Why is no one talking numbers?

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Because the landowners are going to have to pay for it, or lose their agri support money.
And there'll most likely be grants for training and equipment.
Even now, without those incentives, I know a few self-employed stalkers in their 20s who are doing pretty well out of it.

What you class is doing really well and what I class is doing really well too very vast different things.

I call doing well earning £35k-£40k a year without breaking a sweat, actually grafting 6 hours a day max, less if you can work it right!

And if you honestly believe that landowners will have to pay for their management any time in the next 20 years, you’re a dreamer!

They will get around it if they can find a loophole guaranteed

Land owners don’t get Rich through being stupid or following the guidelines that’s for a dead cert

 

[Ratel]

I think it's in areas like yours that incentives to landowners as part of the eligibility criteria for agri-environment schemes could make the biggest difference, because you've got some farmers who's main income is derived from the payment schemes and who are not really farming. They may plant some crops as a token gesture, in order to tick the "active farmer" box on their application form, but they really don't care if the deer eat it all as it saves them the bother of harvesting.
If deer management becomes a requirement of those schemes they risk losing their main income if they don't comply.
I think it could be exciting times ahead for any young and enthusiastic stalkers around there who want to set themselves up in business as deer management contractors.

In this area most farmers farm well and are producers of our food (apart from solar farms)so no chance of payment schemes being withdrawn. There are always people screaming out for stalking but on the three times I have offered it free for just committment only one chap has fitted in to help us when needed. Young stalkers tend to have to work so cannot generally commit and the retired ones are like me and unable to cope with mauling big deer about. If only everybody would or could commit to a concerted effort things might be ok, but scratching the surface of huge numbers because of the reticence of certain landowners won't work especially if those landowners are not real farmers.

 

[slider]

I don’t think it should ever be about just reducing numbers, it’s grotesque and obtuse.
Balance of numbers of deer in line with land size, cover, objectives for plant establishments, along with managing herd structure for the best genetics and health - it’s about balancing all in one go, not one or the other.

Males cause damage all year? Do they now, I’ve yet to be shown anywhere that is heavily suffering from male deer damage compared to hares, sheep getting through fencing, poor soil management, or cattle trudging up landscapes. It’s negligible and stubborn to insist male deer damage is a problem - sorry

I simply don't understand why interfering with the natural process by selective cull is beneficial to deers. Heads and bodies develop to a size to suit the land, choosing your culls only benifits Man.

Regarding your last point, I assume you are not a forester or other land manager.

 

[jimmer.13]

Professional stalkers and guides, and those holding large swathes of land are the problem. They want as many deer as possible for clients, or have so much ground they’ll never manage it properly.

I think guides should be required to be registered and submit cull records with data on land they manage

Similarly, I think landowners should be banned from receiving payment for stalking rights

And I would advocate that whatever you do for a living is forced to stop because some one told me you can’t do it properly.

 

[HonestJohn]

And I would advocate that whatever you do for a living is forced to stop because some one told me you can’t do it properly.

you’re a cracker buddy

Thank you for making for making me smile today

 

[jimmer.13]

you’re a cracker buddy

Thank you for making for making me smile today

Pleasure

 

[waggy 1]

Professional stalkers and guides, and those holding large swathes of land are the problem. They want as many deer as possible for clients, or have so much ground they’ll never manage it properly.

I think guides should be required to be registered and submit cull records with data on land they manage

Similarly, I think landowners should be banned from receiving payment for stalking rights

100% Agree far to many people holding far too many acres and not enough time in the day/week/month or year to do it efficiently, I don’t care how good a shot you are or how long you have been doing the job YOU can only be in one place at a time! If more blocks were available to more people then more deer could end up being culled

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

100% Agree far to many people holding far too many acres and not enough time in the day/week/month or year to do it efficiently, I don’t care how good a shot you are or how long you have been doing the job YOU can only be in one place at a time! If more blocks were available to more people then more deer could end up being culled

What the land owners do and don’t do, or who they allow or don’t allow to shoot their land is their business.

And there’s nothing you or anyone can do about it.

 

[rem284]

Quite simply, we as individuals and as a nation are failing to control a deer population.

I go out to work with the mindset of "I am going to shoot as many deer as possible". There are several factors that limit what I can achieve, access, disturbance, pressure on deer, weather, equipment, time and so on. It is annoying though when I come out of the forest and can see loads over the march fence where no one shoots

I have recreational stalking as well. There is another factor that plays a part here and that is getting rid of the end product other than leaving it on the hill.

I know several large areas of land nearby where they either don't shoot very many or don't shoot at all. I think the government needs to look at enforcement. Some organisations are spending millions on land and wildlife management.

The are no welfare issues regarding the shooting on male deer all year round.

If deer are only coming into fields after dark, there's no point in standing in them fields during daylight hours, just because of a law. Change the law, get the job done.

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

If deer are only coming into fields after dark, there's no point in standing in them fields during daylight hours, just because of a law. Change the law, get the job done.

yep then flood the market price falls through the floor then their not worth shoot at all

 

[Dave_45]

The persecution Scottish red deer get riles me.

The sika numbers are going wild and yet the reds are getting nailed day and night.

 

[rem284]

yep then flood the market price falls through the floor then their not worth shoot at all

That's why we need better marketing, ban vegans and vegetarians, lol

 

[David Barker]

Agree but force all into an agreed realistic cull target and fine those who do not make it

Forcing in scotland has only worked on the big land owners all other smaller landowners and those in the lower ground and industrialised central belt have told the gov to politely Foff. THE VAST Majority of Councils and local authority,s have refused to manage deer on political basis. NGO are only allowing deer management in the north areas and when they do manage deer they use contractors. Public Money private donations and not one armature deer manager no matter how good you are. That's 1000000 deer most on the low ground with out any out side management. Numbers in scotland we Kill 100000 out of 1mil that leaves 900000 to breed any one doing the maths would say we are well and truly stuffed.

 

[Nickb]

yep then flood the market price falls through the floor then their not worth shoot at all

Price doesn't come in to it if they need culling.

A bounty should be paid for each animal culled.

But its all pie in the sky as nothing will change .

We need a big processing plant up North.

 

[jimmer.13]

I remember seeing something on YouTube about a business in Australia that set up a processing plant for deer and wild hogs.
Turned them into ready meals and shipped them all over.
Cattle farmers endorsed it due to the impact of deer and hogs on pasture and it didn’t threaten their industry.

 

[Freeforester]

The persecution Scottish red deer get riles me.

The sika numbers are going wild and yet the reds are getting nailed day and night.

It’s a politically driven attack, as is evidenced by the lack of plan for economic land use alternatives - they simply wish to see ‘the toffs’ and the estates staff off, but have nothing of value to the rural communities to replace the income and sustainable management.

There’s no great demand for sika stalking in spruce woodlands, and ‘out of sight, out of mind’ is their preferrred response to this non-politically motivated issue.

 

[David Barker]

If they were serious they could set up a trial region where they think there are too many, and see how it goes; set aside £5M for a reduction of 75,000 deer; if it doesn’t work in delivering the ‘public goods’ of natural heritage and biodiversity enhancement then in comparison to other ideas it won’t have wasted the monies, they’ll still have the change in the kitty. If it did work, they could try it in other areas.

The payouts are dependent on results, and would identify where even more effort might be needed, though I think a reduction of that order should go some way to address the scale of the issue in said region.

IF they were serious..

I think they tried that in Stirling to Bearsden and only 10 rec deer managers took up the challenge. Some from around Flanders moss were NS manage. 100,000,S For a failed pilot were the spare money was used to give half price fridges to any body who would say it makes them shoot more deer. The report will go back to say using rec stalkers on there own grounds has failed. When in reality this is a deliberate move to only use professionals.

 

[cooksey]

E. No. Shooting pregnant females into spring and summer and with dependents is poor form and will only open us up for more scrutiny. Males 365 in Scotland is bad form too, I hate it. I don’t agree with the season being open during the rut, it’s the wrong time to shoot them. After the rut and when they form bachelor groups into Dec-Feb is the right time to see them in groups and selectively cull.

But would you shoot a vixen or a rabbit while pregnant or nursing? If you are doing it for vermin control which is what deer control is rapidly becoming it changes what is acceptable! People need to stop putting deer on a pedestal it's part of the issues for why numbers have got worse people who don't understand the need to cull thinking all deer are amazing instead of seeing the problems they are creating.

 

[jimmer.13]

Google Search

There is a video about this somewhere

 

[David Barker]

I simply don't understand why interfering with the natural process by selective cull is beneficial to deers. Heads and bodies develop to a size to suit the land, choosing your culls only benifits Man.

Regarding your last point, I assume you are not a forester or other land manager.

Selective culling is the only answer. Shut the lamps down and use only night vision that can identify the animals sex. Surly it has been proven that indiscriminate shooting only helps in the very short term medium to long term selective culling would lower the number certainly the incentives would need to be reasonably high and accesses to areas that have been blocked needs opened