Exactly this.
However, you can at least get a sense of the likely direction of policy based on the SNPs explicit ideology with regard to land redistribution, firearms ownership and wildlife management.
Land redistribution: they are keen on finding ways to break up the large estates and limit the amount of land held by single individuals. This has clear implications for the sporting estates and larger farms, with obvious knock on implications for (at the very least) red deer stalking.
Firearms: they have long been committed to devolved firearms legislation anyway, and are very hostile to extensive (or indeed any) private ownership of firearms. Precisely how hostile they are, and how committed to actually removing all private ownership is unclear - though McKaskill himself seems determined to ban all private ownership. This has very clear implications for all shooting sports.
Wildlife management: they appear to favour an American model of wildlife management, where all wildlife is the property of the state (ie. the deer on your land actually belong to the 'Scottish people'). SNH in particular appears entirely committed to this approach, and is explicitly in favour of taking direct control of, at the very least, setting cull targets. However, based on conversations with members of SNH, what they really want is to control every aspect, from population monitoring through setting cull targets to actually conducting the culls (or at least licensing them via tendered tickets for specific numbers of animals). They are vehemently opposed to the current system, both on ideological grounds and on the grounds that it prevents the emergence of coherent, landscape level management plans.
The first two, I think, are rather ambitious, and even with a strong Yes mandate, it will take years for anything really substantial to change - during which time there is every possibility of the SNP being voted out. To put it in perspective, even in Zimbabwe, it took ZANU PF about 20 years to get really serious about land seizure!
The last I think is the most worrying, because there is already considerable traction for changing the way deer are managed at the national level, and it is something that is likely to proceed, in one way or another, even in the event of a No vote. My guess is that, within 10 years or so, we will start to see the emergence of local cull targets set by SNH (ie. they will tell a given estate or farm how many should be taken in that year), and stalkers will have to apply for (and probably buy) a per animal ticket. I'd guess that this will be accompanied by an increase in the qualifications required to actually be allowed to stalk - probably to DSC2 or equivalent, and possibly beyond. Given the importance of visiting stalkers to the rural economy, I doubt this will be prevented, but I'm fairly certain that they will be obliged to always be accompanied by a locally licensed guide (as is the case in, for example, Africa).
My predictions anyway.
