Shooting deer at night

[Paul at Fechan]

Paul / Davie, businesses may well be using the least amount of labour, and resourses to control deer, do you do everything the most expensive way.
I do find what people call management of wild deer a bit of a mystery, and perhaps someone can explain the science behind it.

Taff I am 100% neutral in terms of night shooting and as a land owner and stalker, I use night license. BUT, cost and budget is irrelevant in terms of the law and guidance on night authorisations. You as the person/organisation 'should' show that you have tried everything to manage the deer but night shooting is your last resort not first thing to do to cash in and lets be honest, it's cashing in whether by rangers or contractors to minimise deer management costs. SNH 'should' be checking this....

As for management V's control, the quickest explanation of this would be management is the selective taking of deer in a sustainable way that maintains or promotes the health of the herd where as Control is simply the culling of deer to minimise damage or the potential for deer to cause damage.

 

[nun_hunter]

This is my main gripe with "stalking" in the uk, deer are held on some etheral pedestal to be treated in a certain ethical way above all other animals. It's fine to lamp rabbits and foxes but not deer, fine to use "vermin" as long range target practice but not deer (not saying this is your POV James). As Taff has pointed out it is how the landowner views the deer as to how they are dealt with. Some want them eradicated, some couldn't care less about their presence and other will encourage them due to their asthetic or financial value.[/QUOTE

Are Deer classed as Vermin now,
in England?

Deer are not classed as vermin, my point is why should a legal classification affect a person's ethics in the manner they kill an animal? Certain 'stalkers' are only too happy to take pot shots at long range rabbits and foxes or shoot a passing fox too far away with too small shot from a shotgun on a driven day but then get all high and mighty when someone else shoots deer in a manner not in their personal view of what deer stalking is all about, ie lamping, head shots, long shots etc

 

[scotspine]

scots pine do you have a day job or are you just a deer lamper. Necessary Evil I don't think so I feel the lamp is a good tool and a dangerous one.If it becomes the norm and we are nearly there (New legislation getting thought about as we speak to help FES MEET TARGETS FOR THE VENISON INDUSTRY)Note not tree damage. Then we will see many more fatality's than we do with the fox lamping problems we will see many more poachers and the balance for deer need numbers male and female will be way off.
Can the deer be managed during the day in some cases YES so that makes SNH criminals in some cases and they know it. The sad thing is so do our big shooting organisations BASC BDS SGA SACS.

Sixpointer,
I have a job that involves lamping from time to time. I agree with you that the lamp is a good tool, however you seem preoccupied with the idea that a great number of licences are "illegal". You are also suggesting that more licences will lead to more poaching. Quite a bad picture really! Personally I reckon that if the deer need controlling then why not at night if needs be. Insisting that all other avenues must be exhausred before a night licence can be issued is daft as this approach ties up too much resouces.

 

[Paul at Fechan]

Your absolutely right, it would tie up resources/money and time but that is the written standard of process before night authorisation should be granted for any one or organisations controllers, on any single named ground and not for huge areas i.e. a dmu.

Ignoring the process and legislation relating to this in favor of a path of least resistance says what about the current relationship between the government bodies in discussion here????

Yes we do need the authorisation some times but not as standard.

 

[bogtrotter]

Your absolutely right, it would tie up resources/money and time but that is the written standard of process before night authorisation should be granted for any one or organisations controllers, on any single named ground and not for huge areas i.e. a dmu.

Ignoring the process and legislation relating to this in favor of a path of least resistance says what about the current relationship between the government bodies in discussion here????

Yes we do need the authorisation some times but not as standard.

100% in agreement with this post, I am not against night authorisation when it's needed and in fact I have had cause to use said authorisation in the past.

However there are criteria that should be met before said authorisation is issued , and it's clear that this is not always being strictly adhered to.

 

[bogtrotter]

Don't have the present wording from SNH, but expect its not changed from the Deer Commission Scotland which they incorporated.
QUOTE
The Commission may authorise a person nominated by an occupier to shoot any species of deer at night for the purpose of crop protection (including trees) , if the nominee is considered fit and competent. THE COMMISSION MUST ALSO BE SATISFIED THAT SHOOTING IS NECESSARY TO PREVENT SERIOUS DAMAGE AND THAT NO OTHER METHOD OF CONTROL WHICH MIGHT BE REASONABLY ADOPTED WOULD BE ADEQUATE. Authorisation is subject
to such conditions as may be specified INCLUDING THE PRECISE AREA TO BE COVERED and compliance with the Commissions Code of Practice for Night Shooting is obligatory. The period of its validity will be determined by the Commission. Authorisations have to be returned to the Commission within 7 days of expiry, together with details
of deer killed.

If requested , a tenant is obliged to inform his landowner of deer killed under these powers.

Before night shooting takes place , the operator involved make themselves thoroughly familiar with the location where the shooting is to be carried out. Particular attention should be paid to the possible field of fire, which will be limited to the range of the spotlight beam,and the background in relation to human habitation, roads and domestic livestock. ANY PERSON LIKELY TO BE IN THE VICINITY SHOULD BE GIVEN ADVANCE WARNING THAT SHOOTING MAY OCCUR AND ADJACENT OCCUPIERS AND POLICE SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED.

While shooting by spotlight is particularly effective in dealing with small groups where all the deer can be shot at the same time, it's use on large numbers of deer must be AVOIDED and is in any case counter productive as survivors quickly associate danger with a bright light.

UNQUOTE

Are these rules always being applied , there are many who would disagree

 

[countrryboy]

I think the problem is not actually 'lamping' itself, i mean if u put enough hours in or used other methods u could control both foxes and rabbits without lamping, but lamping makes it easier. Plenty of people managed it before lamping was common practice like it is today.

The big problem is SNH, i'm not going to tell u my feelings for them, but there purpose/job is to 'protect scotlands wildlife' but u have the very strange situation where SNH tend to reguard them as pests full stop, there would be a lengthy thread on wether deer numbers actually are/are not too high and needs reducing, but depends on wot ur using the land for.
But the folk carrying out the cull wether full time employee's or contractors are just trying to pay their mortage like everyone else, it's not there fault there bosses are numpties.

The big difference is most forestry companies and 'charities/conservation organisations' make no effort to fence new plantations and any original deer fencing is well done in, atleast when many of these were orignally planted they did try to fence them. Same with all this natural regen. Deer are only doing wot is natural to them and looking for shelter. U only have to look at Mar lodge to see that.
If u want to grow trees as a crop or for conservation, great go for it but atleast make some effort to look if its feasable to protect them by fencing somehow

But big culls are nothing new, if u read Ronnie rose's book he was doing some back in the late 60's/early 70's


But for me the big problem is SNH and university educated f**kwits who have fancy jobs involved with conservation and government depts that set policy.
Have no idea how nature actually works, and no 'on tool experiences', u have the crazy situation where peolpe who shoot deer are trying to get them more protection. The licences they do have the conditions are possibly not being met in a lot of cases and possibly being abused and yet there handing licences out like confetti.
Where on the other hand u have Pine martins and a few BoP species at an all time population high, a similar licence exisits to manage problem populations and most off the conditions would be met if not suppassed yet are declined point blank.
Lck of licences for PM is probably going to wipe out the caper, possibly another reasn why many are so against fencing

Stalkers are just as much hypocrites as the rest, have no problem reguarding rats, foxes rabbits as pests but not deer or boar, just all depends on densities and habitat, there is plenty of time when deer or boar would be pests. As long as ur culling it humanely and showing some respect doesnae really matter how u cull it

 

[scotspine]

You have to demonstrate that all reasonable measures have been taken....not exhaust all avenues; there's a big difference. Why should a landowner have to suffer excessive damage and incur unreasonable costs in order to appease third parties. Don't get me wrong, I would rather see fences around the forests but life is not that simple.
As I've said before if there is a number of deer damaging a woodland does it really matter if they are shot during the day or night?
It's a tricky subject!

 

[6pointer]

scots pine you are correct why should any one need to abide by the law. I think I will go out the mora and head up north at 100 miles an hour will save me 2 hours on my time and I can then cull more deer. What do you think lmao.
There are many problems with the current system and I am sure the law will change because Lamping is not a last resort it is in some cases the first. (FACT)
FES Are using contractors to manage there deer because they cant under there budget, These contractors most have a full time job and cannot manage the deer in day light. You are now knowingly putting some one in a position were they cannot follow best practice .This underpins the law.
I do agree with Ranger 22 there are some massive forests up north that need the lamp over them. The areas are vast and the consistent man power is low. But FES are now shooting small areas some less than 200 acres with a lamp and they know they are braking the law and continuing to do it.

 

[Paul at Fechan]

Scotspine, that's fair enough but should the deer herd suffer in the short term because of a lack of effort towards proactive management in the long?

 

[Paul at Fechan]

here's a belter from SNH, wind farms should submit 1-2 years of bird studies data before any application for planning permission is submitted.... How about landowners must submit 1-2 years of deer management records including number of outings, number of controllers and methods used to protect crops before a night license application would be considered...

slurp that one up for an idea!

 

[scotspine]

6pointer,
No one is breaking the law if they have a night licence.....and what truck are you driving if you can get up here averaging 100mph!

 

[scotspine]

Scotspine, that's fair enough but should the deer herd suffer in the short term because of a lack of effort towards proactive management in the long?

If the deer are in the wrong place then they will be culled....I'm not sure how things will pan out but more and more forests are being restructured and resident and marauding deer will need to be culled if fencing is not employed. A reduction in densities will do some herds more good than harm.

 

[6pointer]

Scotspine I am not against culling but I think SNH and FES should follow BP to do it and keep on the correct side of the law. I feel for the BDS they need to sit at the table listening to there charitable status get dragged lower and lower. When the other charity's are so successful at getting SNH to do there beck and call.

 

[.25-06]

If you have enough deer to form a herd you have far to many between the trees especially young trees

Scotspine, that's fair enough but should the deer herd suffer in the short term because of a lack of effort towards proactive management in the long?

 

[Paul at Fechan]

If the deer are in the wrong place then they will be culled....I'm not sure how things will pan out but more and more forests are being restructured and resident and marauding deer will need to be culled if fencing is not employed. A reduction in densities will do some herds more good than harm.

You mean a bit like the 100+ odd red hinds and calves with a good bunch of stags that wintered on and around mine every year up north and then in the first of the really bad winters they strayed onto a new clearfell just off the main road that was FC ground along from mine by 1 km and they got wiped out in a couple of nights. There was no way that if correct process had been followed a night license would have been granted for that area because there was NO CROP TO PROTECT.

There can be no justification for that, they were killed for money because of greed and an abuse of the system. This is my issue with the system, when blanket authorisations for a huge deer management unit of all stages of rotation gets granted which is not a specific area which is the requirement as set out. So deer get culled in areas where they are no a problem that fall into this general area.

 

[tumbleweed]

I was talking to 6pointer just yesterday about these sort of ongoing licences to lamp and have spotted a couple of 4x4 vehicles lamping adjoining parts of land that are not licensed for lamping deer, so what i am thinking is that the so called wannabe poachers know when the Correct people with the proper licence are out and about and take full advantage of this when doing their own dirty deeds, as when i approached their vehicles they made a very haste retreat away and i could not get any number plates.

 

[matt_hooks]

There are certain places where night shooting is necessary. I used to live next to Richmond Park in London. The roads through the park are used as normal public highways during the day, so shooting in daylight is not an option, so the deer are culled at night. Of course, to a certain extent the deer are "enclosed" there, so a mis**** can be more easily followed up. That's a pretty exceptional case though, in most cases daytime shooting is the safest and most practical method.

 

[scotspine]

[QUifTE=Paul at Fechan;908510]You mean a bit like the 100+ odd red hinds and calves with a good bunch of stags that wintered on and around mine every year up north and then in the first of the really bad winters they strayed onto a new clearfell just off the main road that was FC ground along from mine by 1 km and they got wiped out in a couple of nights. There was no way that if correct process had been followed a night license would have been granted for that area because there was NO CROP TO PROTECT.

There can be no justification for that, they were killed for money because of greed and an abuse of the system. This is my issue with the system, when blanket authorisations for a huge deer management unit of all stages of rotation gets granted which is not a specific area which is the requirement as set out. So deer get culled in areas where they are no a problem that fall into this general area.[/QUOTE]

So if the deer were shot during the day would you be ok with that?

 

[JH83]

That's pretty unlikely though, to say the least SP. That's the crux of the argument, it's very effective and relatively easy to kill numbers, hence it's detrimental if over/mis used.