Shooting deer at night

[6pointer]

sp like Jh says that's not selective culling on a site that needs it. That's wipe out and the few that get away could be very pour animals. Time for a change in the law so at least if FES want to employ deer killers at night they can do it legally. Day jobs and night jobs leads to problems short term contracts lead to problems. and a night licence for all no matter how competent is a problem. FC Register is not fit for purpose so time to change plans or the 1000 plus extra deer promised to Christian Nissan might not get there.

 

[Salmo Salar]

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!

Your reply I hope was tongue in cheek as folk in the real world know that 1/2 a dozen reds can do a helluva amount of damage in 1 or 2 nights so your suggestion there is non sensical.

Its the SNH that dish out the licenses, if someone has a beef about a particular license being granted, and can put forward their own argument as to why it should not be granted then go to the SNH and raise there concern. The way public afairs are run now adays they cant hide anything if they are questioned about stuff. I've no idea if anyone has done this but if your certain and can show its not needed then they'd be on a sticky woicket if it contiinued I'd think.

 

[countrryboy]

But how selective is a syndicatee stalking a ground? Are u really telling me most syndicate rifles will pass up a chance on a good buck to leave for breeding.
How many syndicate members truely leave a safe shot at any deer, very few i'd bet.
So wot's the difference other than numbers?

JH depending on the ground it is possible to shoot far larger number in the day than at nite, a keeper friend of mine went up north to help with a tidy up day and had just under 40 to his rifle and the beat kepper beside him, was another 2 or 3 squads shooting that day.

The problem is the way they are viewed and the lack of fencing.

SP obviously many varibles from site to site and tree species but is timber very profitable?
Could most forests stand the fencing costs and still be profitable?
Dunno wot the roadside price is now, last i heard probably 8 years ago possibly longer was about £13 a T, my old boss said that was a similar price to wot u got back in the 70's-80's, in thoose days all hand cut (when he first started used to sned with an axe as saws were so heavy), drag with ponies and hand stack on the wagons.
So really the price hasnae went up much in a long time althou production will have but that really won't affect the owners share

 

[Yoda]

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

Yes, I believe you are right there.

Maybe we are debating two totally different classifications here. On one side we have the ethical Stalker who loves wildlife in general and is very keen to preserve his/her stock of wild and beautiful animals, for future generations to enjoy.
In the other camp we have the man/women who just wants to eradicate a wild animal that is causing a bit of a problem to a business that is only interested in extracting every last farthing before it moves on to the next victim.

Hang on, I've just read the post and my mind is drifting back in history. Sounds familiar?

Ok so I am exaggerating but some people just wont, can't or don't want to see the bigger picture. Grab the pennies when there are there, and it is totally irrelevant how it is done.
I really am shocked at some of the posts, the lack of interest in the animal, an absolute disgrace. I only hope it can all be kept north of the border because when they've killed all the deer up there they might come down to Somerset and pick on the few Roe we have pottering about on grass fields causing huge damage to the odd blade of grass

 

[Salmo Salar]

Yes, I believe you are right there.

Maybe we are debating two totally different classifications here. On one side we have the ethical Stalker who loves wildlife in general and is very keen to preserve his/her stock of wild and beautiful animals, for future generations to enjoy.
In the other camp we have the man/women who just wants to eradicate a wild animal that is causing a bit of a problem to a business that is only interested in extracting every last farthing before it moves on to the next victim.

Hang on, I've just read the post and my mind is drifting back in history. Sounds familiar?

Ok so I am exaggerating but some people just wont, can't or don't want to see the bigger picture. Grab the pennies when there are there, and it is totally irrelevant how it is done.
I really am shocked at some of the posts, the lack of interest in the animal, an absolute disgrace. I only hope it can all be kept north of the border because when they've killed all the deer up there they might come down to Somerset and pick on the few Roe we have pottering about on grass fields causing huge damage to the odd blade of grass

I am not saying that some licenses are being issed when perhaps they shouldn't what I am saying is that when there is a need for a night license it should be granted.
As for your view we up north seem hell bent on shooting everything and that any damage done by deer is negligble, just imagine you being a wee farmer up in my neck of the woods with a park of neeps you intend to feed to your cattle in February or March. Then one evening 1/2 a doz reds and a couple of Roe come in to the field. By the morning they'll have nibbled and chewed several hundred neeps. Not eaten totally but just nibbled and broken the skin. The same happens the following night. Then you get a hard frost...... -12 due tonight by the way. All those neeps that have been nibbled that you've been keeping for feed in the next few months will be frozen and when thawed turn to mush. Those that werent nibbled are fine. Would you as the wee farmer be happy just to accept that. Remember this isnt large scale farming. This is subsitence farming.

So your wee Roe nibbling at grass that is probably still growing down there for most of the year is a different kettle of fish compared to the Roe or Red we have nibbling our crops in the highlands!! We'll be lucky if our growing season starts before May!!

 

[joe soapy]

If you really want to have a say in deer management, I would suggest buying some forest land

 

[Salmo Salar]

If you really want to have a say in deer management, I would suggest buying some forest land

I think a lot of people need to stop looking at this whole topic through rose tinted specs! Very very few wild populations of deer are fully managed. Some may have a resident hind population some may have a resident Stag population and even those that have both I'd imagine during the rut many of their stags will wander to other folks ground so total management is near impossible in probably nearly all wild deer populations in the highlands. Yes some may try and shoot only poorer hinds or stags, but due to the wide range they can travel to onto other peoples ground there is no way this is totaly manged herd/herds.
As many have said the land use needs of the owner will differ from neighbour to neighbour, not just forestry and farming but sporting interests too (Grouse vrs Deer) not to mention the ecological/RSPB type fraternity....... So a one size fits all wont or cant work and never will. And people will use the tools available to them to achieve there objectives, whether someone likes it or not.
Whether the tools are being used correctly is the debate i.e. Are the granting of night licenses following the rules as currently set down

 

[scotspine]

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!

PaF,
My advice to forest owners is to start culling hard at least one year in advance of restocking, preferably two years. I would include as big an area as possible in the excercise. All being well, the restocking will be relatively straight forward. Trouble is that forests and restock sites are a magnet for deer and will draw them in from neighbouring ground. When this happens at night we have a problem. I'm a fan of lamping and out of season shooting as it allows me to protect crops when the deer make an appearance.

6pointer
If we foresters sign up to best practice there is a need to demonstrate that deer numbers are in balance with the surrounding habitat ; this invariably means a significant reduction in deer densities. Best practice encompasses night shooting and out of season shooting.....and its legal!


CB

I wish we could put up fences where needed but there are so many constraints that its not possible. Profitabillity is paramount as you only get the chance to cash in once every 45years. A poor restock site is a waste of money so we need full stocking and negligible damage. Deer have become a serious problem and too many restock sites have been ruined in the past by them in the past so the pressure is on to keep numbers down. Income from timber sales has been very good of late but up here in the highlands there combination of difficult sites, remote locations and inferior crops limits the potential income. Some harvesting sites don't generate enough income to pay for the restocking, let alone a fence.
To sum up, I believe that night shooting is a neccessary evil and if I could change the legislation I would make it possible to get a three year licence.

 

[Yoda]

If you really want to have a say in deer management, I would suggest buying some forest land

I am. When I have and start killing everything that moves in it I will get back to you when I have wiped them all out.
What I'm trying to say you haven't got to be an illegitimate to run a business involving animals (a lot are).
Balance is the key word I believe.

 

[bogtrotter]

Whether the tools are being used correctly is the debate i.e. Are the granting of night licenses following the rules as currently set down

[/B]

No that's what the problem is for many of us the rules are being if not broken severely bent in a lot of cases
nobody is saying that anyone should not be able to protect their crop be that an arable crop or trees for that matter.

But is it right that a forestry company can plant trees and be granted an out of season permit and a night license from day one at the same time as the first tree was planted, decimating the local deer population and seriously effecting the income of three local estates.

Whats my problem with that?

Well the fact that after three months of hammering day and night every deer that set foot on the ground they then fenced it,if they fenced it first and then used out of seaon permits and night licenses to prevent damage then I would not have had a problem with it, but this was not about protection this was about reducing the local deer level to such a level that they would never be a problem.

 

[Salmo Salar]

No that's what the problem is for many of us the rules are being if not broken severely bent in a lot of cases
nobody is saying that anyone should not be able to protect their crop be that an arable crop or trees for that matter.

But is it right that a forestry company can plant trees and be granted an out of season permit and a night license from day one at the same time as the first tree was planted, decimating the local deer population and seriously effecting the income of three local estates.

Whats my problem with that?

Well the fact that after three months of hammering day and night every deer that set foot on the ground they then fenced it,if they fenced it first and then used out of seaon permits and night licenses to prevent damage then I would not have had a problem with it, but this was not about protection this was about reducing the local deer level to such a level that they would never be a problem.

I can well understand your grievance there and I'm 100% behind you. I'm also an advocate of - if you are to be planting then it has to be fenced off - end of. And if its too expensive then it doesn't get planted.

 

[Taff]

Ethical stalking, quote of the week

 

[Paul at Fechan]

Your reply I hope was tongue in cheek as folk in the real world know that 1/2 a dozen reds can do a helluva amount of damage in 1 or 2 nights so your suggestion there is non sensical.

Its the SNH that dish out the licenses

Sorry, but you can't get a night authorisation in one or two days so people need to get off there keyboards and either shoot or move deer. My comments were serious because reds for example move over large areas in a season and could turn up and wander off or be moved off by simply driving near them with a quad bike. It is simple not acceptable to take advantage of a situation where individuals or organisations slaughter deer for commercial gain when other methods are better all round for everyone locally. You take and estates deer that wander onto FC land (wonder if this has happened ) for a few nights because of bad weather and get smashed. It is also not acceptable to have an authorisation covering large areas like dmu's (not specific) unnecessarily for situations where rangers/contractors can take advantage if when transient deer turn up. Specific vulnerable areas I have no problem with.

The mind set of these night shooters is not lets move them tomorrow, it's let's smash them tonight because this whole problem in money driven. Contractors get paid per dead deer and rangers remove a potential crop risk, but all of the deer go in the FC larder and get flogged for mega bucks...

 

[Yoda]

Ethical stalking, quote of the week

Thank you, it was good wasn't it?

Oh by the way it means pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.

 

[rick6point5]

Its not really surprising the cheapest most cost effective methods with the fastest results are used to cull these 'problem deer' as it seems they get better returns on the meat than the wood..

 

[Olaf]

Deer become lamp shy extremely quickly, thus; its a counter productive method that causes more problems than it solves in my part of the world.
Good fieldcraft, and putting the hrs in are the best methods to employ if you wish to reduce, and stay on top of, deer numbers.
Kind regards, Olaf

 

[Ranger22]

Here's a novel idea, why don't estates and private land owners put the deer fences up to stop their deer coming onto commercial forestry ground. Then we wouldn't have to deal with their deer at all.

 

[scotspine]

Here's a novel idea, why don't estates and private land owners put the deer fences up to stop their deer coming onto commercial forestry ground. Then we wouldn't have to deal with their deer at all.

R22

Good point. I've managed to broker deals in the past whereby fencing costs are shared. I would like to think it will become commonplace.

I've also planted woodlands on many sporting estates to create a barrier to deer movement across the boarder in the short term and strategic shelter/food long term. It works very well but needs patience.

 

[Taff]

Thank you, it was good wasn't it?

Oh by the way it means pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.

You have to remember that what is ethical to one man , may not be to the next.

 

[6pointer]

Because commercial forestry get a grant! and it is them that are changing the land use.