Scone the DCS, FC, SACS, APDMG, BASC

griff

Well-Known Member
I visited Scone this weekend to get my points of view across regarding the current proposals by the DCS..
They all agreed that they had been overwhelmed by the number of insenced stalkers who vented their anger over the proposals.
The DCS tent had moe than their fare share of angry stalkers,so much so that Alistair Mcgugan was told to leave and wander about the fair to diffuse the situation..
This does not mean however we should ease up!!

The minister concerned with this consultation paper is Roseanna Cunningham Minister for the Environment and we should direct our responses to her as well as Steven Macgregor who is collecting all the responses to put forward to ministers.

below are the e-mail addresses

steven.macgregor@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Roseanna.Cunningham.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
MinisterforEnvironment@scotland.gsi.gov.uk


What did come over is that we should stop slinging mud at each other and unite to attack these proposals and if we are successful then we can resume the mud slinging ..

Get sending you responses in!!!


regards
griff
 
Maybe Griff you should have been at the Minsters meeting on Friday, at the DCS/FC stand when the Minister put across the current view to the subject that seem to be causing so much turmoil ,that only the select few are really bothered about, I was at the meeting and listened with a open mind to what the Minister had to say.

I also spoke to all the agencies about the subject, they like myself are not to bothered as the current draft is unworkable in some areas requiring work before any further consultation to a bill is reached and becomes a government paper which can take years .

Much the same words the minister herself used

To save a lot of stalkers getting irate over not a great deal ,get your individual letters off via the Respondent Information Form, which is attached to the bill ,that way each and every response can be dealt with appropriately, showing that there is genuine concern to the current draft .

NOT on a web site .

That isn't going to do any of us much good, other than have a good moan to each other about it, thats the truth of the matter .


These returns must be returned by the 4Th September 2009
 
Widdows son,
If I was wanting this to go through un-opposed I would put up a smoke screen just like the ones the DCS the FC and the Minister of the Environment have done..Lull us into a false sense of security..

The only way is to send a response like you say to the powers that be, so that they are fully aware of this devious survival plan by the DCS.

regards
griff
 
Widowson your daft if you think this doesn't matter it maters enough for them to put the so called unworkable bill forward . Spend millions of pounds on the subject (TAX PAYERS MONEY ) Still they are doing there research in to what the public think with out involving the public well that will stop. But they will love all the yes men that say it don't matter you will become one of there friends that get invited to the meetings.Then your name will be used as we speak to stalkers there with us on this or there not that bothered.
Try reading the paper and ask how it will effect you .
 
The people who came up with these proposals will have known from the start that it would upset stalkers. It is a side issue to them and will not deflect them one iota from their intentions.

However, their objective is just that - to regulate stalkers, so while they will have anticipated this, dealing with anger from stalkers will be factored into the process they have planned. They would not have expected anything else, and their risk assessment would plan for the contingency of having to face stalkers' wrath, and then ignoring it because it is quite simply irrelevant.

These proposals will need to be challenged on the basis of a) no need b) counter productive to them achieving their aims c) damaging to other areas e.g. economy, holiday stalkers.
 
LDG ,Davie: have you actually read what I wrote or just glanced at it or made your mind up that i had written something and just replied to it read it, stop just bumping your gums or your fingers in this case .

What I did say is that none of the agencies are to bothered with the current draft as there is much of it that is unworkable in its present state.

That is the reason there is a response form attached to the draft bill, so like minded people thats stalkers and others, who work within the environment, that the current draft will effect, can put there views forward allowing the civil servants to look through all the due correspondence, then forward it in due course to the ministers in question, they then have action groups that will make changes ,as and when required via a further draft of the proposed bill released to the public for the same process to happen all over again .

This is not the place to air your views or get on your high horse do whats been asked for and not on here , its on the respondent form then something might just get done .

Thats if you have a genuine interested in the bill , as I am thats the reason I took the time to go and speak to the agencies that we pay to do this type of work for us .

Also to see what the minster had to say in response to the draft copy of the bill , all informative stuff from all sides .
 
I also spoke to all the agencies about the subject, they like myself are not to bothered as the current draft is unworkable in some areas requiring work before any further consultation to a bill is reached and becomes a government paper

This is your post and yes i read it and if you are not to bothered on the one hand but find it important to meet with the said people i find your post bemusing and negative. While it is not workable in its current state as you say this is the time to put our point across before they make it workable with out our imput saying we didnt give a feck. So while you go out shooting all them deer at 500 mtrs with that DOD of wood i will continue with my campaign in a positive way. ;)
 
BASC, BDS , SASC, SGA ,AMDG ,Countryside alliance and DCS. No doubt the same people you spoke to yourself, Griff.

Davie whats my rifle doing in this conversation things getting to you, as for 500mtr shots on paper yes .

But again thats nothing to do with this thread is it ,
Lets get back on track .

Play nice now Davie.
 
Widows son,
You must of been talking to different agencies than me!
Maitland @ BDS was extremely concerned about the proposal so was Ian @ SACS
APDMG also were concerned about the proposals
Basc are against the proposals
SGA are against the proposals
SCA are against the proposals

FC are towing the party line..

So I'm a little confused here! :confused:

I would of been there on Friday if I had known that a Minister was going to make an appearance,but I didn't...


regards
griff
 
Dear Mr Quarrell,



Thank you for your email. This has been forwarded onto our Ministerial Correspondence Unit and you should receive a response in 20 working days.



Kind regards

Becky

Becky Smith
Private Secretary to Roseanna Cunningham MSP
Minister for Environment
0131 244 4425
07768 802 275


The reply from the ministers sec.
I to found that most of the major organisations were very worried and want to chat about anyway they could attack this paper. With regards the 500 mts with a stuzen i was referring ti the dreaming element of your posts :lol:
But lets not get away from the objective and that is deer welfare and to remove all the unnecessary milestones that keep getting put around our necks to ware us down.
I was talking to Jamie Hammond to day and after a very heated discussion that no one won he has asked me to put truths on all the sites .So i replied with no problem if you tell us them ;) I have sent him my new email with a few question i want answered i will let you know his reply.
 
The front page from the dcs site.
I like the last line were it says scare mongering, Were the DCS are concerned they are the champions at using that type of tactic.


Welcome

MINISTERIAL VISIT TO GAME FAIR



Minister for Environment Roseanna Cunningham attended the Scottish Game Fair at Scone Palace, Perthshire on Friday (July 3, 2009). The visit provided the opportunity for her to visit the DCS/FCS/SNH joint agency display that promoted the benefits arsing from good wildlife management.

It also provided the opportunity to meet with a variety of stakeholders and speak about the proposed Wildlife and Natural Environment Bill

Ms Cunningham said:

"Scotland’s natural environment is an immense asset worth over £17 billion a year and attracting millions of visitors. Making the most of this potential is a high priority for the Scottish Government."

"Deer stalking and game shooting bring millions into the economy annually but it is important that they are properly managed."

"Growing public interest in issues such as animal welfare and the origin of food makes this the right time to modernise some of our wildlife legislation."

"While it would be surprising if everyone agreed with everything proposed in our proposed Wildlife and Natural Environment Bill I do hope interested parties will respond to the detail in the consultation and not be misled by others’ misinterpretations or scaremongering."


Recent News
DCS Briefing on Legislative Proposals
DCS has provided further background information that expands on the rational behind and further detail of the proposals to change the deer legislation currently being consulted on.

to see more
 
Correct and had you taken the time to go to the game fair and the subsequent meeting you would have heard that and more.

Instead of doing everyone that uses this web site head in, one of the reasons no one on here replies to any of your posts as you run it right into the ground and push it up everyone's nose as always.
 
Bob sorry mate but i was at the game fair but unlike you i couldn't go every day just the Saturday now what ever your problem is just tell the truth and no one will be able to have a dig. Griff got your card marked bob made you look a right dick and a true yes man. ;)

Well i got a reply and it was quite detailed but not unexpected as he needs to tow the party line.


REPLY TO MY EMAIL AND A LONG TALK BUT AT LEAST HE MADE AN EFFORT.
Hi David



Thank you for your email. I have copied your questions in below and will endeavor to answer them so that you are clear on the thinking behind some of the proposed changes to legislation.





Is there any benefit to the Roe deer ( DEER WELFARE ) by having an open season on Bucks. ?



There are no welfare issues with shooting male deer in the close season, in particular for roe deer, and with the existing legislation many roe bucks are shot out of season. Where deer are causing or likely to cause serious damage to enclosed woodland or agricultural land, the owner, occupier or their employees can cull deer in the close season without authorisation under section 26 of the Act and this is very much accepted and adopted by farmers and foresters. It should be clear that just because there may be no close season for males this does not mean people will shoot them year round (which is the status quo as they are already entitled to under current law) At a local level people can still decide when they wish to manage their buck population and this will reflect and respect their relevant land use objectives whether that is growing trees, crops, or looking to obtain an economic benefit from trophy animals.



Will the minimum payment of £80 to be on the register be a one off payment or will this be an annual payment.?



At the moment there is no cost associated with going onto the proposed register, however views are sought as to whether this is appropriate and if not what the cost should be. The figure of £80 was an indicative figure relating to existing training.



Who will be asked to control deer that have been assessed as a risk to the public buy either number or direct risk. ?



If you are referring to a situation that may arise where by deer are seen to be causing a threat to public safety for example, this will be resolved though the creation of an advisory panel lead by DCS (SNH) and will be most applicable to the central belt. This panel would be time limited and would look to engage all the relevant parties / owners / managers ie a council, a country park, a roads authority to come to a decision. This would clarify what the duty of land managers / owners is to manage deer sustainably and a solution would be sought. The panel will agree what the most appropriate practical solution may be and this may or may not include culling.



How will people who shoot a lot of properties keep a DCS cull record as this on the current form is unworkable?



There is a recommendation that within the new proposals for a general level of competence across the deer sector that cull returns shift to an individual basis rather than by property as they currently are. (Again this is one of the current weaknesses within the current Deer Act). This will be linked to the centrally held register which is likely to be held by DCS (SNH) and will link cull returns to individuals rather than land areas. The current system is limited in its coverage and does not provide information that is useful for deer management, at either a local or national level. We estimate that the current system records 90% of red, 70% sika, 95% fallow and the biggest gap lies with roe deer at 50%. You will remember currently you are required to keep individual records of animals shot if supplying that venison for human consumption. We do not envisage the shift of cull returns from property to individuals to add any further bureaucratic burden.



If a person wants to opped out of the DCS register but has all the relevant paper work will they be braking the law and what will the charge be.



If the proposals are passed by government and a new system of competence is established (this may be some years away yet before it is fully operational) it would become an offence to shoot deer unless you were on the centrally held register or accompanied by a stalker who is on the register. If found to be shooting deer out with these parameters then it would become a Police matter and they would take the case forward.



Will the DCS pay individuals if they are asked to hand rifles back because they don’t meet the new laws?



No – There is no linkage between the requirement to be on the register and the suitability to hold a firearm. Being on the register will not be requirement to hold a FAC, if however individuals operate illegally by shooting deer without being on the register or stalking unaccompanied, then they would therefore be committing an offence and hence risk losing their FAC.



What assessment will be given to person that hold lev 2 dmq or above.?



The assessment route / qualifications required for entering onto the register have not been discussed and are open for consultation. It is likely that currently ‘accepted’ qualifications such as those delivered through DMQ Ltd, LANTRA AWARDS, SQA, ST Huberts Club etc that meet the agreed standards would be acceptable. Whether ‘grandfather rights’ (ie many year’s practical experience) should be accepted could be a matter for public consultation. However, the evidence presented above highlighting current welfare concerns suggests that skills levels among some experienced practitioners are lower than desired.





Will they need to pay for the assessment and will it take them to a higher stage of knowledge ?



Again existing skills may be transferable and only a small cost may be incurred in getting onto the centrally held register. More experienced stalkers like yourself with Level 2 are likely to have the required levels of knowledge and experience. Training and assessment for more inexperienced stalkers should cost no more than £350 per person and will be taken up by the deer sector which already has a well developed training programme. Again the consultation seeks views on the best ways for individuals to show that they have the agreed skills and knowledge.



Do the DCS have any person from the amateur sector to draw information from and if so who is he or she and what are his/her credentials.



DCS have 26 staff including 10 technical team members of which there are 6 deer officers with geographical responsibilities and you know that I am the deer officer for the South area including the central belt. All of the technical team have deer backgrounds both recreationally and professionally – I was a recreational stalker for 10 years before spending 7 years as a part time deer manager for a large 50,000 Ha mixed estate in the Scottish Borders before joining DCS and my background is very much from the roe perspective. Ultimately all DCS staff, despite the flack we receive, have deer interests at heart and want to achieve a balance between differing land use objectives and still safeguard deer welfare.



Specific to your area I use a network of recreational stalkers on the ground to gain information and intelligence as to the intricacies of deer management, deer numbers, emerging issues and concerns throughout the central belt area from West of Glasgow all the way through East Lothian and Fife.





I feel that the DCS are mixing the red deer situation with the roe deer in the central belt and there are no likenesses at . It is a different animal with totally different and needs different approaches.



As you point out there are inherent differences between red and roe management and the heart of some of these proposals takes this into account. While DCS, formerly the Red Deer Commission came from very much an upland deer orientated past, DCS now dedicates increased resources and time to better understand roe deer management in the lowland setting. The Forest Research Peri urban deer project of which you contributed to through the focus group meetings highlights some of the work done thus far. You also eluded to the work down by DCS on the NE of Glasgow in relation to the trialing of different methods of data capture using night vision and thermal imaging equipment to allow us to get a better handle on roe numbers and distributions. To re-emphasize my discussions with you this was not DCS shooting deer on the Gartloch road using Night vision weapon sights.



One of the key aspects of the legislative proposals involves placing a duty on land owners to manage deer sustainably. Relevant to the central belt this will ensure that eg. Council owned country parks are aware of their responsibilities to care for and manage their deer in a responsible fashion. You and I both know that there are increasing issues with RTAs and serious threats to deer welfare through snaring, airguns, dog attacks, crossbows etc. The impact of deer on people and people on deer is a growing concern at a high level within the government and deer sector, but rest assured it is crystal clear that roe deer within the central belt are seen as valuable asset that people like to see. This has to be balanced with the potential for issues to arise through RTAs, threats to deer welfare and damage to crops / commercial property etc. First and foremost the communication and education of all the parties which may have an influence on deer in these areas is crucial to the process and this is not about DCS using a heavy handed approach to instigate widespread culls.



Much of the work we are attempting to carry out is to better understand the new challenge, particularly presented by roe in this setting, in recognising that there is lack of existing collaborative measures in place.



You will find DSC’s thinking behind some of the proposals here:



http://www.dcs.gov.uk/information/Publications/WNEB Consultation Detailed DCS Brief Web.pdf





Back to your original enquiry into setting up a deer management group, this is not something you need to have formally approved by us – Deer management groups as they stand are voluntary.

I would however be very interested in seeing what your clearly defined objectives are and what role and purpose you see the group making. With regards to joining ADMG as full members you, should be aware that in order to have a deer management group you will need to have a formal constitution with a chairman and secretary and ADMG will require an annual levy as part of their membership which is approximately ~ 50p for each roe shot by members of the group.



Please feel free to email me your objectives for the group and I would be very happy to comment on them

Regards

Jamie

Jamie Hammond
Deer Officer South Scotland
 
What planet do these guys come from!
And he says he was one of us before, well goodness knows what happens to them when they enter the DCS but he certainly isnt represeting any views I or other people that I've spoken to.

He says - No welfare issues shooting Roe bucks all year!

Is that part of their best practice guidelines. Bloody hell the poor creatures need a break as we all do.

He says - The figure of £80 was an indicative figure relating to existing training.

Well well fancy that, and I'm sure it would be on a yearly basis or otherwise you'd be struck off the register. And theres no guarantee about the £80.

He says - If you are referring to a situation that may arise where by deer are seen to be causing a threat to public safety for example, this will be resolved though the creation of an advisory panel lead by DCS (SNH)

Again, jobs for the boys what do they take us for!

He says - it would become an offence to shoot deer unless you were on the centrally held register or accompanied by a stalker who is on the register. If found to be shooting deer out with these parameters then it would become a Police matter and they would take the case forward.

This is a biggie here folks, no more having your own land and shooting as and when you can without being on this register - Or going out with someone who isnt on it either. I have stalked on various estates, with very experienced stalkers who have had no "official" training but their skillss are without question. Now they too would be deemend not competent.

He says - The assessment route / qualifications required for entering onto the register have not been discussed and are open for consultation. It is likely that currently ‘accepted’ qualifications such as those delivered through DMQ Ltd, LANTRA AWARDS, SQA, ST Huberts Club etc that meet the agreed standards would be acceptable. Whether ‘grandfather rights’ (ie many year’s practical experience) should be accepted could be a matter for public consultation. However, the evidence presented above highlighting current welfare concerns suggests that skills levels among some experienced practitioners are lower than desired.

The words to look at here are "it is likely" in other words we'll take bits from them all and make up our own one. And where are these people whose skills are lower than desired. If he has evidence then the DCS should be going to these people and telling them. I also have yet to here of any venison reaching the public that has caused food poisoning or anything else. Where exactly is the problem??

He says - Training and assessment for more inexperienced stalkers should cost no more than £350 per person and will be taken up by the deer sector which already has a well developed training programme.

Should cost no more, some of us out here in the real world can think and I certainly think this stinks!

He says - Ultimately all DCS staff, despite the flack we receive, have deer interests at heart and want to achieve a balance between differing land use objectives and still safeguard deer welfare.

Well they have the most unusual way of showing it in wanting to stop closed seasons.......

He says - this is not about DCS using a heavy handed approach to instigate widespread culls

Unlike Glenfeshie or Mar Lodge.......

He says - Back to your original enquiry into setting up a deer management group, this is not something you need to have formally approved by us – Deer management groups as they stand are voluntary.
I would however be very interested in seeing what your clearly defined objectives are and what role and purpose you see the group making. With regards to joining ADMG as full members you, should be aware that in order to have a deer management group you will need to have a formal constitution with a chairman and secretary and ADMG will require an annual levy as part of their membership which is approximately ~ 50p for each roe shot by members of the group.

Why on earth if a group of land owners decide to set up ADMG then they have to have all the beurocracy that goes with it - shouldn't we try and get rid of unecessary crap like - contitutions/chaimen and secretarys! Bloody hell it's 2009 we should be trying to make things easier for us! Its not rocket science. And +/_ 50p per beast shot!! I wonder where that would go.
 
dcs

i couldnt agree more salmo ,i was at scone on the sunday and made a point of going into the dcs tent to question this draft,the young man i spoke to didnt have a clue about current regulations never mind what they have planned for the future.this to me is a group who want total control at the expence of the welfare of the deer[especially roe]as always in todays society its about money. rant over
 
dcs

i couldnt agree more salmo ,i was at scone on the sunday and made a point of going into the dcs tent to question this draft,the young man i spoke to didnt have a clue about current regulations never mind what they have planned for the future.this to me is a group who want total control at the expence of the welfare of the deer[especially roe]as always in todays society its about money. rant over
 
dcs

i couldnt agree more salmo ,i was at scone on the sunday and made a point of going into the dcs tent to question this draft,the young man i spoke to didnt have a clue about current regulations never mind what they have planned for the future.this to me is a group who want total control at the expence of the welfare of the deer[especially roe]as always in todays society its about money. rant over
 
consultation doc

Hi Griff, Steve Latham in Chester,Just had Chris Brooks e-mail the relevent pages for a response, 14 in all, doesn't look too bad, going to fill em in after tea. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top