good deer ground

atom

Well-Known Member
This is how i would view a good piece of ground 1st year hit it hard try to shoot it out a good piece of ground should regenerate for the following year i would allways be wary of someone offering ground and saying we dont shoot does not mature ones just young this would indicate to me that there is low numbers resident on that ground deer move into good feeding ground so numbers should stay up if they dont improve on second year i reckon the ground is just average this is my opinion any one else have a thought on this matter this thread is about good ground
 
Good deer ground to me dose not need to hold hundreds but it needs to have everything the deer want and no mater what you shoot the deer will be waiting to fill it.
 
I guess this technique for assessing ground supposes that the surrounding ground is not being managed by someone with a similar technique or there would be no deer in year two. I am not convinced this method beats census taking and pyramidal management.
I think that any management of a ground should be done in consultation with other stalkers in the same area and that deer management groups on the whole are a good idea.
If anyone proposed trying to manage my land with the above method I personally would think that the potential stalker would be a fly-by-night if the ground did not yield what the stalker thought was enough to keep him happy and that I would be left in year two with an absent stalker and few deer.
 
I got the impression it was a wind up post but thought that as it's a new year I might start the year in benevolent fashion.
 
You dont say wether you are looking to manage the ground as a long term lease or you have been asked to hit hard ie forestry ready for replanting ???????:rolleyes:
 
I was assuming (right or wrongly) That the viewing of good ground was at its beginning the management of the ground would need to be set out on this area afterwards.
 
Last edited:
sounds like see deer shoot deer . Good management that!!!!! if we all had that attitude towards deer there wouldn,t be any left:cuckoo:.
 
Last edited:
Management begins a long time before the trigger is pulled. Had a few folk who didn't know that I stalk come knocking on my door trying to get stalking. Anyone who told me they would be able to start the shooting tomorrow would be laughed out of the house if they thought they could shoot before assessing the population and discussing the current year's and the long term plan with me.
 
LLD Now that is not always the case if it was then every public deer manager would be doing it incorrect. You are given an area that needs sorted and you sort it simple.
 
LLD Now that is not always the case if it was then every public deer manager would be doing it incorrect. You are given an area that needs sorted and you sort it simple.

to be fare I personally think there an awful lot who are!
my biggest gripe is the wholesale mismanangement of population figures and deer ecology that sees barren "ground" next to areas with a population explosion!

too many people who have never taken the time to stalk without a rifle before they decide to take one with them.

"Sorting it" as you say, does not involve "hitting it hard" in the first year "and it will sort itself out" in year two as the OP has suggested. I have seen several areas denuded of deer purely down to an ambitious cull figure. no amount of relying on surrounding ground and influx of bucks being kicked out will account for a stalker/deer manager reducing the breeding doe population to much.

there, that should get some discussion going! :stir:
 
This is how i would view a good piece of ground 1st year hit it hard try to shoot it out a good piece of ground should regenerate for the following year i would allways be wary of someone offering ground and saying we dont shoot does not mature ones just young this would indicate to me that there is low numbers resident on that ground deer move into good feeding ground so numbers should stay up if they dont improve on second year i reckon the ground is just average this is my opinion any one else have a thought on this matter this thread is about good ground


Not sure why such a post was put on this site :-|:confused: However anyone who thinks that managing an estate or piece of ground for deer by total elimination in the first year is unlikely to be staying for very long.

Depending on the size of the ground it takes at least 2 seasons to get to know what you have and where it may be, let alone the boundaries etc. If its a fenced area and re generation the job is easier in certain respects. But moving onto an area and thinking you can totally eliminate the deer and then watch the void filled again is not to be recommended in my book.
 
This is an interesting one as it almost describes exactly what I did on a local estate, and the results where not what you might expect!
I took on an estate of about 2500 acres which was mainly arable, but with one largish wood and numerous smaller ones. There were an awful lot of deer and some severe damage to replanted trees. I only had 3 weeks left of the Roe Doe season when I started and the pressure was on to get some results (from land owner and woodland manager). I hesitantly agreed to a 'shoot on sight in season' policy for the first year, purely to get the numbers back to a manageable level.
Now.... this is what I would describe as 'good ground', and the larger wood is an absolute magnet for deer. There are a good amount of deer in the general area (Roe, Muntjac, Fallow, and some transient Red) and most surrounding areas have deer management in hand.
After the first year, I reviewed the figures, and the results were quite surprising!
As well as reducing the numbers on the estate considerably, the animals culled formed almost a perfect cull plan with regards to sex ratio and age class banding. Obviously, a good cull plan should replicate what would happen if we still had natural predation, with the cull consisting of mainly young animals with some old and the odd mature one, i.e. survival of the fittest and strongest!
My theory is, that decent mature animals don't get to that stage of life by being weak or stupid! I was never going to shoot them all out either. By shooting what I saw first and easiest, I was pretty much doing the job of a natural predator!
Anyway, recent changes to the estate, grant schemes and FC demands have meant that I have continued with this policy for a few years. (Although i admit to having left one or two really nice animals that I couldn't justify shooting:rolleyes:). The estate now has an acceptable low level of deer. Those remaining are very good quality, with Roe triplets common. We get some immigration for sure as well as recruitment from our own stock. I was as surprised by these results, but I am now of the opinion that it appears to work in this particular area. The people I work for are happy, the deer population is at an acceptable level and thriving. I am therefore happy, and it ain't broke so there is no need to fix it!
I'm not suggesting that this policy will work everywhere, but I certainly wouldn't rubbish the OP's post without considering all the factors.
MS:tiphat:
 
Malcolm that is exactly what needs to be done in many areas that i shoot. There are places were the deer numbers are to high but access to these areas can be troublesome to say the least some areas you will never get access to .The option then is to remove as many deer from the areas that you have access and let they deer move in from the over populated area. This has been on trial in many areas across the central belt of Scotland and we have found it very successful. Not recommend for other areas were full access is the norm. May i also add this has only been done were roe deer are the problem i think it would be totally different if it was one of the larger species.
 
my post was not put up to have insults thrown at me but as a serious thought on some land i shoot it seems the more i take off the more appear one mate suggested that roe are like magpies one allways round the corner and on other land i shoot the managment consists of managing to see one i have met dozens of stalkers who travel massive distances to shoot deer i reckon managment plans go out the window in the early hours of sunday morning a term comes to mind if its brown its down if its red its dead mind you i could allways go back to posting {looking for new boots any suggestions}
 
I would offer the view that if the sustenance is available on the ground, whatever the species you are concentrating on, unless it's on an island, you won't shoot it out, all you might do is move stuff on to other peoples areas, as happened for a while on the Arran scheme, (the farmers surrounding were getting more than anyone), Just like foxing, shoot one & usually two come to the funeral.
 
I would offer the view that if the sustenance is available on the ground, whatever the species you are concentrating on, unless it's on an island, you won't shoot it out, all you might do is move stuff on to other peoples areas, as happened for a while on the Arran scheme, (the farmers surrounding were getting more than anyone), Just like foxing, shoot one & usually two come to the funeral.

The fox myth. Is this the case as it doesnt happen on any of my ground !!!
 
Good ground is ground that can hold a good head of deer no matter the time of year. It must have everything the deer need in every season. How many deer can be taken off this type of ground is any ones guess but i am sure even on ground like that there is a limit. No one will truly comment because not many people have ground like that,

dec2011easter003.jpg
 
Back
Top