Cull Fees

Trevor.

Well-Known Member
What does everyone think about paying to shoot cull deer , yes paying to stalk ok, But paying a fee on top to shoot an animal that needs culling i think is a bit much :confused: What do you all think. :confused: :confused:

Gadget.
 
It's a very interesting question...

There seems to be a lot of difference between the multitude of available paid stalking... I've seen it where no cull fees applied at all, no fees for cull does but a 'success charge' for cull bucks (separate to trophy charges), and of course, cull charges for both does and bucks.

I wouldn't expect to pay to shoot a cull animal...

If you are getting a guided stalk and therefore benefitting from the knowledge and experience of your guide, as well as the use of his land, then of course you expect to pay for that.

In the case of culls, however, how do you know if the stalker needs to get the job done and is actually profitting from getting someone else to do their job, or if they are offering a genuine and valid opportunity to oters who either don't have access to their own land, or don't have that species or landscape on their own patch?

Could spark quite a debate....
 
Hi

I would expect to pay for someones time to take me out,Or a fee to stalk on there ground (unaccompanied)
But if the beast needs culling i would not expect to pay for a cull animal.
I don't agree with paying for trophy fees as well. and would never do it.
i believe if a beast needs culling it should be for better reasons than cash.
But if people are prepared to pay stupid cash to shoot big heads then they can have them and i will stick to the cull animals.

ATB
Cam
 
It's all a question of supply and demand. As long as some people are happy to pay for cull animals in addition to an outing fee, the professionals will continue to charge.

As long as the fees are agreed up before any stalking takes place I can't see a problem. You pays yer money, you takes yer choice - and you can always go somewhere else if you don't like an arrangement.
 
The Mole said:
It's all a question of supply and demand. As long as some people are happy to pay for cull animals in addition to an outing fee, the professionals will continue to charge.

As long as the fees are agreed up before any stalking takes place I can't see a problem. You pays yer money, you takes yer choice - and you can always go somewhere else if you don't like an arrangement.
moles right in my opinion, if someone wants to pay me to shoot deer on my permissions why should that be wrong the deer will die either way, i like to shoot myself and buy stalking myself, but if i can enjoy a stalk and pleasure in getting both of us within range and get sucess and get paid to do it am i a fool making a living out of your hobbies.(no i,m not).
if you do'nt want to pay do'nt but some people will its not wrong or explotation people come to me and the prices are not hidden.
Either i shoot the deer and get the carcass value or someone pays me to find the same deer for them to shoot i'm in pocket they are happy and the deer dies either way.
As long as the deer was going to be shot anyway theres no problem.
I spend alot of time on recon keep putting up high seats and help on the game shoots no one pays me for my time doing this in return i get the deer, so landowners are happy shoot captains are happy and me and clients are happy wheres the wrong in this i am very busy so alot of people out there WILL pay for culls and trophies. I'm glad or i'd need a big paper round. ;)
 
I used to go out on an estate in the highlands that only sold days for cull animals and they only charged a set price.I can see the point off charging extra for a trophy beast but only if it is off medal class.I would never pay for an outing and then more for a cull animal but then I have ground that I can shoot cull animals on.It all depends on an individuals circumstances,
somebody without ground might be more than happy to pay a cull fee if it gets them out stalking .If you don't like the fees you don't have to book it

deerhunter270
 
I had a 72 MGB sitting on my drive for a year. Wouldn't drive, rotten right through, had to get rid of it before the council told me to. The scrappy still gave me £100 for it.

Same principle - even if somthing has to be done it doesn't mean it has no value. Most things are worth something to someone.
 
I can see where paying cull fees might work to the advantage of the guest stalker:

There is one place I know of where the stalking fee for the day is very low but the cull fee is £150ish. This certainly motivates them to get each guest a shot as otherwise they wouldn't even be covering costs in my view. In turn I think that works to the advantage of the guest as if they walk you miles over ground never known to hold deer for the whole day then you might be none the wiser but they are losing money. It is, therefore, in their interests that you shoot a deer and I would say that works in the favour of the guest.

So, while I find complex variable "trophy fees" somewhat off-putting I can see how a flat cull fee if set at a reasonable rate can work to my advantage in some circumstances.
 
Let me see 1) A charge for the stalking 2) A charge for the beast to be culled or maybe a charge for missing 3) pay for the end use if you want to eat it. How on earth can it be fair to charge a succes fee on say a Fallow doe. I certainly would not pay for cull does and any spikers would have to be reasonable before I would part with the cash.
By the time you have added these variables together what seemed a reasonable fee in the first place quickly becomes not so.
 
vizslamad said:
Let me see 1) A charge for the stalking 2) A charge for the beast to be culled or maybe a charge for missing 3) pay for the end use if you want to eat it. How on earth can it be fair to charge a succes fee on say a Fallow doe. I certainly would not pay for cull does and any spikers would have to be reasonable before I would part with the cash.
By the time you have added these variables together what seemed a reasonable fee in the first place quickly becomes not so.

you are missing the point you only pay for the priviledge of shooting someone elses deer dont pay and shoot your own its simple a choice anyone can make. however its broke down you pay. more or less again people are free to shop around.
 
yes i agree you should pay a man for his time and yes pay extra to shoot a good buck or stag as you will have to put the time in to find them but as we all know you have to cull does and some bucks as part of the deer plan on the land if you don,t keep on top of the does the farmer , keeper will soon have you off and get some one how will, so yes pay for the stalk but not extra to shoot cull deer

Gadget
 
I agree that it is a matter of supply and demand. A market exists simply because there are more people who want to stalk than there are deer to be culled. The market could also be skewed by increased demend due to people requiring qualifying stalks for DSC2. But in the end, if you don't like the prices, you don't have to stalk with them.

However, I can see the force of the argument but is the question bit more subtle in that does it depends upon the employment role of the stalker? Fore example, does the response change if:

1. The Stalker stalks the land for free on the arrangremtn that he keeps the deer numbers down and therefore pockets all the money
2. The Stalker buys the rights to stalk and uses the money to pay for the rights.
3. The stalker is employed by an estate and the costs are predetermined and all the money goes to the estate, he only gets a wage +tips.
 
I recon after some long walks :evil:

Pay an agreed fee for the guides time and an agreed fee for culls, trophy etc as has been said above we all have the choice..

However

No deer no payment other than guides fee i think is reasonable..

Before anyone says - i appreciate the deer most of us stalk are wild not park and therefore there are no guarantees..

There is one family i now of that will happily mentor you for your level 1+2 and i can guarantee every candidate i have known will be taken on a long walk..

Nice money if you have no integrity and same fee to pay regardless..

I personally feel agrieved paying a full fee without even seeing a shootable deer..

Terry
 
Some of the pricing I have seen on the web would make Midas weap.
As has been said "You pays your money you takes your choice"
If the people that charge too much got no business then they would drop their prices, I have to assume that they are doing ok. Now I know in this game there are people that do it for the love and joy of watching someone get there first deer,medal head etc and the people who are in it for as much as they can get by fair means or foul.
Where I stalk the price is set and that is it

Taken from their web site

Q.Are there any Trophy charges?

No, once you have paid the cull charge then the trophy is yours to take home.

Q.What is the cull charge?

This is the charge made to pay for the deer you shoot, in the case of a Roe buck below 6 points £45, 6 points or above £75. A red stag £150.



Thats it, no £1/kilo for the meat the carcass is yours if you want it.

Last time I went he put me on some ground couldn't make the Roe rut was up just after.there were Roe there I spent a good 20mins watching a Doe and Kid 20m away but the ground also had Reds on.

His fees for stalking are
£75 accompanied
£40 Unaccompanied

Now to me this I think is transparent and leaves no doubt as to what you will be paying, none of the well I was saving that Buck for a client so it will be £XXX
Fair I think So
 
Quercus said:
A market exists simply because there are more people who want to stalk than there are deer to be culled.

Not sure that is really true Q. All too often you hear of folk complaining about deer damage and/or cull targets not being achieved. The received wisdom is that deer numbers are rising and that more need to be culled.

In some cases folk have too much ground that they simply can't manage the deer effectively. Certainly I hear that some landowners are wising up and not simply letting stalking - they are now charging the stalker/syndicate a premium if deer damage is deemed 'excessive'.
 
gadget said:
yes i agree you should pay a man for his time and yes pay extra to shoot a good buck or stag as you will have to put the time in to find them but as we all know you have to cull does and some bucks as part of the deer plan on the land if you don,t keep on top of the does the farmer , keeper will soon have you off and get some one how will, so yes pay for the stalk but not extra to shoot cull deer

Gadget
Gadget I totally agree with you there are to many people out there for whom the expression You cant have your cake and eat it! certainly does not apply. I think the majority of people on this site have no reservation in paying a reasonable rate for their chosen sport but different people have differing perceptions of value.

I have also noted that some members of the site including myself have not been recession proof. That will also have a bearing on ones stance on this subject. Should our passion for stalking be dragged down to the ability to pay? I certainly have no wish to have expensive trophies hanging on the wall. I just enjoy going out seeing the deer and maybe I get one. It is also my intention to achieve Level 2 but again I will only be going to someone I consider to be fair in their costs for this. Suggestions for accredited witnesses please! I have told my the wife I would rather do this than have the one days semi expensive pheasant shooting I do per year. This day I have done over the last three years and I can assure you has represented excellent value but sometimes one has to cut ones cloth.

However as you know some places charge for photographic stalking. Do you think the day will come when some greedy spark decides its time to charge per photo. Totally depending on species, points etc. :lol: :lol:
 
Cull deer

A few observations, if I may?

There are people in this world who get very excited over the prospect of a nice rack to hang on the wall at home - and there are estates that manage their wild stock in a way that enables this market to be exploited to the maximum.

An alternative management policy - and it's one that the BDS promotes - aims to achieve a 1:1 sex ratio with an appropriate mix of age classes. If the ground is not regularly poached and neighbouring estates have a similarly benign management policy, there may be occasional trophy heads to be removed but the majority of animals culled will be female and young. Stalking here is likely to be advertised as 'cull stalking' - to make it clear that trophy hunters need not apply.

I now turn to the matter of fees.

Three factors are at play. Deer eat trees and crops. Estates need maintaining. A lot of people want to kill deer and, as the value of stalking lets demonstrates, are prepared to pay to do it, often royally.

It's naive in the extreme for the would-be stalker to imagine that he's doing the estate a favour by going out with a guide to shoot cull animals. A competent deer manager can shoot more animals more quickly alone than he can with a visitor in tow. Visitors slow the cull, they don't help it - but they do generate necessary revenue.

In the case of an estate where the land owner seeks simply to maintain a equilibrium between the damage caused by deer and the amenity value of having them on the ground, (see above), the per-animal cull fees are typically lumped with carcass value to help offset the cost of estate maintenance. Wringing the maximum financial return from the deer is not the primary motivation and this will often be reflected in lower cull fees.

However, many estates do not take such an approach. I AWd a while back for two stalkers who together rented the stalking on a big estate. They paid an annual fee of some £7,000 but the previous tenants had shot the place almost completely out and so my two stalkers were treading lightly with the aim of encouraging re-population. With no chance of recovering the high cost of their sport through venison yield alone, advertising for paying visitors was their only option and it meant charges were high. They found willing customers from the Continent.

The fact is that a market exists in deer because deer have associated costs and landowners, unless they are remarkably philanthropic, seek at least to recover those costs. Unless a stalker is very lucky, he or she is therefore going to pay to stalk.

For what it may be worth, my advice is to become useful. Get as well qualified as it is possible to be, get as much experience as possible, and build a reputation for being informed, honest, ethical, humane - and good company. To some landowners - and such people do exist - these qualities matter more than the odd cull fee.

With kind regards to all.

KF
 
Re: Cull deer

KF[/quote]
It's naive in the extreme for the would-be stalker to imagine that he's doing the estate a favour by going out with a guide to shoot cull animals. A competent deer manager can shoot more animals more quickly alone than he can with a visitor in tow. Visitors slow the cull, they don't help it - but they do generate necessary revenue.
KF[/quote]

I think it very naive to think a man is better at his job then the next man i would like to think if i was out culling deer with a guide and i come across a group of deer all needing to be culled i could do the job as safe and as quick and humane as him not all stalkers are new to the game and some or use do manager ground of are own but its nice to go out on different ground with good company with paying the earth for it.

gadget
 
In my opinion, this post is only about complaining how deer stalking can be an expensive hobby. Well, to many it is. It certainly is to me, but what you can do? Work harder :confused: :lol:

Greg
 
Back
Top