Story in largest selling paper in Scotland.

Deerstalker2010

Well-Known Member
Were do you stand on this have the FC shot them selves in the foot and collaborative deer management is only a myth. Or are they right to shoot even if every one else round them has decided to give things a chance in the worst winter weather for 32 years and it ain't finished yet.
Deerstory2.jpg
 
yep cant let anything get in the way of there trees same at Marlodge they have contract stalkers in killing anything that nibbles a tree.

Colm
 
Maybe someone should check their off season licence. I thought that was for regeneration woods only. Maybe someone could also challenge DCS on the decission if it is a blanket free for all. Otherwise all the claptrap re DMG's goes out the window. Same with lamping licenses. Why does one body get a free for all and others have to jump through hoops then get told the damage will not justify. The stalkers are there to do the job without the lamp. They the FC take money to issue leases permits to control deer they also retain a right to lamp it without passing on that right to the lease holders. I have been in a wood when the lampers were flashing their light in my direction. They are then in danger of shooting without a known backstop. The licence to lamp should be individual and time related. covering only small areas where the damage occurs.
Jim
 
DCS / FC

Last October I was up a hill and could not get a shot on monster of a stag due to the hinds moving around. It was 19th October.

I eventually got a Sika Stag later that day and all was well.

We took the sika to the game dealer and could not get it on the rack for hinds.

They had just picked them up from FC larders.

Think on next time you tender for an FC lease.
 
I have to be VERY careful what i say, but I, and some neighbouring stalkers are in a much worse position than John Cameron (bad though his position is) due to FCS. Disgusting, revolting, completely disrespectful to the deer and their neighbours. Sickening.
 
There must be a commision stalker on here that could try and explain whats goin on,they cant be trying to shoot themselves out of a job can they???
I know an FC stalker he has told me he often shoots deer (roe) that other stalkers would give their eye teeth for,but has to meet his cull , the powers that be wont stop until they can plant broadleaves without having to cover them.
They are more concerned about having a good raptor population that can leave the forest to menace the neighbouring game birds :(
Nell
 
There is a lot of dubious deer “management” practice taking place in Scotland. The John Muir Trust for instance shot hinds that crossed from Barisdale Estate onto their ground and just lest them lying. I know that hinds, in that part of the country, are not in great numbers either.
 
Having been a FC senior and then head ranger , I'll give an opinion although I don't know all the facts.

facts to consider

this is the dailly record which is not known for great journalism

we are talking about 20 deer which is not a lot in the scale of things

The open licence covers all "enclosed" land under cultivation, ie forestry, grazing, arable.

The leaving of deer carcases on the hill does not have any implications on deer welfare, in fact the leaving of carrion could be enviromentally beneficial, especialy when you look at the logistics concerned in bringing deer of this piece of land,

I know and respect John Cameron and know that he is trying to increase stag numbers so can understand his frustrations.

I have seen this before, people "leaving deer" in poor weather, to be quite honest if you have a large cull and are worried about high densities then severe weather like this will increase the effectiveness of your culling , it may not be "sporting" but this is not what it is about, it's about effective culling and lamping etc are the most effective, they may not be the most enjoyable[I wouldn't care if I never saw a lamp ever again] but in many cases it's a numbers game.

Those of you concerned with forestry will know that it's dam near impossible to drive deer out of forests like this and the damage that could be caused in a short time with these deer is ireversable, shooting is the only option and why not do it when you can flatten 20 odd in one go relatively easily and cheaply, again not stalking but effective.
 
Good reply bambislayer, however with the amount of energy and money spent trying to convince the general public that what is being doing on the hill is humane and well intentioned, I still have concerns when deer carcases are left for hill walkers to see, and smell.
Aesthetically it might be a good thing for other wildlife, but you will have a lot to do to convince “joe public” that leaving hinds rotting on the hillside is for the best !,
I keep telling myself that it’s those “fireside” ecologists who call the shots when some politician seeking publicity decides to ban something
 
I would think the % of deer left on the hill will be very low, I know a few of the JMT staff very well and will ask what the reasons were in that instance.
I've shot a fair ammount of deer and have only left a very small ammount on the hill,[ lucky if it's been 1 in a 1000] always because of a very good reason, normall it would be because it would be physically impossible or dangerous, more times than not in years of low prices it has cost me money to have extract deer,
SNH in some areas will pay for deer to be left in order to feed eagles, this is probably down to low deer mortality , drop in sheep numbers and fallen stock being lifted that there is little food left for eagles.Or it is an ecologically important area and just not finacially viable to extract carcasses , this again is very rare.


Just a note on numbers, much is being said about Mar Lodge etc, I was talking to an old [retired] colegue of mine last week and we were reiminicing of the old days
In the 1980's 6 of us from the old RDC shot 622 deer in two days on the island of Scarba nothing was ever said, it had to be done as there were far too many deer and they were in a terrible state. It was not enjoyable work and hopefully deer management is in a better state in the UK now that we will never need to carry out culls like that again.

Just a thought but things have changed for the better, yes in the good old days there were pelnty of stags but there was also a hell of a lot of dead deer every spring something I luckily don't see much of any more.
 
Good job Arnie isn't in charge here, some Condors got lead poisoning (alledgedly) from carcase & waste left out in the countryside, the eagles must be more resilient! :)
 
The FC and private forest owners have different objectives than other land managers, and the main objective is to grow trees. Deer eat trees therefore there is bound to be a conflict so you cannot expect foresters to manage the deer in the same way as a sporting estate would mange it’s herd. I've said this before, but will repeat it again for this thread...most foresters like deer fences because they keep deer out thus avoiding the problems associated with marauding animals. However fencing every wood, all the time is not always possible/practicable/affordable/effective (take your pick) so when things go awry and deer get in, or numbers build up, then the best way to sort things is with the rifle. When the trees are relatively young and easily damaged, the speed of the cull is important hence we encounter out of season licences, lamping and shooting in the snow. At the other end of the scale, when trees are well established, the forester is happy to lease the ground to sportsmen (and make money from it). Unfortunately when the weather is particularly poor deer then use woodlands as shelter; after all it is their natural habitat. This is when things turn really sour as significant numbers may come into the woods from adjacent hill ground and when they are culled the neighbouring ground can see their Deer Management Plans ruined. So there we have it, the deer are an asset on one side of the fence and an asset destroyer on the other side….a recipe for a bitter and sustained fight or what?
I appreciate both sides of the argument and would always encourage a forester to fence and a land manager to provide his/her own woodlands for deer shelter as this approach will minimise the fighting plus (surprise, surprise) keep me in a job!

So, to sum up, I think collaborative deer management is fine until there is a “crisis” such as we see reported in the paper here, but to say the FC actions are “wrong” (that’s my sanitised way of describing your thoughts) and attacking them for culling (the neighbours) deer in the snow ignores the fact that it is up to the FC to do what they need to do to protect their assets.

regards
 
Very good Stuart, I had to look up the old latin there. John, very well put, a good explanation to others that are not foresters.

My input for what it is worth................ you need to be a narrow minded individual to not take all considerations into account.

I am a deer manager on some land where the population dynamics and the environment are important. Therefor, good deer management occurs so that both parties including the landowner (most importantly)are happy.

I have helped foresters where, as Scotspine states, trees are the asset, so therefore the deer need to be removed irrespective of circumstance.

I have a FC lease where a population of 5 per 100 hectares is the practice. For those that dont know what that means..........What you see, you shoot.

Each piece of ground has its own ability to sustain a population of deer and this is what will dictate what needs to happen. Unfortunately, there is no exact science to deer management and each landowner and the use of the land will dictate what is required.

This is by no means an answer, but we should recognise that each boundary will have a change in management, and therefor a change in policy for the deer. This is also true even where DMG's exist.

I will step down at the mo and return post birthday drinks 8) :lol:
 
Like I said before I cant say much about what has been happening locally to me because certain things are ongoing, but what I can say is that the FCS have been FUNDAMENTALLY wrong in their actions (and the way they went about these actions) near here.

One question: If a load of sheep get into a plantation, why dont FCS send for the hit squad to sort them out?! The reasons they dont are known and clear to everyone, and in many ways deer should not be treated any differently.

I could start about best practice, safety,etc (let alone respect for deer and your neighbours), but if I did I wouldnt be able to stop.

Im saying no more. :evil:
 
Back
Top