Britain’s deer are thriving. It’s a nightmare for the countryside

[Chris Richardson]

I doubt that

FE help facilitate and liase with landowners and stalkers across the country

Well that’s funny because I asked them about a wood nearly 12 months ago that’s theirs that I know nobody is stalking on my boundary , no reply yet …. yet in the next breath we need to shoot more deer

 

[sauer]

Tin hat on time ....
Folk saying problem offloading carcasses

1. Eat it !....if your not a guide or contractor then numbers should be less
Your a hobbyist!
2. Financial constraints mentioned,again Your a hobbyist
How many golfers try to make their game pay for them?

Eat it or give it to family and friends
Or set yourself up create your own market
Or stick into the gamedealer and accept what little you may get


Why shoot deer if not got to use the end result?

Join a club shoot gongs or paper targets

Paul

 

[Bo Diddley]

Although I must admit, I've a proper thing for a lass in riding gear. I'm often not crawling past for the sake of the horse

Avoid at all costs, they think more of the flippin' horse than they do of any man.... ask me how I know

 

[David Barker]

The article gets some things right: deer numbers are undeniably high in parts of Britain, habitat damage is real in some areas, and poor management over decades has created welfare as well as ecological problems. But it also slips into a familiar media narrative where deer are framed primarily as pests, and where “more culling” is treated as the obvious solution without enough scrutiny of how, where, or by whom that culling would actually happen.

The article itself admits that nobody truly knows how many deer live in Britain and that the commonly quoted figure of 2 million is “at best an educated guess”. That point deserves far more attention than it gets. Population estimates are often extrapolated from local surveys, sightings, cull returns, or habitat models, all with significant margins of error. Yet these uncertain figures are then used to justify calls for dramatically increased cull targets. If the baseline numbers are uncertain, management decisions based heavily on them should be approached cautiously. Otherwise there is a risk of replacing evidence-led deer management with politically driven target-setting.

The first issue is the repeated assumption that bigger cull targets automatically equal better management. Welfare matters just as much as numbers. A rushed or politically driven increase in culling risks creating exactly the sort of poor practice responsible stalkers spend years trying to avoid. Effective deer management depends on skilled, local, species-specific stalking carried out over time — not headline-driven pressure to simply “double the kill”.

The article also glosses over the fact that Britain’s deer populations are not one uniform problem. Fallow on Ashdown are not the same challenge as roe in fragmented farmland or muntjac in southern coppice woods. Habitat condition, forestry objectives, public access, winter pressure, agricultural damage, and carrying capacity all differ enormously by region. Blanket national rhetoric rarely reflects that reality.

There’s also little acknowledgement that deer themselves are often symptoms of wider land-use decisions. Large-scale commercial forestry, winter crops, suburban edge habitat, fragmented woodland, and the decline of traditional mixed farming have all created ideal deer conditions. Yet the burden of “fixing” the issue is repeatedly placed almost entirely on stalkers.

The piece is strongest when discussing venison. Britain does have an oddly weak wild venison culture compared with much of Europe, and that creates a genuine bottleneck. Many stalkers already struggle with game dealer prices, processing costs, access arrangements, and carcass handling regulations. Calling for dramatically higher cull numbers without addressing the economics risks encouraging waste, which is neither ethical nor sustainable.

Some of the proposed alternatives are also treated too casually. Fertility control sounds attractive to non-hunters, but at landscape scale it remains impractical and extremely expensive for free-ranging deer populations. Likewise, predator reintroduction is often discussed romantically without confronting the social, agricultural, and welfare implications in a densely populated country like Britain.

Perhaps the biggest omission is the welfare cost of under-management itself. High-density deer populations do not simply “thrive”. In many areas they suffer poorer body condition, parasite burdens, winter stress, habitat depletion, and increased road mortality. Responsible stalking, done well, is fundamentally a welfare tool as much as a conservation one.

The article is probably right that current policy has failed. But the answer is not simply “more culling”. It is better management: more trained stalkers, better access arrangements, stronger venison markets, realistic local population objectives, and less ideological debate from people far removed from practical deer management on the ground.

As stated but not elaborated on Access to lands by stalkers is limited and most of the UK has no management at all. So on the current % of ground available to deer management there is no way the number will be reduced. We now have an army of trained deer stalker most would love the opertunity to manage deer locally. Some pay copious amounts of money to stalk with some one. There are options to the problem sadly there is no want and the public department will continue to complain and blame others while the massive pot of money keeps getting bigger and lining the few pockets.

 

[Chris Richardson]

As stated but not elaborated on Access to lands by stalkers is limited and most of the UK has no management at all. So on the current % of ground available to deer management there is no way the number will be reduced. We now have an army of trained deer stalker most would love the opertunity to manage deer locally. Some pay copious amounts of money to stalk with some one. There are options to the problem sadly there is no want and the public department will continue to complain and blame others while the massive pot of money keeps getting bigger and lining the few pockets.

but amongst that army how many are A, capable and B willing to put the time in .............. very very few

 

[Ronin]

Well that’s funny because I asked them about a wood nearly 12 months ago that’s theirs that I know nobody is stalking on my boundary , no reply yet …. yet in the next breath we need to shoot more deer

Perhaps email them
Again and copy in the next person up the food chain too asking for a reply

 

[Chris Richardson]

Perhaps email them
Again and copy in the next person up the food chain too asking for a reply

already done several times , ridiculously slow

 

[Ratel]

I a

I’ve sampled a couple in the past trust me not good for your health , or the women for that matter …..

I also rode a lot more in my younger days.

 

[Twodogs]

Just been thinking about some of the issues both known and highlighted in various threads.

There are an unknown number of qualified and willing stalkers who lack access to deer and would happily ‘assist’ if the opportunity arose.

Might it be an idea for, on SD for example (sorry no idea how much work this would take), to generate and maintain a database of the willing. I would suggest only contact via the PM facility, yes I know this is limiting, and a public declaration of skills/qualifications etc such as DSC 1, insurance, night licence/qualification, dog, short notice availability and geographic area willing to work.

Money comes into most things in any capitalist society but this should be a matter between parties involved. Having said this I suspect that there are many willing to put in the work in exchange for opportunities to shoot.

Thoughts anyone.

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Just been thinking about some of the issues both known and highlighted in various threads.

There are an unknown number of qualified and willing stalkers who lack access to deer and would happily ‘assist’ if the opportunity arose.

Might it be an idea for, on SD for example (sorry no idea how much work this would take), to generate and maintain a database of the willing. I would suggest only contact via the PM facility, yes I know this is limiting, and a public declaration of skills/qualifications etc such as DSC 1, insurance, night licence/qualification, dog, short notice availability and geographic area willing to work.

Money comes into most things in any capitalist society but this should be a matter between parties involved. Having said this I suspect that there are many willing to put in the work in exchange for opportunities to shoot.

Thoughts anyone.

I will correct you slightly there there is or are thousands of qualified stalkers on the SD, but how many actually have practical experience in getting on with a job?

In respect the answer is probably very very few!

Very easy to get pieces of paper to say you’re qualified very very difficult to get experience to say you can do the job

 

[Chris Richardson]

Just been thinking about some of the issues both known and highlighted in various threads.

There are an unknown number of qualified and willing stalkers who lack access to deer and would happily ‘assist’ if the opportunity arose.

Might it be an idea for, on SD for example (sorry no idea how much work this would take), to generate and maintain a database of the willing. I would suggest only contact via the PM facility, yes I know this is limiting, and a public declaration of skills/qualifications etc such as DSC 1, insurance, night licence/qualification, dog, short notice availability and geographic area willing to work.

Money comes into most things in any capitalist society but this should be a matter between parties involved. Having said this I suspect that there are many willing to put in the work in exchange for opportunities to shoot.

Thoughts anyone.

willing and qualified ... but able?
ill give you a wee example , i invited 5 guys to a collab cull in january 2 showed up ( the two who regularly help me ) of of the guys who didnt show is constantly banging on about how he wants his own ground .......

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Also to add, don’t anybody tell me it’s not out there to be gone because it is if you look hard enough!

 

[Mickeydredd]

but amongst that army how many are A, capable and B willing to put the time in .............. very very few

Every little helps......

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Every little helps......

I’ve had people help me in the past it’s just better to do it yourself in the long run!

 

[Mickeydredd]

I’ve had people help me in the past it’s just better to do it yourself in the long run!

Indeed, but not related to the post I replied to.

I do find it makes managing Reds (even the little Scottish ones) easier if you have a like-minded mate with you.

 

[Tim.243]

Just been thinking about some of the issues both known and highlighted in various threads.

There are an unknown number of qualified and willing stalkers who lack access to deer and would happily ‘assist’ if the opportunity arose.

Might it be an idea for, on SD for example (sorry no idea how much work this would take), to generate and maintain a database of the willing. I would suggest only contact via the PM facility, yes I know this is limiting, and a public declaration of skills/qualifications etc such as DSC 1, insurance, night licence/qualification, dog, short notice availability and geographic area willing to work.

Money comes into most things in any capitalist society but this should be a matter between parties involved. Having said this I suspect that there are many willing to put in the work in exchange for opportunities to shoot.

Thoughts anyone.

Yes, those who hop on the 6.39am to Liverpool St 5 days a week will only want to do weekends, who will set them out on the land as it takes years to learn a farm also come harvest on arable land then the activity is off the scale, also the heat as with last light it is still roasting hot and deer need to cool and follow a process. Get a runner and that area is ducked as the welfare side will take over.
Yes there will be a lot of willing hands but at weekends, with respect it is not a fishing lake work party with loppers and a rake.

 

[Chris Richardson]

Every little helps......

Not really I’ve found it a lot easier to do it myself

 

[Mickeydredd]

Not really I’ve found it a lot easier to do it myself

but amongst that army how many are A, capable and B willing to put the time in .............. very very few

My reply was to the above post, what I meant was its worth getting those few in the army that are willing to get involved properly managing deer populations rather than none at all.

 

[Chris Richardson]

My reply was to the above post, what I meant was its worth getting those few in the army that are willing to get involved properly managing deer populations rather than none at all.

Ah I see my apologies I agree but sadly they are very few and far between

 

[timbrayford]

I doubt that

FE help facilitate and liase with landowners and stalkers across the country

But what about our own property, such as the New Forest?