Deer Management Plan

[75]

Does anyone have a populated DMP they'd mind sharing please? I'm working through the DI template but as it's the first time this piece of ground has had a formal management plan in place I'm struggling with not having a baseline survey to work from and unsure where to set the land and deer management objectives for year 1. Obviously easier going forward once we have some data to work from... It's mixed woodland but predominantly broadleaf / ancient.

Many thanks in advance

 

[VSS]

Even if you use someone else's plan as a template, it'll be meaningless unless you carry out a population census to give you a starting point, I would have thought?

 

[jcampbellsmith]

DMPs were covered in some depth on this course Deer Management Course - The British Deer Society
Some templates were supplied too. The instructors were very knowledgeable.
Or you could hire a professional to draw up a plan and maintain it for you.
Regards
JCS

 

[75]

Even if you use someone else's plan as a template, it'll be meaningless unless you carry out a population census to give you a starting point, I would have thought?

We have the deer population / density data but light on the land objectives (which lead into the deer management objectives) so I was looking for some suggestions in this space. One of our big overall objectives is to "maintain and monitor" going forward due to the lack of historical plan but that principle doesn't lend itself well to any actions other than monitoring.

 

[VSS]

We have the deer population / density data but light on the land objectives (which lead into the deer management objectives) so I was looking for some suggestions in this space. One of our big overall objectives is to "maintain and monitor" going forward due to the lack of historical plan but that principle doesn't lend itself well to any actions other than monitoring.

Ah, that makes more sense.

 

[T.eddie]

We have the deer population / density data but light on the land objectives (which lead into the deer management objectives) so I was looking for some suggestions in this space. One of our big overall objectives is to "maintain and monitor" going forward due to the lack of historical plan but that principle doesn't lend itself well to any actions other than monitoring.

It may be worth getting a baseline from the landowner, I.e. do they want to see a reduction or just maintenance
For reduction it would be dependent on numbers and which deer are present as to a sensible figure as some will be easier to deal with than others (both in terms of stalking and actually dealing with for lardering amd storing etc) which you no doubt know anyway so apologies but may be helpful for others

I'd then set a % reduction based on a number of counts and as its a first year be Conservative. Then with a year's data under your belt you can review/revist objectives etc

 

[Terrydeer]

I suppose what is the composition of the land, what are the main land features/components. What are the long term aims of the land managers/owners/custodians.
What is the adjacent land and how is this managed

 

[75]

Thanks folks - all sorted and thanks to the couple of members who PM'd me just the sort of thing I was after.

 

[Klenchblaize]

And just to add to post #2’s reference to a site-specific population census, don’t overlook what can only be described as the ‘indeterminable’ if the land in question is poorly fenced and fallow are involved.

I spent a considerable amount of time & effort producing my DMP which included many photographs of deer paths and crossing points etc. This in addition to counting deer. Determining a cull plan for the roe was a relatively easy proposition and based on my desire not to eradicate them. When it came to the fallow and after much deliberation, I was compelled to conclude that without deer fencing throughout the estate and/or full cooperation from all adjoining landowners in deer management on their land, a policy of “shoot on sight” was justified and necessary. In short, arriving at a cull figure for fallow was not possible as long as the herds were at liberty to enjoy thier nomadic lifestyle!

K

 

[HallyButt]

I’m finding more and more that landowners preferred option is ‘kill everything’, I’m not convinced these ‘management plans’ (essentially used to prolong ‘sport’)do anything positive to address the deer burden, same as syndicates who hoover up great swathes of land and often struggle to get members out shooting anything, blocking others in the process.

 

[T.eddie]

I’m finding more and more that landowners preferred option is ‘kill everything’, I’m not convinced these ‘management plans’ (essentially used to prolong ‘sport’)do anything positive to address the deer burden, same as syndicates who hoover up great swathes of land and often struggle to get members out shooting anything, blocking others in the process.

I would disagree, the management plans are designed to document the problem, solution as well as outcome so your landowner can have something to hold you accountable to as well as justify for grants etc. If the landowner wants the deer eradicated the management plan would say that and it would be up to your to propose the best way to do it be that cull teams, fencing etc

If the landowner wants to maintain a healthy population this also indicates to them how expansion takes place (through birth rates and anticipated population growth/death). I would also say it goes as far to actually make people take deer off, as you will have a mix of female and male population to take which again you will he held accountable to by the landowner and if not meeting their expecting and objectives as set out in the plan they may well get rid of you. It is worth noting that these plans are for everyone/every landowner as some will be quite happy with you just turning up to take what you can etc

 

[DaveNeal]

"I hate muntjac" comes up a lot

I like them personally - funny little habits, small to carry, taste great - like little cervine pigs .....

 

[Klenchblaize]

Surely a coherent and credible Deer Survey & Management Plan will assist a Landowner in their application for certain Government grants?

K

 

[Shabz]

I’d be looking at herbivore impacts rather than population if you’re looking at setting cull figures.

You can see the methodology here:

https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/1480-the-woodland-herbivore-impact-assessment-method-user-guide/download

 

[Cris]

And just to add to post #2’s reference to a site-specific population census, don’t overlook what can only be described as the ‘indeterminable’ if the land in question is poorly fenced and fallow are involved.

I spent a considerable amount of time & effort producing my DMP which included many photographs of deer paths and crossing points etc. This in addition to counting deer. Determining a cull plan for the roe was a relatively easy proposition and based on my desire not to eradicate them. When it came to the fallow and after much deliberation, I was compelled to conclude that without deer fencing throughout the estate and/or full cooperation from all adjoining landowners in deer management on their land, a policy of “shoot on sight” was justified and necessary. In short, arriving at a cull figure for fallow was not possible as long as the herds were at liberty to enjoy thier nomadic lifestyle!

K

For Fallow, no truer word said. Certainly in most cases of small land ownership, their nomadic ways make management very difficult to impossible to plan for. Your only chance is collaboration with adjoining land managers if they will! In most cases it will just be shoot on sight or Deer moves if you have enough land, can reasonably predict were they will move to and help from strategically placed guns.

 

[Klenchblaize]

I’d be looking at herbivore impacts rather than population if you’re looking at setting cull figures.

You can see the methodology here:

https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/1480-the-woodland-herbivore-impact-assessment-method-user-guide/download

Agreed. Rather than stop at “etc” (post #9) I should have specifically referenced photographic evidence of the types of flora damage. Fortunately mine does and in reality is as much a squirrel impact assessment.

K

 

[WildTrackPro]

We are finding a lot of land agents/foresters/land owners want:
Thermal survey (drone) (for baseline);
Stakeholder Deer Management plan (verbose, detailed, considers all stakeholders); and
FC WS1 compliant Deer Management Plan (an elaborated excel spreadsheet focussed more on the specifics of sex/age class progressive culling).

44:30 in the below webinar shows how to generate the plans in a few seconds using the software.

 

[WildTrackPro]

For those that don’t know WS1 has been upped to £105 p.a (Total for WD2, Squirrels and Deer is now close to £300 per ha). The time frame has been extended to 10 years.

Just to make that clear - for a landowner/farmer with a 100ha EXISTING woodland there is £30,000 p.a available for improving it, managing deer and managing squirrels…

The FC WS1 Deer management plan template is linked here:

management requirements for deer control woodland supplement (WS1)

www.gov.uk

The guidance notes are also linked in the text.

 

[Overlay]

We are finding a lot of land agents/foresters/land owners want:
Thermal survey (drone) (for baseline);
Stakeholder Deer Management plan (verbose, detailed, considers all stakeholders); and
FC WS1 compliant Deer Management Plan (an elaborated excel spreadsheet focussed more on the specifics of sex/age class progressive culling).

44:30 in the below webinar shows how to generate the plans in a few seconds using the software.

That is all bright and dandy but some grounds are small and with migratory deer flow, thermal assessments could be an asset but you’ve have to be in it to win it, the cost of doing this has to be borne by someone and finding a solution won’t come out of a thermal survey, the foundation has to be laid by getting to know the ground the impact and deer flow there isn’t any other way but to do it properly and generate a sustainable manageable deer policy and plan perhaps with the aid / help of a drone and a colour chart

making a mountain out of a mole hill comes to mind and not seeing the wood before the trees

 

[WildTrackPro]

That is all bright and dandy but some grounds are small and with migratory deer flow, thermal assessments could be an asset but you’ve have to be in it to win it, the cost of doing this has to be borne by someone and finding a solution won’t come out of a thermal survey, the foundation has to be laid by getting to know the ground the impact and deer flow there isn’t any other way but to do it properly and generate a sustainable manageable deer policy and plan perhaps with the aid / help of a drone and a colour chart

making a mountain out of a mole hill comes to mind and not seeing the wood before the trees

This is just what we are seeing. You’re correct in that our sample size will be larger sites.

In respect of transitory deer that does depend on species (alluded to in the thread) … and research shows Roe Doe hefts are very territorial and in relevantly small areas. (Some as small as 40m2 depending on density) Muntjac also.

I can link the papers (when I’m back in the office) - but interesting that experienced deer managers are generally low by 33-50% in population estimates compared to empirical methods… so it’s worth considering that.

Absolutely in agreement that damage assessments should form the main driver of the plan.

Another thing we are seeing is that muntjac population (where present - and in some cases where they weren’t known to be present) is substantially higher than people believe. [again that’s just what we are seeing].

We saw double digits on a 500-600 ha block of land that “had one sighting 5 years ago”. This land was stalked by 2/3 people.

There are a few people doing thermal surveys and the cost isn’t high. Especially given the grants. BH wildlife has some good vids online and there’s a couple of other doing them depending on location. They’re certainly better than the dung plots I’m having to do in Scotland!

Again this is just what we are seeing.