Deer Management Plans - cull figures and high numbers

[bottletopbill]

Think us stalker's pro or occasional should be able to cull the deer when there.
And why shouldn't we have a back up plan for any deer overload .
Zoos .petfood. Food banks for the elderly and other's so it does not affect the price a professional stalker gets from a game dealer.
Only trying to look from both sides.

 

[Mickeydredd]

I don't mean reduce the target, but you would need to be realistic with the owner. If that means the cull needs to take 2 years or 3 that doesn't reduce the overall cull number but I'm fact sets expectations

Would that not necessitate increasing the actual total cull though?

i.e. If you think the total cull requirement is 30 head and you suggest doing this over 3 years, then you will need to increase your annual cull to account for the breeding in years 1 and 2 you will fail to stop if you were hitting the 30 cull target (mainly females) in year 1? it just sounds like you would never achieve the cull.

 

[T.eddie]

Would that not necessitate increasing the actual total cull though?

i.e. If you think the total cull requirement is 30 head and you suggest doing this over 3 years, then you will need to increase your annual cull to account for the breeding in years 1 and 2 you will fail to stop if you were hitting the 30 cull target (mainly females) in year 1? it just sounds like you would never achieve the cull.

Yeah that's what I would imagine, and would need to be factored in

Just as saying if x need to be removed but you can only take y (due to ground, mobility, infrastructure etc) then you would likely not meet the cull. My main point is that the cull also needs to be realistic in relation to boots on the ground alongside carrying capacity or landowner requirements

 

[Bowland blades]

They form big herds and wander , sleep where they dont get bothered by culling then once its dark or they are put under real shooting pressure they will beggar off to another quiet estate / farm . it plainly needs co-operation or a massive investment in deer proof fencing and its maintenance

 

[Pete6.5]

Just keep shooting as many as you can until your impact survey shows what your aiming for. Then start a management cull

 

[Hayduke]

I don’t think we can extrapolate some counties in south east England where fallow herds are too big, with the rest of the United Kingdom. There are some localised pockets with unmanaged deer, and muntjac range expansion is worrying. For the majority of Scotland, England and Wales deer populations are in balance or close to it.

We also have large areas that don’t have our two native deer species, are we or the rewilders going to bring them back?

The current war on deer approach is unnecessary and unjustified.

 

[VSS]

I don’t think we can extrapolate some counties in south east England where fallow herds are too big, with the rest of the United Kingdom. There are some localised pockets with unmanaged deer, and muntjac range expansion is worrying. For the majority of Scotland, England and Wales deer populations are in balance or close to it.

We also have large areas that don’t have our two native deer species, are we or the rewilders going to bring them back?

The current war on deer approach is unnecessary and unjustified.

Fair points.
There are plenty of places with very few deer, or none at all.
You cannot, for example, compare the situation in the Midlands (where fallow numbers are unquestionably out of control) with the situation here in North West Wales.
There are also places which deer are unlikely to colonise any time soon, due to landscape features that limit their spread in a particular direction.

 

[bottletopbill]

Some of us stalkers are crying out to control there numbers in the south east.
We have large estates that do not allow any shooting and the deer know this as a safe place.
I have a 400acre farm to shoot on not one deer in 12 years and i have left cameras to see.
Yes i have heard them barking a distance away

 

[Sandy25]

We all have commitments if you have a meeting or doctors or being paid to do a stalk.
Lets all agree let us get the number's down regardless of being full time pro stalker or stalker.
we all have the same interest in shooting we all have to try inform all the land owner's who love deer on there land.
To let us control there number's

Completely agree!

As a recreational stalker managing a large estate, I fully appreciate the comittment to meet the cull target, while still working etc.

The problem I have encountered so far is that even though I’m putting in the hours and outings, I will see deer virtually every stalk, but encountering the right species/sex/animal in a shootable position is often very hard.

Disposing of the carcasses isn’t an issue, so any we see we can shoot, so long as they are in season etc.
We are doing our best, but if we aren’t able to shoot the animals it isn’t through any fault of our own as we are out at all hours!

If the damage on the land is acceptable, the land owner is satisfied, and you have done your best to achieve the target, even if you have fallen short, I think those are the main criteria to judge your success.

Regards,

Sandy

 

[bottletopbill]

Every one shot helps bring the numbers down.
As you and so many have stated should we be able to shoot out of season be the next step.

 

[Hazlett]

Every one shot helps bring the numbers down.

Whilst that seems to make sense, if you do the calcs or a population model, with a large fallow herd with typically 4 times as many does as bucks, it doesn't really matter how many bucks you shoot, the numbers don't come down.

 

[Stalker62]

Every one shot helps bring the numbers down.

Not true.

If you want to bring down the numbers, then you need to reduce the females.

 

[bottletopbill]

So seems the best way is shoot does out of season as well

 

[Sandy25]

So seems the best way is shoot does out of season as well

I think that is fine as a last resort, if there is no other way of getting the numbers. But the seasons are there for a reason, and shooting outside of them defeats the object of managing the species properly.

I appreciate the difficultly of meeting cull targets, but if the market isn’t there for the extra numbers taken, there isn’t any point shooting them.

 

[Tim.243]

Not true.

If you want to bring down the numbers, then you need to reduce the females.

Yes but people wanting Bucks for their man cave does not help the numbers one bit.
Also this Jurassic Park selection process is fiction like the film.

 

[Dickie]

Yeah that's what I would imagine, and would need to be factored in

Just as saying if x need to be removed but you can only take y (due to ground, mobility, infrastructure etc) then you would likely not meet the cull. My main point is that the cull also needs to be realistic in relation to boots on the ground alongside carrying capacity or landowner requirements

If X needs to be culled but you can only meet Y then you need to call in assistance, also people who have large areas but only take one for the freezer which are mainly males because of the comfy season and the length of time the freezer stock dwindles hardly ever touch females are part of the population problem along with the landowners who don't have shooting because the deer look nice.

 

[T.eddie]

If X needs to be culled but you can only meet Y then you need to call in assistance, also people who have large areas but only take one for the freezer which are mainly males because of the comfy season and the length of time the freezer stock dwindles hardly ever touch females are part of the population problem along with the landowners who don't have shooting because the deer look nice.

I completely agree

 

[Dan Newcombe]

I don't mean reduce the target, but you would need to be realistic with the owner. If that means the cull needs to take 2 years or 3 that doesn't reduce the overall cull number but I'm fact sets expectations

So just to be clear - how are you structuring it if you aren’t reducing the numbers needed?

Over a time you will need to remove a number of deer to reduce, maintain or let the population increase. Assuming that the aim is maintenance of the population at todays level, every year you don’t remove the necessary number of deer, you will need to remove more in subsequent years - regardless of your chiller space or ability to shoot 10 deer in one sitting.

Storage of multiple large numbers of large carcasses and their waste also needs to be considered. Making a difference is usually a team game.

nope - not when you are determining how many need to be shot in order to achieve the outcome that you are looking for. The required cull figure is a totally independent number - the number you are able / willing so shoot is a separate number and if you can’t make the two match then you aren’t going to get the desired results.

 

[T.eddie]

So just to be clear - how are you structuring it if you aren’t reducing the numbers needed?

Over a time you will need to remove a number of deer to reduce, maintain or let the population increase. Assuming that the aim is maintenance of the population at todays level, every year you don’t remove the necessary number of deer, you will need to remove more in subsequent years - regardless of your chiller space or ability to shoot 10 deer in one sitting.

nope - not when you are determining how many need to be shot in order to achieve the outcome that you are looking for. The required cull figure is a totally independent number - the number you are able / willing so shoot is a separate number and if you can’t make the two match then you aren’t going to get the desired results.

Say you ground can handle x ( or the landowner wants it as x) you estimate you need to take off 300 to meet that, you need to cut some rides to increase access, get seats up etc plus learn the land. That takes you a couple of weeks as an example

You know the best way to impact is to cull the females so you target those (when in season) but your already halfway through the season.

You take as many as you can, move them (game dealer, butcher or do it yourself) you when get back out. Your unlikely to hit the cull as you don't have the man power /infrastructure to do so. (You apply for funding for these things which is the point of the thread)

That's year 1, year 2 you are better equipped, know the land better and Deer better and already have the majority of infrastructure sorted. You can still only move what you can move but the rest takes less time, so you get closer. You've also already reduced females and males by x I'm the first year. You have the full year to make more of an impact including on the natural increase from births this continues etc

The point I'm trying to make is that, if you have a cull target and you can't meet it for whatever reason you need to be honest with the landowner about that to set expectations, get help, get funding to support whatever it may be

Vs if you already have quads/access/help/large larder etc which would make things considerably easier

 

[baguio]

nope - not when you are determining how many need to be shot in order to achieve the outcome that you are looking for. The required cull figure is a totally independent number - the number you are able / willing so shoot is a separate number and if you can’t make the two match then you aren’t going to get the desired results.

Dan, I haven’t said that the waste needed to be factored in to how many are put on the cull plan.
I have simply said that waste management and storage of carcasses needs to be considered when culling lots of large deer.
If the facilities you have aren’t up to the job you need to acknowledge that and upgrade.
I think you have misunderstood me?