Roe kid dilema

chiron

Well-Known Member
Last night I sat in high seat and out popped a buck roe kid ~ no problems -out of season.He grazed and browsed happily or 5 minutes and I sat looking at him thru the binos - cute. Then out came mum and after abit of soul searching and remembering that I didnt get the numbers last year down she went neck shot at 80 metres. The buck wasnt fazed just kept on browsing and then tried to suckle from mum who was on her back. Whilst I am thinking should I shoot buck on welfare grounds out comes his sister. No problems down she goes but then I agonize about the buck. Finally decide that as he is browsing happily and well grown I will leave him. Did I do right?
 

roedeerred

Well-Known Member
only one person can give the answer to that and its yourself.you should know the cull plan/ density of animals on your patch.IMHO it should ok to survive on its own by now unless very bad weather comes as you say it was browsing.dont knock yourself up about it at least you looked carefully and identified it as as a buck more then some do.I would say you probably (most likley) did the right thing
 

1st Pattern Paul

Well-Known Member
IMO the welfare of the animal come before any cull plan. Only say this as I have made the same decisions in the past only to regret it after. Welfare first always, for me anyway.
Paul
 

roedeerred

Well-Known Member
question if the rest of the family had not appeared would you consider it dependant ?
buck kid I shot on monday was 18kg its mother was 20kg larder weight think it would have been ok health wise on reflection but the owner wants population severly reducing.
 

Treedave

Well-Known Member
I've been there and even made extra trips back to the same patch as the kid can hang around for days. He may get away if the winter stays as it has been but its a slim chance in my book. I'd rather leave an extra buck in the next season than not make the cull, but only you saw how big he was and at least you're thinking about the welfare. Sometimes there's no right or wrong answers.
 

limulus

Well-Known Member
There are lots of possible scenarios to this. Given the scenario presented the decision would (for me) have been to shoot the dependant.
Its often stated, kids first, adults later.
The buck WAS in season as a dependant. The doe showing and the buck suckling just confirmed this.
It MAY have survived the winter but we'll probably never know.
 

devilishdave

Well-Known Member
This is not best practice but if you are not in Scotland or North England chances are the little fella will be ok over the winter.

Dave
 

limulus

Well-Known Member
I agree with Dave. I have some roe kids here that would survive without mum if I took her now but I choose not to.
Why? because the population is low and there is plenty of food available to them and the land owner isnt bothered about them being reduced yet
 

6.5/284matt

Well-Known Member
Heres one for you. If you do like has already been said and stick to best practise and take a supposed dependent buck first and then the mother doesn't hang about for another shot. Where do you stand. Surely you've broken the law. How would you explain that one in the unlikely invent that you got your collar felt on the way home. Matt.
 

Uncle Buck

Well-Known Member
Heres one for you. If you do like has already been said and stick to best practise and take a supposed dependent buck first and then the mother doesn't hang about for another shot. Where do you stand. Surely you've broken the law. How would you explain that one in the unlikely invent that you got your collar felt on the way home. Matt.
A Buck kid, is classed as a kid (sexless) until he turns a yearling at which point he's classed as a Buck.

Rgds, Buck.
 
Last edited:

ferretmanabu

Well-Known Member
Heres one for you. If you do like has already been said and stick to best practise and take a supposed dependent buck first and then the mother doesn't hang about for another shot. Where do you stand. Surely you've broken the law. How would you explain that one in the unlikely invent that you got your collar felt on the way home. Matt.
Wouldn't be breaking the law because the kid was "about to be deprived of it's mother".
 

Uncle Buck

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't be breaking the law because the kid was "about to be deprived of it's mother".
Because it's "about to be deprived of it's mother". It's mother is in season and kid would have been dependant on her.

Rgds, Buck.
 
Last edited:

aliS

Well-Known Member
Buck is it in season? I've heard Kid classed as sexless until independant before but the law clearly states under the exception for certain acts - action to intended to prevent suffering, a person shall not be guilty of an offence... under this act... for the purpose of preventing suffering by b) kid deprived or about to be deprived of it's mother.

Saying the kid is in season would mean you could target the kid with no intention of shooting the Doe. That seems a little wrong to me.
 

flyingfisherman

Well-Known Member
In scotland it is ILLEGAL to target a buck kid/stag calf while the respective buck or stag is 'in season' As Uncle Buck says they are classed as dependants and can be shot when the mother is in season ie classed as a female, regardless of their sex.

Not quite as sure about England so i wont comment on that.
 

aliS

Well-Known Member
Where are they classed as female? I only ask as all litreture I can find specifically states "about to be deprived of it's mother" and unless my memory is failing me that is also what you are taught on the DSC level 1.

I only bring this up because the way you describe it would mean you can target Kids only in the Doe season with no intention of shooting the Doe.
 

Top