I think there's more munties then rabbits about now round here....Midlands isn’t the North, ‘the North remembers’
Why is no one talking numbers?
- Thread starter oneeyedanddeaf
- Start date
big ears
Well-Known Member
Agree and this shows the failure of the present system.
In effect the whole area needs to be surveyed and a cull issued not just for one farm but the whole area.
40% is a good start for a reduction cull.
ALL landowners are forced by law to partake and fined heavily if they don’t.
There are no such thing as “safe areas” for deer. Those landowners not taking part are enforced by NE to have deer managers imported into there land.
Stop bunny huggers buying land and allowing huge herds safe grazing.
Roe in Central Scotland are out of hand. Particular in peri-urban areas
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
I’d imagine the Natsi’s will soon be erecting high shooting towers on every street corner in their strongholds ere long; do they hold any certificate of competence though? We’re pretty aware of their lack of experience and integrity elsewhere..
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
If they were serious they could set up a trial region where they think there are too many, and see how it goes; set aside £5M for a reduction of 75,000 deer; if it doesn’t work in delivering the ‘public goods’ of natural heritage and biodiversity enhancement then in comparison to other ideas it won’t have wasted the monies, they’ll still have the change in the kitty. If it did work, they could try it in other areas.
The payouts are dependent on results, and would identify where even more effort might be needed, though I think a reduction of that order should go some way to address the scale of the issue in said region.
IF they were serious..
bottletopbill
Well-Known Member
Why have a kitty fund for the few only.
Land owners should be liable to bring there numbers down.
Plenty of stalkers willing to help
Land owners should be liable to bring there numbers down.
Plenty of stalkers willing to help
This isn't a simple problem to solve
You've guides and recreational stalkers have too much ground to do a good job, wanting good trophy's and not culling enough.
You've landowners who like seeing them.
And a lack of insensitive to kill large numbers due to low value of the meat!
My first point 2 points aren't easy to solve
My 3rd point could be solved by getting the meat into schools and other places. I also think we need to open the season up on females not males deer you'll kill more killing 1 pregnant female than 1 male
You've guides and recreational stalkers have too much ground to do a good job, wanting good trophy's and not culling enough.
You've landowners who like seeing them.
And a lack of insensitive to kill large numbers due to low value of the meat!
My first point 2 points aren't easy to solve
My 3rd point could be solved by getting the meat into schools and other places. I also think we need to open the season up on females not males deer you'll kill more killing 1 pregnant female than 1 male
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
Is this not where we are at the moment in England? In Scotland landowners are indeed obliged to do so.
The deer belong to nobody, until
they are dead.
Not sure about your last statement. Willing, maybe, maybe not. Able?
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
Who in their right minds want to take that on though! Christ, dealing with the people, constant police call outs.
What damage do they do in peri-urban areas that harms the natural environment to the point where they need managing? I mean, compared to the litter along the roads, industrial areas filled with garbage and oil / chemical spills and pollution, etc etc.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
A. Yes, my point too
B. Indeed, and many farmers wives/kids with horses
. Horse people do not like stalkers.C. Yes, VSS’s approach may work for him, but not everyone wants to invest in a small good business or deal with the BS of the inspections and reporting. A government subsidy to GD’s to guarantee a minimum £5/kg would set the wheels in motion
D. Schools and prisons - lead free in the former, lead ammo use in the latter
E. No. Shooting pregnant females into spring and summer and with dependents is poor form and will only open us up for more scrutiny. Males 365 in Scotland is bad form too, I hate it. I don’t agree with the season being open during the rut, it’s the wrong time to shoot them. After the rut and when they form bachelor groups into Dec-Feb is the right time to see them in groups and selectively cull.
I revert to the issue of lease paying tenants/stalkers - if land owners were not allowed to take payments for deer management, but either provide it free or ideally PAY for the management like they would with moles; LOCAL stalkers who could be on the ground regularly and who understand the local deer population, part of local DMG’s, could managed at better than the guy who can afford the big lease fee, but only comes 3 times a year because he lives 300 miles away. This, is a big issue, money talks, and the local stalkers who should be doing the work, cannot get the chance
bottletopbill
Well-Known Member
Ok so lets say they have to show they are able to complete the task
Its a nightmare for sure but big issue a vehicle collisions, new woodlands and regeneration of existing woodland in and around towns
Problem is there is no incentive for many landowners to reduce numbers, some are happy to harbour deer.
If a landlord HAS to reduce numbers then he has to find sufficient competent stalkers and it may well be that he has to use part of that incentive to pay stalkers.
At the end of the day the land belongs to the landowner to control as they wish. The problem isnt just landowners charging for leases, its a long queue of people prepared to pay for these leases.
Has been since 1960.I think there's more munties then rabbits about now round here....
B. lots more than just wives and horse people, many just like to see deer or are opposed to killing anything. As a slightly aside I control deer on a property with a large horse livery. The horse owners are (mainly) happy as they don't like deer spooking their horses.A. Yes, my point too
B. Indeed, and many farmers wives/kids with horses
C. Yes, VSS’s approach may work for him, but not everyone wants to invest in a small good business or deal with the BS of the inspections and reporting. A government subsidy to GD’s to guarantee a minimum £5/kg would set the wheels in motion
D. Schools and prisons - lead free in the former, lead ammo use in the latter
E. No. Shooting pregnant females into spring and summer and with dependents is poor form and will only open us up for more scrutiny. Males 365 in Scotland is bad form too, I hate it. I don’t agree with the season being open during the rut, it’s the wrong time to shoot them. After the rut and when they form bachelor groups into Dec-Feb is the right time to see them in groups and selectively cull.
C. So you expect people to offer you stalking but you also expect someone else to deal with the carcasses?.
E. Up until yhe introduction of the Deer Act in 1963 there were no seasons, is it a coincidence that deer numbers have surged since then.
Deer seem to have been given a status above other animals. There is no season for foxes, rabbits, moles etc etc. "Poor form" is a mindset not a reason. Selective culling is part of the problem. Why to you select? To improve bodies and heads? Why do you want to do that if its about reducing numbers?
Your comments on males are also part of the problem. While I agree culling females is far more effective in reducing populations, males cause damage to trees and the wider environment all year round
I live and try to manage deer in an area of large numbers. Two of our own biggest problems are public opinion on stalking and walkers with dogs running loose who wander where they deem fit to go.
Generally it is a strange situation in an area of heavy numbers. We try our best and achieve reasonable results on about 3000 acres. The estate next to us on one side is "managed" by the "Keeper" who occasionally goes out and shoots the biggest animals he can because he gets more pennies for them. Next to him is occasionally stalked by one man. Following the land round.there are recreational stalkers and its not unusual to see a couple of hundred deer laid out on those fields. Just beyond there is a large estate with a stalking syndicate but also their estate keeper has a nght licence. We then have FC ground and a sanctuary heaving with deer where just a few out of many, many hundreds are culled. Add it all together just those areas are holding perhaps 3000-3500 deer and are in no way managed efficiently. Beyond that there are even more animals. I'm afraid the situation isn't going to improve in my time despite the local deer group trying to get things to work.
Generally it is a strange situation in an area of heavy numbers. We try our best and achieve reasonable results on about 3000 acres. The estate next to us on one side is "managed" by the "Keeper" who occasionally goes out and shoots the biggest animals he can because he gets more pennies for them. Next to him is occasionally stalked by one man. Following the land round.there are recreational stalkers and its not unusual to see a couple of hundred deer laid out on those fields. Just beyond there is a large estate with a stalking syndicate but also their estate keeper has a nght licence. We then have FC ground and a sanctuary heaving with deer where just a few out of many, many hundreds are culled. Add it all together just those areas are holding perhaps 3000-3500 deer and are in no way managed efficiently. Beyond that there are even more animals. I'm afraid the situation isn't going to improve in my time despite the local deer group trying to get things to work.
I think it's in areas like yours that incentives to landowners as part of the eligibility criteria for agri-environment schemes could make the biggest difference, because you've got some farmers who's main income is derived from the payment schemes and who are not really farming. They may plant some crops as a token gesture, in order to tick the "active farmer" box on their application form, but they really don't care if the deer eat it all as it saves them the bother of harvesting.
If deer management becomes a requirement of those schemes they risk losing their main income if they don't comply.
I think it could be exciting times ahead for any young and enthusiastic stalkers around there who want to set themselves up in business as deer management contractors.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
B. I do as well, but in general, horse people aren’t very open to let stalkers in, and they tend to have lots of land
C. No, - if rates are low, people will cull for the table, nothing more. And certainly not invest in small venison businesses. If the government created a game dealer subsidy so the game dealers could offer us min. £5/kg, people would start shooting more deer. Ok, might be open to abuse, but all things are.
D. We also used to smoke on planes and in cars, paint kids toys with lead paint and ride motorcycles without helmets.
Seasons are right for many reasons, I’m not going to go there, to argue open season for all animals is beyond me. Then we could go to pheasants, grouse, partridges, why not, they’re just animals too?
I don’t think it should ever be about just reducing numbers, it’s grotesque and obtuse.
Balance of numbers of deer in line with land size, cover, objectives for plant establishments, along with managing herd structure for the best genetics and health - it’s about balancing all in one go, not one or the other.
Males cause damage all year? Do they now, I’ve yet to be shown anywhere that is heavily suffering from male deer damage compared to hares, sheep getting through fencing, poor soil management, or cattle trudging up landscapes. It’s negligible and stubborn to insist male deer damage is a problem - sorry
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Why on earth would anybody young want to set up a business for shooting deer, or start being a contractor?
There’s no money in it, by the time you’ve bought the kit got it all paying for it all or paid for it all you’ll be in the hole for nearly £60,000 – £70,000 a lot of debt just to shoot deer!
And to be brutally honest, that’s just to get the basic equipment you need to do an efficient job why anybody would even bother is beyond me
Because the landowners are going to have to pay for it, or lose their agri support money.
And there'll most likely be grants for training and equipment.
Even now, without those incentives, I know a few self-employed stalkers in their 20s who are doing pretty well out of it.
Similar threads
