UKC

In reply to halfaseesaw: Perhaps the stalkers dont wish to announce their plans beforehand, in case conditions such as deer location, wind direction etc change, then they can adapt as needed, if they had put up some announcement then they may not feel they can change things.

In reply to halfaseesaw:

Even with the recently updated phone message I found it difficult to work out whether my chosen route up Beinn a' Ghlo would be viable on Tuesday.

I erred on the side of caution and went elsewhere.

Isn't it obvious? They don't want the deer to find out where they'll be stalking.

In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:
Just looked at this: massive gaps. Nearly no use for most of the NW Scotland!

In reply to Flinticus: Indeed!

In reply to Douglas Griffin: Thanks for that Douglas, I'll look out for it.

In reply to halfaseesaw:
Contacted Beinn Damph estate by email (though prob not going there now) however, the response was detailed, friendly and informative.

In reply to halfaseesaw:

Speaking as someone who has been deerstalking many times, leading a pony at a distance behind, keepers can't give detailed information as where they will stalk depends on where they think the deer will be. This is dependent on wind and weather conditions and recent hill activity, other stalkers and hill walkers will send the deer on the move to the deer's other favourite sheltered spots. The keepers I know with popular hills on their ground, i.e. Munros, will never stalk on the main paths to and from the summits, as they will have too many wasted stalks and days for the paying customers. They also know that their rifles will kill at a very extended range so unless they are firing into ground behind their target, they just don't fire. These guys aren't idiots and they don't want their livelihood and home life and mental health jeopardised by shooting someone out hillwalking. I've known of stalkers shooting themselves but never heard of a stalking accidental shooting. I do know of beaters being shot by shotgun by overexcited lines of guns.

Most keepers I know would also welcome some contact by email to their factors office stating your intentions and on what days you will be there, that allows them to plan for alternatives. As someone up in the thread stated, actual meetings whilst a stalk is active between walkers and stalkers are rare; and I hope that this continues.

Tom

In reply to the abmmc:

Thanks for your post. I wonder if I could ask you to have a look at my last post in the ledgowan thread? I mean the one on deer numbers etc. Your thoughts are of interest.

In reply to Saor Alba:

Yup, no problem, I've had a look at it and read through the thread. You've asked me a short question with only a long answer and even that will be incomplete.

My history is that I spent 4 years at Mar Lodge Estate as a ghillie, and spent four long summers there and two winters at the hinds. It was a great time, where my love for the hills deepened and I saw them in a different way from that I had before. While every time I go there, I feel like I am at home; I also had to face troubling thoughts and situations that led me to think of land ownership in different ways.

At Mar Lodge in my time, the 1980s to 1990's, we shot 300 stags and 500 hinds and calves each year. The deer population grew steadily and herds of 500 stags in summer and early autumn were commonly seen. This is a fantastic sight to behold when they are still, but to see them running took the breath away. However, there was no new tree growth and as we've known since Frank Fraser Darling's time the hill environment was almost sterile, so denuded was it. We did winter feed our deer at that time and this helped to keep the deer population healthier. I was lucky to work with stalkers who appreciated that selective culling was proper, and I never worked in a place where any stag was shot, despite inducements of huge financial reward from guests who wanted to take a "trophy" home. My diaries of that time reveal that on the day of the sale from Kluge to the National Trust, I walked over Creag Bhalg and saw golden eagles, buzzards, hen harriers, red and black grouse and a plethora of other birds. I saw huge herds of deer, we used to call the flat top of Creag Bhalg the rose garden, so many antlers did we see on the stages. I saw no new tree growth except in little fenced off areas.

Now the National Trust owns the estate and the deer numbers have been hammered. the head keeper at Mar Lodge resigned in protest at the drastic culling of the deer, and this was reported in the Shooting Times and the Scottish press. I was in Glen Lui at the weekend, walked up Glen Derry and into the upper reaches of Glen Luibeg. I saw no deer whatsoever, and one buzzard. I did see plenty of new tree growth, Scots Pines, and marvelled at one little island in the Lui that was festooned with new Scots Pines. I don't know how to include the link to my flickr site to show a picture of that little island.

I really like that in 50 years or so, the environment of those glens will be transformed. I get the feeling that the empty acres of heather and stones of the last fifty, hundred years will be changed to healthy, new forest of trees. But, I worry about the access to the Cairngorms and the freedom of people to go where and when they like. I wonder what the people who do there will see. The National Trust has clearly decided that deer numbers had to be dramatically reduced. I wonder how long before they decide that the numbers of human visitors also has to be dramatically reduced. This leads to the age old debate about a community's access to land belonging to someone else which is part of all ours community. I wonder how long before we need to buy tickets to go to the southern Cairngorms, dressed up as protection of the land.

Where I lived, a large portion of that population was employed by the estates. Most were involved in forestry and only a few in deerstalking. The rest of the population depended on tourism for their income. My worry is that owners like the NTS will create better environments, with fewer people living there and fewer amenities so that the areas truly become parks with dependent facilities only during the tourist season.

So a long answer to a short question. It is clear from my experience that significantly reducing the number of deer allows real regeneration of the environment. The question of what happens next needs considered now too. My preference is for local communities to own their land and decide how they want to go forward with this precious resource that they will ever only hold in trust for their children and grandchildren.

In reply to the abmmc:

Thanks for taking the time to write a very considered post.

Yes, I do rather wonder how far conservation might be taken in some areas. I'd really like to avoid the situation where access to the hills was restricted as it is in some parts of the US and sometimes reflect that the restrictions in place on Rhum now are no less onerous than those in place when the previous owners were in charge.

I also wonder about the economics of it all. It's no use simply saying that "there must be an alternative to stalking" when all the alternatives I can think of are as destructive as keeping artificially high numbers of deer on an estate.

Can you think of any ways of keeping people working on the land that are more environmentally friendly than having them work on shooting estates?

In reply to Removed User:

Rum is totally different now Eric. The Community own the Kinloch and have the ability to shape their future. I know one of their trustees and they have been successful in getting funding for the new hostel and providing other community facilities. The person I know actually wants the deer numbers reduced.

I don't think shooting is the problem, it has to be done but to whose advantage? Tom makes some great points and I was worried that my post in the other thread would seen to be anti-stalking/deer control/ghillies etc. The opposite is true but activity in these areas should be, in my view, controlled by local communities there and for their benefit. Not some absentee landlord.

Apart from the Tories, I think there is broad agreement on this in political Scotland.