Hart of the matter – who pays for deer management?

Land managers are being asked to reduce deer numbers to help the Scottish Government achieve its ambitious targets for forest regeneration and peatland restoration. But as the cost of deer management increases, a question arises: who will foot the bill?

Some of this cost is already publicly funded. Forestry and Land Scotland accounts for an estimated 15-20% of the national red deer cull on just 9% of Scotland’s land. But most deer management – and most of the associated cost – is currently borne by private landowners.

Historically, some of this cost has been offset by attracting clients willing to pay to hunt deer. But deer reduction targets threaten to undermine this traditional model:

‘We don't have paying guests anymore, due to the number of deer we’re shooting,’ explains Falcon Frost, head stalker on the Glenfalloch Estate. And without the income that paying guests provide, deer management can become a significant drain on the balance sheet.

Image provided by SCOTLAND: The Big Picture

‘Every time I pull the trigger, it costs money,’ continues Falcon. ‘It’s my time, the price of ammunition, fuel, electricity for the larder and so on. It all adds up. Last year, deer management at Glenfalloch ran at a £70,000 net loss. That's quite a hit.’

‘The economics of deer management are challenging,’ agrees Deirdre Stewart, Vice Chair of the Association of Deer Management Groups and a trustee of the Common Ground Forum – a diverse group of over 45 organisations committed to navigating the difficult conversations that have long surrounded deer management.

‘The traditional sporting model relies to some extent on population size,’ she explains. ‘So where we have reduced deer numbers, that income is obviously at risk. We try to add value where we can, but we're dealing with a diminishing resource. And on top of that, we’re making less money from venison than we did forty years ago.’

‘Most of us don't see what we do as a job,’ continues Falcon. ‘Deer stalking is a livelihood. We live on the estate. We love where we work. We’re invested in the land. But there’s a sense of nervousness in the industry. What does it look like going forward?’

Image provided by SCOTLAND: The Big Picture

Seeking to replace the money generated by stalking guests, many estates have been exploring opportunities to diversify their income, but this has proved challenging for some. ‘Diversification relies upon what assets you have. And it depends how close you are to population centres,’ says Deirdre. ‘People have tried offering wildlife photography, off-road tours and so on, but whether that's ever going to fill the gap in funding is doubtful, and we still need someone to manage the deer!’

Keenly aware of what’s at stake for Scotland’s upland environment, conservationists have been thinking about how to plug this funding gap. ‘We estimate it might cost around £15 million per year to manage Scotland’s deer,’ says Alan McDonnell from the rewilding charity, Trees for Life.

‘That’s less than a third of what the Government already spends on its forestry grant scheme. If we redirected some of that money towards deer management you’d probably deliver a lot of the same objectives, while sustaining rural livelihoods and maintaining vital skills. So it feels like there’s a win-win-win available here.’

It’s an intriguing proposal, partly born out of the Common Ground Forum. This has brought together an unusual mix of traditional land management groups and environmental organisations with divergent views on some issues, but with one thing everyone agrees on, as Deirdre points out: ‘Everybody wants a sustainable future and a sustainable model for land use.'

This article is sponsored by SCOTLAND: The Big Picture

scotlandbigpicture.com/fiadh