Interestingly remove the deer from one valley system and they take many years to come back from other areas – a surprising finding

Not sure that is true.

The Scottish Gamekeepers’ Association (SGA) represents 1200 professional stalkers and keepers, the vast majority of the professionals in Scotland, and it takes a very different view.
Peter Fraser, a member of the SGA committee, says the Mar Lodge and Feshie culls have led to a serious shortage of deer on neighbouring estates including the one where he works.
“When you remove deer from an estate you create a vacuum, and deer from neighbouring estates move in to fill that vacuum,” he says.
“Everybody around Feshie and Mar lodge is feeling the effects. We are very short of mature stags now.

http://www.richardbaynes.com/?page_id=125

This would suggest that at least some of the ongoing deer cull in Glen Feshie is animals migrating from neighbouring estates.

a serious shortage of deer

Perspective, innit. There’s no shortage of deer around the Cairngorms.

A few lynx and some wolves could do it for us!!

The ability to cycle at 12 mph for hours on end over all terrain would be helpful for HT550, not much good against ambush predators but excellent for keeping the very large dogs at bay.

irc – that was the findings when they wiped out the deer in one glen system. took many years for that glen to be recolonised. Of course shooting estates don’t want reduced deer numbers.

Ninfan
“During the last 15 years, reduction of the deer population within wood-
land regeneration areas has resulted in slow progress in terms of
regeneration. However, in the last two years the impact of deer numbers on key habitats has reached target level and positive changes in the development of natural regeneration, particularly the emergence of seedlings above the height of surrounding vegetation,
are beginning to be observed, in the presence of lower numbers of deer.”

The “Grand Vistas”, as mentioned already, are not natural – rather wholly manmade through hundreds of years of deforestation. The gamekeepers don’t give a crap about vistas, they’re the ones maintaining the current desert for their own financial (hunting) gains.

Natural, grand vistas involve a lot of trees.

Because I can’t post the picture from work, I’ll describe it – go to Oregon, go walking or biking in their (re)forested mountains and take in their Grand Vistas then say that the Scottish landscape is beautiful and untouched. Nothing of the sort…

And just to reiterate – Mar lodge has a legal obligation to keep high deer numbers on the estate so cannot do a complete cull so are having to consider fencing

Looks like MCofS are having to back-pedal clarify things a little.

https://www.mountaineering.scot/news/clarification-on-joint-press-release-with-sga

Some naiveity on show by letting themselves be linked to the SGA I think. A stand-alone letter to ScotGov would have avoided this hijack.

As I understood it the replanting is intended to be like what’s on the east bank of Loch Lomond? Not a “plantation” but the re-introduction of native trees.

The Scottish Highland landscape is the result of the deforestation, then the Highland Clearances and the introduction of thousands of sheep instead of people.

The sheep then ate everything that was left that a bird could live in.

No bushes – no birds.

No birds – lots of midge.

If reforestation reduces the number of midge, that could only be a good thing!

And just to reiterate – Mar lodge has a legal obligation to keep high deer numbers on the estate so cannot do a complete cull so are having to consider fencing

It’s not quite that simple, I would encourage you to read the report.

There of course is a commitment to retain sporting on the estate, but the reason behind that was, of course, to show whether an estate could be run in both an environmentally and fiscally sustainable fashion.

The one thing missing from many proposals put forward in other areas remains “how does it pay for itself?” If the planting isn’t commercial, and the sporting isn’t commercial, and the sheep are gone… then who funds the ongoing management costs? The taxpayer?

I have read the report.

Its was a condition of sale that it was kept as a sporting estate hence the need to keep unsustainable high deer numbers

But you are right in that something other than recreation is needed for the land ie something to earn money and to encourage keeping it in good condition. Otherwise it all becomes parkland and further depopulated.

I think this could be a number of models including deer stalking ( done responsibly) and (relativly) small farms that get a minimum income in return for strict environmental standards. grouse shooting has to go tho by and large – its an ecological disaster in many areas. Look at the lammermuirs for a classic example of the damage grouse monoculture does.

I’m always amazed at the enthusiasm there is to preserve the detreed, deraptored, heavily tracked grouse factories that used to be beautiful Caledonian pine forest. Really surprised that mountaineers share the enthusiasm of game keepers to keep it unreal.

When even the FC is trying to move away from blocks of haunted miserable sitka, I think it’s pretty fair to assume that’s not what they’re talking about for reforestation. Scotland already has enough tree factories that they’re not sure what to do with. And the percentage here doesn’t imply any need to touch the most iconic parts

Course, naturalised woods are much harder to do, it’s got to be a mix of manufacture and nature, and patience. You can’t just plant a rothiemurcus.

(me, I like naturalisation and native species but exotics, and diversification and redistribution, are worthy too- we’re going to lose traditional environs for some geographically limited species over the next 100 years, without a doubt and once it starts it’ll be too late to really act. So if we’re going to plant millions of trees, let’s make some of this a bunch of super-Kilmuns with huge, mental groves of redwoods and wollemi and monkeypuzzles and pinsapos, let’s plant stuff that’ll thrive in a potential warm wet scotand (or for that matter, a gulf-stream-less colder west coast) that’ll be threatened elsewhere, and make it sustainable not just a garden… In 200 years we could have something beautiful and unique and just maybe a little liferaft for stuff that’d otherwise only be in seed banks and botanical gardens. (and also, in 100 years we could easily be having mass die-offs of species that don’t like our new weather…)

(and let’s not be so down on the poor ol sitka, big ones are lovely trees, there’s some at drumlanrig and benmore that you’d barely even guess are the same tree)

xora – Member

Put the bloody woods back before Scotland ends up a desert! Scotland’s “vistas” are all man made anyway when they cut all the trees down originally!

That’s the conventional wisdom but it’s been challenged a lot more recently, deforestation happened pretty uniformly including in lots of places where there weren’t enough people to have done it- rannoch moor’s the textbook example, but what happened there most likely happened elsewhere

I think we are in broad agreement TJ – I don’t necessarily think that grouse shooting needs to go, but the intensive shoots are unsustainable. I don’t think I’ve ever argued otherwise, in fact it’s always been my case that totalitarian and over simplified arguments either way are false, and that sustainable game/sporting can and should work in conjunction with other uses, such as well managed forestry (again, something where intensive use is unsustainable – monocultures are nearly always a bad thing) as an effective way of funding both the land management and local economy.

Surely a big part of the problem is that monoculture blocks have given forestry a bad name. I’m all for a rewilding with natural forestry.

I have spent whole days walking below the tree-line in Japanese mountains, and it is a bit disappointing, but Scotland is so far off having a problem of too many trees spoiling the view!

Ninfan – you certainly gave the impression that you supported the intensive grouse farms – just being contrarian?

It is something the fundies don’t always appreciate tho that without a proper use for the land and employment upon it then rural depopulatiuon will get worse and many areas would go to gorse and scrub

Reforestation could also be a more cost-effective means of flood management than the stuff that’s currently being done in the likes of Elgin. No one doubts that there’s a need to do that or looks for how it pays for itself.

Gorse is fine, not so keen on bracken though.

TJ, no, I’ve always supported sustainable management – what I’ve taken exception to are the totalitarian and over simplified arguments (e.g. all gamekeepers kill raptors/no raptors should ever be controlled/deer populations are too high as a blanket statement rather than it being valid for some areas – all being as incorrect as the opposite extreme))

Raptors should never be killed and gamekeepers are resposible for a lot of raptor deaths.

You should know – predator species only grow in population with a good amount of prey. so high numbers of predators is indicative of high numbers of prey animals not the other way round as many shooters would try to claim

When even the FC is trying to move away from blocks of haunted miserable sitka, I think it’s pretty fair to assume that’s not what they’re talking about for reforestation.

The FC moved away from parallel rows of conifers years ago. I remember going to a school trip to Aberfoyle (yipee!) in the 90’s where they explained to us how they were planting in a much more natural fashion.

But trees live a long time so there is still a lot of this old monoculture around. It creates a landscape every bit a sterile as the moorland “deserts”. But diverse woodland is a wonderful thing. I’d definitely support having more of it.

Council apology over trees planted on football pitch

🙄

Pah!

http://amazing-post.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/460000-spent-for-two-games-of-forest.html

Well worth a watch if you haven’t seen it:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q[/video]

£460,000 blimey what a waste, the tree infested pitch at least might develop another Archie Gemmill

fcs are moving from sitka because the wood is rubbish and only really good for pulp, which can be got cheaper.

All that mess left behind after cropping the forest will be too difficult to clear and very difficult to plant through to turn into a haven of arboreal calm. So the planting will take place where?

This map viewer may be of interest to anyone concerned about mountain areas becoming covered in Sitka etc

http://scotland.forestry.gov.uk/supporting/communication-consultation/map-viewer-guidance

in particular FCS Grants & Regulations> FGS (2014-20) Climatic Site Suitability and then click on tree crop of interest

Some lovely patches of oak and beech woods (but in different spots) down in South Wales.. hope they get around to reforesting down here too as I’d love to see more natural landscape.

one hundered – replanting where sitka has been removed is common – the brash is either left of chipped, the stumps are left to rot. Its not a 5 year thing – its 50 years

grouse shooting has to go tho by and large – its an ecological disaster in many areas.

Including the Pennines? Wasn’t there something about burning grouse moors contributing to downstream flooding?

ratherbeintobago – Member

Including the Pennines? Wasn’t there something about burning grouse moors contributing to downstream flooding?

Singletrack nearly got flooded out by exactly this- apparently a major contributor to the Hebden Bridge flood. In fact the drainage work was publically subsidised.

Mountaineering Scotland said people were not interested in walking for miles through woodland

There might be a clue in there somewhere…
Vested interests, perhaps?

Yes – flooding is one aspect trees hold water and release it slower than short heather. also burnt heather leads to soil erosion. Then there is the loss of biodiversity where you have huge managed areas and the killing of predators both legally and illegally as well as scaring off raptors from the moors.

Can we lobby for a one in, one out rule?
For every tree planted, a deer is shot.

There might be a clue in there somewhere…
Vested interests, perhaps?

I’m curious if anyone can elaborate on why mountaineering and trees are incompatible? What are your thoughts countzero?

Beavers will be reintroduced before wolves and lynx.

Already done AA…

there is a clarification from MCofS somewhere on this thread. they are looking for details of the plans.

flooding is one aspect trees hold water and release it slower than short heather

Well, if planted without draining, which seriously limits the areas where you are able to grow trees and species you can grow

also burnt heather leads to soil erosion.

And unmanaged heather carries the highest fuel loads and wild fire risk.

There’s already quite a few beaver populations in Scotland. They’ve expanded from the trial areas and set up new communities so would be great if we could get lynx and wolves reintroduced as well

Beavers will be reintroduced before wolves and lynx.

In a few places, too.