My dad was a keeper. The last estate he worked on he was responsible for at least 3 new woods, obviously this was for benefit of the shooting but he took great pride in the improved environment for song birds too. He stopped keepering for various reasons but he was proud of his legacy. Please don’t make broad sweeping statements like “gamekeepers bad.”

steven – its one of the conundrums – Pheasant / lowland shoots require shelter belts / woodland – so lowland shoots have a very big role to play in managing the landscape in a way most of us would like. I accept the nuances in the whole hunting / shooting / fishing thang abnd its role in the rural economy and land management.

Its the massive grouse moors that are the main issue with their monoculture and raptor killings and even then some are more responsible than others but all grouse shooting impoverishes the landscape whereas lowland shooting and even deer stalking need not

If there is any chance of some new bike trails in these forests I am in.

I have to respond to IRC saying what has happened at Feshie is good.

Trees are not self seeding in Feshie, it isn’t working. There is no new under storey, other than rampant heather caused by the lack of grazing AND fires. No seedling can get away because of the the thick brush. You need wild fires or some other intervention to fix this.

Trees For Life do good work but effort needs to be directed towards permitting natural regeneration rather than planting.

bigjim – Member
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 interestcheers for that, very useful. 🙂

Waderider – last time I was in feshie I thought there where a lot of young trees in places where there were none before? Not so?

I have no grounds on which to argue with TJ on this thread.

Cautiously in favour of tree planting with the correct trees in the correct areas. If it brings jobs to the highlands and other remote and rural areas then maybe we have a chance of keeping living communities in those areas.
There has been a dispute between the JMT in knoydart and their neighbours over deer management and tree planting ( JMT have apparently been planting trees but not fencing them off which makes the young trees an attractive and accessible food for deer and attracts deer from neighbouring estates depriving them of an income

gordihimor – do the neighbouring estates maintain very high deer numbers? Otherwise they wouldn’t travel to eat young trees unless they had eaten all the grazing locally?

My opinion is part based on the opinion of a local professional forester and my own observations from working in and visiting the glen. No doubt there are some young naturally seeded trees. I am speaking generally regarding the glen as a whole.

TJ I know that it’s a long term thing but the cropped areas will take many decades to naturally break down to easily plantable areas never mind resetting the natural pH of the area. I think it’d be great to plant slower growing softwoods or hardwoods into coppiced areas.

The cheap crap wood that is being grown at the moment was meant to make a quick buck but not quick enough to keep up with dropping prices.

Ta Waderider. I was just pleased to see young trees when I was last there

Need more trees on the tops around hebden/calder valley. Might soak up some of the flood waters…but land owners….

Instead mega public money spent on half hearted flood defences further down stream.

onehundredthidiot

I have seen deciduous plantations put directly into the ground on clearfell from conifers. In Affric they cut down all the non native trees and left them to rot to leach nutrients back into the soil. I have also seen the stumps dragged out and the brash chipped in other areas.

Knoydart deer cull

JMT Defence of the cull
I don’t know TJ. I am not an estate worker nor am I a member or employee of JMT.
What I do know is that friends who do work on estates, or are hunters were shocked to see piles of deer carcasses left on the hill. I hope the links above can explain the issues better than I have.

Leaving shot deer on the hill can benefit a variety of other wildlife. eg foxes, pine martens, eagles, ravens, and even insects. Probably why gamekeepers don’t like it.

Also as the carcass rots, it will put a lot of nutrients back into the soil. Which can benefit any trees growing there. Better than carrying the carcass off, which just depletes the ecosystem.

If you want forests you need less deer – at least until the trees are large enough to survive the deer. To some leaving the carcasses to rot is a waste of good meet, to others its about biodiversity

Waderider – Member
Trees are not self seeding in Feshie, it isn’t working. There is no new under storey, other than rampant heather caused by the lack of grazing AND fires. No seedling can get away because of the the thick brush. You need wild fires or some other intervention to fix this.

We’ll just need to disagree then. I’ve been visiting Glen Feshie on and off since the 1970s. It’s far healthier now with much new growth of juniper, birch and pine. Still scope for more improvement but going in the right direction now deer numbers have been reduced. I’m not the only one that thinks so.

Glen Feshie – a new beginning

A strong pulse of natural regeneration of pine, birch,
rowan, alder, aspen, willows, juniper and other trees and
shrubs, and also an increasingly diverse herb layer, has
become well-established.

http://www.eca.ed.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/news/PMacdonald-ChangeInGlenFeshie-SNH-Nos-AW2016-PDF.pdf

My second link has two pairs of photos on page 3 of the same spots in 1992 and 2016. Look at them and tell me it isn’t working. Bare close cropped grass and heather in 1992. Young growth everywhere in 2016.

The last estate he worked on he was responsible for at least 3 new woods, obviously this was for benefit of the shooting [/I]

I really don’t see why folk are anti-shooting, it’s income for the estates and therefore pays wages (in areas lacking in jobs). Countryside-wise, any changes that are needed/wanted that aren’t economically positive will only occur with taxpayers money, and the FC and farmers/estates will always want to spend that.

If folk want to spend their money on a hobby that others think is expensive and damaging to the countryside, it’s up to them. Although be careful what you complain about:

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/mountain-bikers-destroying-environment-protected/story-27862423-detail/story.html

BR – for some its a moral issue. For some its about practicalities.

Personally I feel it important to differentiate between deer stalking, moorland shooting ,lowland shooting and fox hunting.

Deer stalking has some utility in that there is a need to cull deer in Scotland due to the lack of predators and the meat can be eaten. Its also fairly highly skilled practice. However some estates hold far to high numbers of deer on the land with massive ecological damage this causes. On the other hand it does bring money and work into the rural economy.

Lowland shooting for pheasant and the like – no utility beyond the meat. However there is a need for woodland and shelter belts of trees which does enhance the local environment – without the shooting these would perhaps be cut down to enlarge grazing or arable land. However morally its pretty poor as they breed these fancy chickens and then shoot them or leave them to die over the winter ( more so in Scotland)

Grouse moors – ecological disaster areas with high erosion, poor biodiversity and degraded environments. Large numbers of raptors and hares killed illegally to “protect” the grouse that are going to be shot anyway

Fox hunting – the worst of the lot. No utility at all, responsible for much cruelty – fox ( and deer hunting with dogs) is all about the cruelty and as it has no utility at all no case can be made for it to continue

so for some forms of hunting the moral case against it is strong, for others the degradation of the landscape and killing of predators makes it hard to make a case for allowing it. For some form of blood sports the only argument against it is a moral one and for some folk this is absolute but for some it is nuanced

I don’t know how many keepers you know TJ but I’ve never known any that leave them to die after the winter. Its your blanket bullshit statements like this that piss me off.

Well, it’s interesting for him to compare them to Chickens, regardless.

From a welfare point of view, which do you think has the better life? By the age a pheasant is released in the woods, (in July/August, with shooting beginning October) most chickens have already been slaughtered… without so much as a sporting chance either.

I don’t personally have anything against shooting in itself – not even largely the moral concerns TJ raises. I’m not so keen on some of the side effects of large scale commercial shooting – and damage to the countryside is also the business of people who don’t own the land or pay to use it (your link is spurious, apart from it being a sensationalist inaccurate article, any damage caused by mountain bikers is on a completely different scale – arguably if you’re going to complain about environmental damage it’s the driving to trail centres you should be most concerned about).

steven round where my parents used to live there was a lot of pheasant shooting. You would see them being reared in pens, then released and they came into my parents garden looking for the bird food as they were effectivly tame. Numbers would go down over the shooting season then over the remaining winter numbers went down more with there being none around in the early spring until the next lot were released.

I’d didn’t mean they were callously left to die – I meant few of them survived the winter even allowing for those who were shot. I believe in England more survive the winter in Scotland few do IME. Maybe thinking about it a series of cold winters when I was there

Ninfan – its a good point. I’d rather eat free range meat that factory farmed – and Pheasants perhaps have a better life than many chickens. Ditto deer / cows. Hence I find the issues interesting and nuanced and some forms of hunting are less damaging than others and some have utility and others none

without so much as a sporting chance either.

😆 😆

Give the pheasants shotguns and we’ll call it a sport

Tj- I certainly don’t leave my remaining stock unfed- why would I? I give them the best chance to breed for next season as every successful chick they fledge is an extra bird for very little cost. With all the massive spin offs for the beleaguered native wildlife that brings.

Anybody who eats pretty much any mass produced crop has blood on their hands- modern farming is an ecological disaster.

As for grouse Moors- have you been to a progressive, well run one?
I hadn’t been at all until last season and I had my eyes opened. It was like stepping foot onto the biggest, best kept wildlife reserve you’ve ever visited- a truly great couple of days.

And shooting Hares isn’t illegal…..

crosshair – I can only say what I saw with the pheasants round where I lived ( central scotland in an area with a cold microclimate) Maybe a poorly run lot? There were none around by march. All died off over the winter – and I knew where the pens and feeders were.

Grouse moors? I have not been to a grouse moor that is anything but an ecological disaster. Theses one you mention. Any tree planting? Did they trap for stoats and weasels? ( often done illegally) Did they still burn off the heather so much? ( again often burnt in larger areas than lega;l “accidentally”

Research stats suggest about 16% released birds outlive the season (i.e, 1st Feb) after which, as rightly pointed out, they otentially add to the breeding stock as feral birds. Also worth remembering that not all shoots release, some rely on entirely ‘wild’ stock (though I don’t think stealing them off the neighbouring estate with raisins filled with sleeping pills applies)

Regards grouse Moor, I was lucky enough to visit some of the best estates years ago, where the keeper was already grip blocking and trying to revive black grouse populations back to the eighties – and to see the wildlife that this created an absolute haven for.

I can’t really comment on one shoot I’ve never seen- but it seems unlikely. Here, if I stopped feeding, all the dozens of surrounding small farm shoots who release next to no birds but with hoppers running would soon be rubbing their hands together 😉

It was a Moor in Northumberland and yes there was tree planting on the fringes.
Of course they trapped for stoats and weasels- that’s why they had wheeling flocks of Lapwings and Snipe by the hundreds.
It’s pretty hard to trap illegally- as long a Fenn is covered to avoid catching non-target species (and Grouse lol!) you don’t technically have to ever go back and check it so not sure what you are alluding to there?

As for burning, it was the most perfect chequerboard of 20m square’s of different aged heather. Large illegal burns are more likely to be done by shepherds than keepers as large patches of single age heather re-gen have less holding potential than lots of smaller ones….. but I don’t actually know a lot about it tbh.

so trapping predators is OK? Illegal trapping is common with these traps – as you say its about how they are set up. I have seen illegal trapping with my own eyes. Personally if they are trapping stoats and weasels then they are not OK. So its only somew wildlife that is allowed to flourish – anything that might reduce shooting stocks is eliminated.

Sorry – you will never convince me on grouse moors. Yes a well run one with an eye on biodiversity is not as bad as one run purely to maximise shooting but its still a long long way from good and still causes huge damage

Large populations of predators means good stocks of prey species. Not the other way round.

You have to wonder why the RSPB spend so much time doing it then, don’t you?

Taken this way away from the OP and I apologise. One last thing on Grouse moors

RSPB Scotland has appealed for information following the discovery of illegally-set spring traps in the heart of the Cairngorms National Park. The conservation organisation has commended the actions of two members of the public who alerted it to a distressed bird caught in a trap they came across while out walking but is disappointed that, as with many wildlife crimes, the perpetrators are yet to be identified.

these are the spring traps that are legal if covered as you say but left uncovered and with bait beside them to catch raptors.

Pole traps are a cruel illegal and ignorant misuse of a Spring trap.
That’s irrelevant to stoat and weasel trapping though..,

As you say- large predator numbers are a spin off of high prey densities. Seeing as a)stoats and weasels aren’t being eradicated- merely controlled and b)the large prey densities provide the economic stimulus for all the vital habitat management that makes moors so diverse- what is wrong with humanely controlling them to sustainable levels?

That was not pole traps – that was the spring traps used for mustelids laid on the ground with a dead rabbit next to them and no cover. IE an attempt to catch raptors but disguised to make it look accidental.

I have seen spring traps on the ground / on bridges over streams with no covers

It’s the same thing- a misuse of a legal device.

I don’t believe you’ve seen a live, set trap deliberately uncovered on a bridge- it would be the fastest way to catch a Grouse…..

What is the legality regarding Pheasants btw, i’ve always fancied clubing one over the back of the head and taking home for dinner. Frowned upon? 😆

How do you know if it’s just a wild pheasant or if some estate owns it?

Joe, seems like a good idea to reverse the damage caused by humans over many centuries. The current state and more worryingly the state 100 years ago is unnatural. The strategic is now to reverse this.

Assume you have seen

http://scotland.forestry.gov.uk/images/corporate/pdf/ForestExpansion.pdf

Quite an interesting read. As often gov publications are often far better than the noise tha the poliicians themselves create

Sadly- they belong to whoever’s land they are on. Which pleases me no end when I see £40,000 worth over the boundary on next doors fields some mornings 😀

crosshair – ninfan – lets stop arguing from different perspectives and look at solutions?

For grouse moors I would say licensing and vicarious liability ( as in Scotland) will help. IE mange the land badly- lose your licence. Raptors killed on your land – the landowner is responsible and will face jailtime.

Things are moving this way in Scotland slowly but in a two steps forward one back fashion.

well run shoots like you describe would actually benefit as they would be able to compete better as unethical practices are stamped out, badly run ones would lose their income for a period and thus land values fall either allowing more responsible estates to take over or the land to be used for other uses or perhaps they would get their house in order

That’s already pretty much the case in England- estates lose their single farm payment if an employee is caught killing wildlife illegally I believe……

The trouble is, Raptor persecution is worth a fortune in donations to the RSPB. They can’t afford to fix the problem constructively now 😉