Deer numbers are a red herring in the debate over population management
The Deer Commission correctly emphasises that numbers are in themselves of no importance. It is the impact of deer and other grazing animals on their habitat that is important. It is the role of deer management groups to ensure the impact and distribution of deer are sustainable, and take account of the full range of public and private land management objectives.
It is difficult to understand why certain interest groups continue to demonise deer and those who manage them, regardless of the contribution they make to Scotland.
RMJ COOKE
secretary, Association of Deer Management Groups
Dalhousie
Brechin, Angus
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdConservationist charities would have us believe that it is necessary to reduce deer numbers to an "acceptable" level that doesn't cause ecological damage. It is only in the past 50 or so years that deer numbers have increased significantly, coinciding with increased mobility of shooting parties from abroad, resulting in a thriving hunting industry and reforestation that provides shelter; and indeed, more recently, milder winters.
On the other hand, stalking estates require an artificially high deer population for their shooting clients, who pay up to 20,000 a week. But as deer know no boundaries, the population expands outside of the stalking estates, where they can damage unprotected saplings, ground flora and ground nesting habitats.
If deer were left alone and their populations not manipulated for anthropocentric reasons, the population would adjust in accordance with their habitat, just like any other mammal. We should learn to live with other species, not exploit them and cause them harm.
ANGUS MACMILLAN
Meikle Boturich, nr Balloch
Dunbartonshire