You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
There should be dozens of different habitat types, blending, mixing, varying and rubbing shoulders. That's the way that biodiversity increases. Look at the work now being done to replant willow species into the Loch Avon basin, restoring the high altitude scrub woodland that used to be common above 600m across the Highlands. Higher up, tundra species of plants supporting vertebrate and invertebrates; just around the corner, Scots pine woods, with a new understorey developing rapidly as species spread naturally into the developing system.
Grouse and wader populations will survive and if some have to diminish in order to restore the wider range of land to greater diversity and help with carbon capture, fine.
It's worth remembering that 'natural' is a temporary term; after all, much of this land was buried under a kilometre or more of ice, not so very long ago.
That is a huge can of worms to open Vlad. Rewilding yes - but to what?
this is just from a poor memory and knowledge - others perhaps know a lot more
Post ice age it was taiga forest I think - so scattered birch and pine on impoverished thin soils. 10 000 years ago
As things warmed up and trees grew ( In most of scotland - not all) more diversity of trees and denser forest. 5000 years ago
then humans arrived they started cutting the trees down. so even 5000 years ago humans where altering the landscape. also at this sort of time the peat stated developing - so human were hear and altering the landscape before the peat developed
1000 years ago a lot of the trees would have gone from valley bottoms but still be on the hillsides, Then came the highland clearances and any remaining trees over large areas were removed for sheep grazing and deer farming for shooting 200 years ago ish?
You will have seen in many areas that in the peat you can see the stumps of the trees cut down during the clearances
for me rewilding should be going back to the pre clearance landscape / level of tree cover. We can hardly remove the peat and go back to Taiga
Heather should also be much deeper and longer than it is. in "Kidnapped" the hero hides in the heather in Glencoe. Yo couldn't do that now - its only a foot or so high
Some areas would be temperate rain forest - differnt areas would have differnt flora and fauna
Modern day highlands are a man made landscape of sheep, deer and grouse farms with impoverished biodiversity
Rewinding is just that, letting nature get on with it and sort out what works.
do that in much of scotland there will be no native trees, vast overpopulation of deer and a denuded over grazed landscape. Large areas have no native trees to regenerate from. Deer without predators the population will explode and over graze the land
I'll take the most important one first:
And, more to the point, would eradicating grouse moors dramatically reduce the number of midges? 😄
Having spent time in Atlantic rain forests, the answer is 'no'... 🙁
Although there is little evidence of the scourge of the midge in historic writings and records. So either we're nesh of there were fewer midges.
😉
Thanks TJ
Then came the highland clearances and any remaining trees over large areas were removed for sheep grazing and deer farming for shooting 200 years ago ish?
I was always under the impression that the clearances were clearing people, not trees (though I guess that's secondary to make the landscape suitable for sheep farming). I also believed that a large swathe of British trees were felled for military purposes during WW1. Is that an urban myth, or maybe most of Scotland was already bare of trees...
Rewinding is just that, letting nature get on with it and sort out what works.
Except our currently changing climate and the damage over the last 200-300 years is so deep and damaging it needs our intervention. An example - there are many valleys without the few 'granny' trees to supply seed. Therefore we need to plant those trees, reduce deer numbers so they don't eat the new trees, manage rabbits, re-seed understory and montane plants (etc etc). I believe RSPB at Abernethy have a 1000 year management plan...!
I was always under the impression that the clearances were clearing people, not trees (though I guess that’s secondary to make the landscape suitable for sheep farming).
The growth of sheep and other more intensive farming precipitated a huge change in people and environment.
. I also believed that a large swathe of British trees were felled for military purposes during WW1. Is that an urban myth, or maybe most of Scotland was already bare of trees…
This is true, and partly led to the formation of Forestry Commission.
The highland clearances does refer to clearing people off the land. the landowners did then remove a lot of the remaining trees to provide more grazing f for sheep I think.
reduce deer numbers so they don’t eat the new trees
This is the biggie - but how. Can’t realistically bring back wolves, by all accounts even serious culling isn’t getting the numbers down (and the carcasses are valueless as supply exceeds demand), introduced disease is problematic…
This is the biggie – but how
Just a lot, lot more culling of numbers over probably a couple of decades.
Feshie estate just shot every deer on the estate IIRC. Others have reduced numbers to sustainable levels by culling
no real logistical issue to do a big cull.
Rewinding is just that, letting nature get on with it and sort out what works.
Not really, rewilding is about getting stuff back to roughly the end of the last ice age. People think that means boreal and deciduous forest but there were a lot of large ungulates that kept signifcant grasslands, heath and open moor as well as climax community forest. Most of the mega fauna from that period are now extinct so primitive breeds of cattle, horses and deer are used as proxies in larger scemes.
When did Grouse moors become a thing?
The driven grouse moors are a Victorian invention which was when it became convenient to catch the train to a remote area for a bit of shooting fun. Since grouse cant be reared in captivity (not commercially anyway) it needs very heavy intervention both in terms of killing predators or anything else which might look at grouse in a funny way (eg mountain hares) and in terms of burning the heather back to ensure there is always patches at different stage of the heather lifecycle to suit the grouse.
And what was the landscape like prior to this?
The highlands would have been Scots pine (if you ever go to Glenmore lodge take a walk out in the woods behind it to get an idea of what they are like) and the lowlands more oak etc.
They were put under pressure way before the grouse moors due to normal agriculture both clearing for crops and also sheep grazing higher up plus the need for fuel (making iron for example uses a lot of wood).
As with the rest of the UK I think its uncertain when exactly most of the woodlands got cleared with quite a lot possibly happening when people returned after the ice age especially in areas which were already under stress from the climate change even a fairly small impact from people could quickly clear it.
I did beating at Invergeldie one summer back in my student days. 3 weeks, the second was spent digging gravel pits as there weren't enough grouse. No jobs the next year or the year after and probably the year after that. I wouldn't be surprised if it was on its arse anyway hence being happy to sell, we haven't had any decent winters in years.
Deer numbers need to be reduced significantly if there’s to be any chance of rewilding the landscape - they do and will eat anything. They had a ballot to cull the deer on an estate on one of the Uists, but it was rejected, particularly by those with an interest in tourism. As well as Scots Pine, native trees include oak, birch, hazel and poplar - there are still some native temperate rainforest areas in some coastal areas, often where the ground is too steep for it to have been cultivated. What there wasn’t was large stands of monoculture Sitka spruce, larch and pine planted so dense that the light doesn’t reach the ground that barely anything grows or lives there - much of it planted post WW2 by the Forestry Commission to create jobs, and now clear-felled to create what can be best described as post-industrial landscape totally devoid of anything that’s going to take decades to regrow.
by all accounts even serious culling isn’t getting the numbers down
Unfortunately very few estates are undertaking "serious culling" and in many areas the red deer population is still more than double the sustainable level. As TJ mentions, Glen Feshie estate has a zero tolerance approach and will despatch a shooter as soon as a deer is seen. Of course they are still wandering in from other estates, hence the frequent intervention.
Feshie is a bit of a poster boy for what can be achieved. There's very little planting going on and the growth in the glen is all just being allowed to happen.
Conversely, the Brewdog-owned Kinrara Estate is being fenced ready for intensive planting of native species. This is partly because it was previously a grouse moor and so there are few native plants able to begin recolonisation. However, by fencing it off, they are encouraging the red deer to migrate into areas where successful regeneration is already happening. Once again, the answer isn't more fences, it's fewer deer
Ah but 'shooting bad'.
I know nobody here is saying that but a lot of people outside do. People have a massive issue with guns and hunting in this country from poor associations with the US and just general ignorance. As said, once you get deer down to manageable numbers you could licence the hunting but that would probably be quite unpopular amongst those who wouldn't take part.
The shooting community often doesn't help itself either with vocal absolutists amongst their numbers who will defend anything with a slippery slope argument. Again, these people need to get on board and the BASC and SACS (and all organisations tbh) need to start encouraging their members to act in a more thoughtful manner.
Not just thoughtful but not illegal. Those organisations are part of the criminal conspiracy
I have no moral issue with deer stalking. Nor really with walk up bird shooting. Its the driven grouse moors that are a criminal conspiracy and they are protected by those organisations
I think the Norwegians offer variable numbers of deer hunting permits depending on the population size and health - more deer, more permits.
From an animal welfare POV we have too many deer, even with our the overgrazing.
I have no moral issue with deer stalking.
It can have similar issues to driven grouse moors. In order to ensure some targets for customers on certain estates numbers are kept way higher than they should be.
Thats not a moral issue tho - thats a environmental one.
Feshie is a bit of a poster boy for what can be achieved. There’s very little planting going on and the growth in the glen is all just being allowed to happen.
this is what I was trying to say, somewhat clumsily.
Introducing locally extinct species, such as Bison in Kent, and letting nature take its course. Trying to return a landscape to some previous condition, 5000 or 10000 or whatever years ago is futile. Increasing biodiversity in our depleted ecosystem is the aim. Shelling hunting dear as a sustainable ecological benefit might be the way to go?
@dissonance I thought that was a reason why some estates are against adequate culling (and as above the end result is that animal health is suffering as the population is too large, never mind the overgrazing)?
It can have similar issues to driven grouse moors. In order to ensure some targets for customers on certain estates numbers are kept way higher than they should be.
Yep. And the "value" of an estate is often determined by the number of deer shot annually. Make them scarcer and the poor shooters will actually have to walk around a bit in order to find their targets. That leaves less time for champers and dinner. 😂
Futonrivercrossing
Feshie had grandmother trees to reseed the woodlands. Some valley systems do not - so even if all the deer are culled no native trees will grow because there is no seed source
TJ's right; the presence of grandmother trees in Feshie isn't just about those individual trees themselves, it's also an indicator for the whole range of associated species having survived there alongside those few ancient trees. So the ecosystem there still contains the fungi, bacteria, invertebrates and most other elements of the system. This means that the forest restoration and tree regrowth is really rapid; trees never do as well unless their whole support system is present. They need those other organisms, forms of life for access to nutrients, for 'soil health', for want of a better expression.
Just planting scots pine or birch out onto a depleted moor will be desperately slow until many of those support species are also present or introduced. That's what a broad ecosystem should contain and helps all of the species to thrive, not just the totem pole, visible apex plant species. Oak will always do better when it expands its range (or is planted) into ground that previously hosted birch, for example. Rapid birch and willow growth creates shelter and begins the process of creating the organic biomass, the loam that lots of other species want to live in. This isn't rocket science; I was taught this in my first year botany course at uni, 40 years ago..
Relevant to this recent discussion
So rewilding is tough. but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried and it has to be better than the wildlife desert of a driven grouse moor.
Happy to learn things about this stuff 👍😁 - fascinating, really.
Some more positive news, for anyone who hasn't come across this yet:
https://treesforlife.org.uk/dundreggan/
The location is a bit of a diversion off a Badger Divide/Great Glen Way ride but is almost bang on the route for anyone doing a relaxed HT550, a Great North Trail mission or anything similar. Or you're driving to or from Skye, Torridon etc. I'm told that the cafe at the new centre is well worth a visit.
I have just read the piece by Nick Kempe posted by scotroutes. Given that I am fully aware of the rationale behind the trial, and of the challenges of pinewood regeneration in a core pinewood area, I can only say that I wish he had actually come and ask questions before throwing stones.
That seems Nick Kempe's approach to lots in his articles.
Another related tweet. Too many deer and sheep = this would not happen.
https://twitter.com/PaintingAndrew/status/1649135136481374212?t=p924GS0MtNRAGTM6GL7JOA&s=19
I can recommend Andrew Painting's book 'Regeneration' for anyone who fancies a bit of bed time reading on this subject. Lots of interesting worked examples from around the Mar Lodge estate. He's not claiming to be perfect or to have all of the answers but has certainly participated in a lot of good, on a very large estate that is next door to Feshie and is leaning on Invercauld.. Quite a contrast.
Interesting. I listened to a radio 4 piece which suggested that released birds were the dominant vector for avian flu, due to there being so many in such a small space.
Interesting. I listened to a radio 4 piece which suggested that released birds were the dominant vector for avian flu, due to there being so many in such a small space.
55 million game birds reared each year to be shot - what an insane activity. How big is the carbon footprint? How much de-rainforested land is used to grow the feed? How much damage to the local ecosystems? And all just for a brief buzz when the trigger is pulled, nothing achieved at all.
How big is the carbon footprint? How much de-rainforested land is used to grow the feed? How much damage to the local ecosystems?
Yep, but don't forget that they are guardians of the countryside and there are a few more curlews because of grouse moors.....(also more fires, less peat, fewer raptors, restricted access, little in the way of native flora and fauna, massive vehicle tracks across the country, lead shot everywhere, straightened waterways etc etc etc etc)
The shooting community often doesn’t help itself either with vocal absolutists amongst their numbers who will defend anything with a slippery slope argument.
It's interesting that the gamekeepers association quote on the very first page was aggressive and immediately adopted a metaphor of violence:
Scottish Gamekeepers Association Chairman Alex Hogg said: “This decision will anger our community. It will not be easily forgotten. Our members have effectively had targets painted on their backs, today.
Reduce deer numbers. Serious culling can be done if the will is there. See Glen Feshie. The landowner there was not very popular with other neighbouring owners when he did it. I hear he also had issues intially with gamekeepers not cooperating.
The resuts are plain to see. There used to be a debate. Some expert advice was that only fencing would work. Feshie proves otherwise. Trees are now growing at 900m is some areas around Glen Feshie
Unless deer and sheep grazing pressure is reduced you are wasting time and money to get an inferior result.
The pic below is Glen Feshie 1981. No young trees anywhere on the floor of the glen apart from a few in the background in a small fenced area near the river.
Now. Stand outside the bothy and you are surrounded by young trees up to 20 years old. The grass and heather around the bothy is knee high most places. Incidentally that log is still there. Rotted down to about 6" high and hidden in the grass.
For a recent example of the bothy see
The sports lobby really are their own worst enemy. Their absolute refusal to budge, reform, evolve or adopt new practice will be their ultimate undoing. I follow SGA on Facebook out of curiosity, it is fascinating to see how little insight they have into their own behaviours, and the risk that poses to the very livelihoods and countryside they claim to be protecting.
United utilities is ending all leases for grouse shooting on their land. We are slowly winning
Good
Although that opinion piece doesnt seem optimistic on the long term outcome of licensing
Unless deer and sheep grazing pressure is reduced you are wasting time and money to get an inferior result
Need to create a demand for eating wild venison - healthier *and* greener (and probably better for the deer too, as fewer of them means the ones that are left will be better nourished?)
I had a laugh this week. An estate neighbouring Glen Feshie ceased it's deer stalking activities. It seems "their" deer were crossing the watershed into Glen Feshie and getting culled.
As per Parkwatch. This allowing natural regeneration to start. No cash in that though. The grant application for forestry is in.
An estate neighbouring Glen Feshie ceased it’s deer stalking activities. It seems “their” deer were crossing the watershed into Glen Feshie and getting culled.
The interesting bit of that article is that the companies that have trashed an estate are now both being paid to restore peat AND nearby plant trees so reducing the peat. So they get taxpayer money to trash, repair and trash again - all while being a profitable enterprise before any subsidiaries...
Madness of an archaic system that has to change.
Yin and Yang on the 12th.
https://twitter.com/Watts_SH/status/1689646299036180480?t=qolmZIRCCwUc2GkZN_SSEA&s=19
https://twitter.com/RewildScotland/status/1689925384983166976?t=zbZdjZrfmsvcnQ0oAn2AFg&s=19
Can someone explain to me what the proposal is to allow year-round deer culling and why this is a problem (outside the shooting estates)?
the only reason there are seasons is for sporting purposes - make sure the antler have grown enough and so on. there is also a dusk till dawn restriction, you cant shoot them at night. until recently any kind of night vision or thermal was banned too (in scotland) - presumably to make it more 'sporting'
If the deer are now a pest then the seasons and daylight restrictions are silly, do you want the numbers reduced or not. Leave the seasons and daylight restrictions for the paid stalkers, but for the professional cullers, let them have at it.
to me on the outside it seems simple, theres a massive deer overpopulation issue all over the uk. there is also a lot of foodbanks needing food. join these two issues up and everyone is happy?
to me on the outside it seems simple, theres a massive deer overpopulation issue all over the uk. there is also a lot of foodbanks needing food. join these two issues up and everyone is happy?
Everyone apart from the deer stalking estates and their punters. Who ever heard of a deer forest with a) trees to get in the way and b) enough deer to be guaranteed a kill?
To be fair there is a huge industry and jobs resting on these shooting estates. I have said it before - we need a transition to something different and that needs both cultural acceptance and financial input.
But I agree - let us shoot well over half the deer in Scotland (lowlands included, and not just red deer) and use the meat well.
@porter_jamie I’m sure there was something about allowing ‘food-safer’ ammunition as well?
consultation on the use of snares
https://consult.gov.scot/environment-forestry/wildlife-management-in-scotland-2023/
Scottish Water not renewing shooting leases for grouse.
https://www.birdguides.com/news/scottish-water-to-end-grouse-shooting-on-its-land/
the only reason there are seasons is for sporting purposes – make sure the antler have grown enough and so on.
Nope. Closed seasons are generally to allow some respite during the breeding season, or least part of it. But yes, if the sole aim is to reduce numbers then closed seasons make no sense. Shooting pregnant does/hinds and leaving orphaned calves to starve is an effective way to reduce numbers as long as you're comfortable with that.
To be fair there is a huge industry and jobs resting on these shooting estates.
I'm not convinced the industry is as big as they tell us it is. There is lots of money being spent but it didn't filter down much beyond the estates. A few hotels do well but I struggle to see wider benefit.
@franksinatra Isn't there at least some evidence that eco-tourism brings in more money and more jobs? Problem is how big a market that is...
@franksinatra Isn’t there at least some evidence that eco-tourism brings in more money and more jobs?
I think that has been the case on Mull, and I expect elsewhere.
I had this discussion with the local farmer at my old outdoor centre. He was adamant that the shooting parties via him leasing them employed people and brought money in.
It did - a part time on and off through the year gamekeeper, a couple of stalkers and ghillies through the season part time.
Meanwhile our outdoor centre had 22 staff, 18 of whom were permanent and full time, living locally.
I don't believe that they are exclusive of each other, but the game shooting / fishing industry needs to be aware that thier financial contribution is both not as big as they think and isn't the only way of turning money from the land.
I think that has been the case on Mull, and I expect elsewhere.
yep, plenty of people pointing fancy cameras at the wildlife instead of fancy guns
the game shooting / fishing industry needs to be aware that thier financial contribution is both not as big as they think
Different context but work we did a few years back showed farming itself to be a minor contributor to rural economies, much to the disgust of the NFU. Most rural ecomonic activity was created by small businesses (tech, creative, retail) and covid had likely increased that.
Edit. And tourism of course. Whether farmers are the creators (or the barriers) to the landscape and access that tourists expect was another issue....
Is it not more about net profit than turnover? I suspect a shooting party paying £3k a gun per day is more profitable for the landowner than an outdoor centre which has a load of staff and other costs.
Re Deer there's a lot of hand ringing about a lack of larder (processing facilities) which is making it hard to get the venison out to sell. To me that seems like a distraction, if they are serious about reducing numbers, just leave them where they drop and let nature deal with the carrion.
On the other side there's a load of money going into Peatland Restoration of which a significant part is the removal of trees.
So on one side we want to remove deer to let the trees grow and in other areas we are manually removing saplings that deer could normally take care of.
Did anyone mention gardening? 🤣
Yeah, but to quote a famous movie "you can't eat the scenery Mac".
Different context but work we did a few years back showed farming itself to be a minor contributor to rural economies.
But a somewhat more significant contributor to preventing mass starvation perhaps. Unless you can eat what the tech and creative businesses produce?
On the other side there’s a load of money going into Peatland Restoration of which a significant part is the removal of trees.
Round here it's more about blocking up the drainage.
Yep. Same here.
Is it not more about net profit than turnover? I suspect a shooting party paying £3k a gun per day is more profitable for the landowner than an outdoor centre which has a load of staff and other costs.
Yes, this is correct. But their argument is that they sustain rural economies, not that they line rich land owners pockets. Making a rich person richer is not the same thing as sustaining a varied mixed economy within a rural region.
Round here it’s more about blocking up the drainage.
That's another significant part of it.
Yes, this is correct. But their argument is that they sustain rural economies, not that they line rich land owners pockets. Making a rich person richer is not the same thing as sustaining a varied mixed economy within a rural region.
I don't disagree.
Just to be clear, I'm in favour of reducing deer to levels where the hills can revert to natural woodland. I'd also ban all sport shooting.
A question I too have asked before: why do we allow free roaming release of pheasants each year to interrupt so many natural balances and processes?
https://twitter.com/PCairnsPhoto/status/1718964304869777522
Because, erm, checks notes.....
- Custodians of countryside
- Lapwings
- Rural Economy
- Chris Packham.
Is it not more about net profit than turnover? I suspect a shooting party paying £3k a gun per day is more profitable for the landowner than an outdoor centre which has a load of staff and other costs.
There is no way that every shooting party is paying £3k a gun a day - a few may, on a few days, but most not even close. I would like to see the figures.
They also are not shooting every day - again, I would be interested in how many days a year the ghillies and similar are earning income. My experience was it was just a few earning in permanent jobs.
It also is a question of where the money is going - does it get spread around the community, or is it heading into the pockets of a few wealthy, a few new Range Rovers and posh guns? Or could the same income employ more people, more likely to spend time and money locally etc.
Happened on my mates estate/farm near to Moniaive, neighbouring estate (toffs shooting/hunting estate frequented by Buccluech hunt) had thousands in a pen that was destroyed by falling trees and his farm was overrun by birds, 4 of us spent a weekend removing as many as possible with air rifles and filled a large Ifor Williams trailer then returned them to the estate managers/gamekeepers courtyard on a Monday morning.
Caused quite an uproar with police getting involved but as we returned his property then nothing came of it.
Theres bloody loads of the things round here in kirkcudbright as you know matt, no one really bothers trying to avoid them when driving round the town or countryside/singletrack roads around the area.
There is no way that every shooting party is paying £3k a gun a day – a few may, on a few days, but most not even close. I would like to see the figures.
They also are not shooting every day – again, I would be interested in how many days a year the ghillies and similar are earning income. My experience was it was just a few earning in permanent jobs.
It also is a question of where the money is going – does it get spread around the community, or is it heading into the pockets of a few wealthy, a few new Range Rovers and posh guns? Or could the same income employ more people, more likely to spend time and money locally etc.
I don't disagree with any of that Matt. I'm just trying to consider it from the the land owner's perspective. I suspect the landowners are only interested in their own income and not concerned about the local economy.
This is mind boggling 😳
https://twitter.com/malaconotus/status/1719097584696856580
Another huntsman gets away with a telling off. Kelso hunt let dogs chase and kill Fox. Master of the hunt didn't notice so obviously nothing he could do anyway he's popped off to be master at old Berkshire hunt so he's jolly well learnt his lesson.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-67102216
Buccleuch hunt yet again, not surprising as they are all a bunch of self entitled utter ****ers
Another organisation set to see if a different way of managing land can bring income and put environment at the forefront.
This, I am pretty sure, is the western end of Gaick pass.