Deer
Historical background
Red deer and roe deer are native to the UK. Hundreds of years ago the fallow
deer was introduced and more recently the UK’s deer fauna has been further
added to by muntjac, sika and Chinese water deer. Current populations of
deer are estimated to be 400,000 for red deer, 400,000 for roe, 110,000 for
fallow, 50-100,000 for muntjac 30-50,000 for sika and 650 for Chinese water
deer.(1)
Deer populations have long been of concern to foresters, particularly in
Scotland, but have become a high profile issue within conservation in
England and their expansion into Wales is also generating debate. Around
1900 deer numbers were in decline. Woodland clearance and hunting had led to
reduced population levels. The twentieth century saw a dramatic turn around
in the fortunes of deer, which are now commonplace throughout most of rural
Britain as deer continue to rise in numbers and to extend their range.
Deer
and their impact
Deer are an
important part of our wildlife, which people enjoy seeing but they can have
a range of negative impacts on the environment, including:
- Preventing the growth
of young trees or coppice re-growth by browsing, fraying or bark
stripping
- Some species
preferring to feed on bluebells, oxlips and other woodland flowers
- Damaging crops where
they occur in large numbers.
Deer are often cited as a
cause of woodland Sites of Special Scientific Interest being in unfavourable
condition. However, despite the strength of concern expressed by some people
about the scale of the threat posed to biodiversity by deer, evidence of
negative impacts at all but a site scale (e.g.at Monks Wood, Cambridgeshire
and Wytham Wood, Oxford) is equivocal. For example, the recent Bunce report(2)
identified that increased grazing was correlated with increased ground flora
species-richness. Similarly, whilst the recent Repeat Woodland Bird Survey(3)
suggested that changes in woodland structure were the most likely driver for
many of the bird declines, they were not correlated with deer data. In both
cases, it may be that the variables recorded, or the way in which they were
observed, was inadequate for the purposes of analysis. However, one might
equally draw the conclusion that concerns in relation to deer may be a
result of local rather than general issues and that different deer species
have different impacts.
Relationships between deer densities and deer impacts at a landscape-scale
especially in the lowlands seem to be particularly poorly researched and
understanding of the impact of interactions between deer species and with
other wild and domestic grazers is only in its infancy.(4) The
same could also be said to be true of some of the potentially beneficial
impacts of deer, such as their purported role in longer distance dispersal
of other species. However, there is agreement in the literature that
intermediate levels of grazing/browsing are probably most beneficial,
although clearly this may vary dependent on the key features of a site.
Deer management
Whilst there is a
range of legislation which affects the control of deer and the use of
firearms, only in Scotland is there a statutory agency, the Deer Commission
for Scotland, with specific powers to promote deer management including
giving support to deer management groups. No statutory framework exists to
support deer management throughout the rest of the United Kingdom. In recent
years, the Deer Initiative (a partnership of organisations interested in
deer management, conservation and welfare) has actively promoted
collaborative deer management in England, where Deer Management Groups exist
in some areas, formed by neighbouring landowners. While sustained control at
anything other than a very local level (e.g. individual sites or estates)
has not been achieved , it is worthy of note that red, sika and fallow deer
are herding species, which could enable effective control or eradication if
landowners were of a like mind. However, roe and muntjac are not gregarious,
which leads many to contend that even if there is a will there will not be a
way to sustain their effective control at anything other than a site level.
The
Woodland Trust’s approach
The Woodland Trust
recognises that deer are an important part of our natural heritage. In
managing deer we aim to strike a balance between deer numbers and the wider
needs of the woodland environment.
With this in mind the Trust:
- will co-operate with
our neighbours and local Deer Management Groups, and participate where
appropriate.
- does not permit the
hunting of animals for sport in its woodlands, including the hunting of
deer. The generation of income from venison will not be a factor in
considering the need for deer control
- will produce
management plans for its properties containing prescriptions to minimise
deer damage where they have a negative impact on our woods. These will
provide for the control of deer where necessary and where such measures
can be sustained for so long as the risk of damage continues
- will comply with all
the statutory requirements affecting deer management and will use only
humane methods of control.
The Woodland Trust monitors
the impact of deer at our sites and assesses the degree to which the deer
are affecting our objectives for the management of individual sites and the
wider semi-natural habitats around them. Where there is evidence that the
deer are having a detrimental impact on a site or the wider habitat then the
Trust will undertake management action. Our properties encompass a wide
variety of situations both in terms of conservation value and the extent of
public access. The Trust encourages its managers to develop local
prescriptions, which take account of local circumstances.
We will consider a range of options, balancing the needs of the habitat, our
neighbours, other species and the deer themselves. These options could
include or be a combination of the following:
- Decisions on felling
or coppicing will take account of deer. The Trust will consider the size
and shape of areas felled with the aim of minimising the impact deer
will have on subsequent regeneration. Where it is expected that deer
damage is likely to be high it may effect the decision on whether to
fell or coppice at all.
- Where deer damage is
likely to be high either to newly established woodland or to coppice the
Trust will consider protection of the habitat, through fencing or
brushwood hedges. Where fencing is appropriate we will take into
consideration the impact such fencing will have on the landscape and
other species. In some cases it may be more appropriate to protect young
trees individually.
- In some circumstances
none of the above may be effective. In these cases the Trust will
undertake humane culling of deer numbers to a level whereby the damage
levels are acceptable in the context of the objectives of the site, the
needs of our neighbours and the needs to maintain a viable deer
population. Where possible this will be undertaken as part of a Deer
Management Group.
- Where deer are
affecting the interests of our neighbours then the Trust would consider
culling as part of a wider Deer Management Plan and as part of a Deer
Management Group provided that this is not detrimental to the
conservation interests of the wider area.
The Woodland Trust’s Native
Species Conservation Position Statement (2005) states:
When considering the need to control a species, its native or non-native
status is unimportant. The key issue is whether it is causing significant
ongoing habitat change or loss of other species, additional to that from
climate change.
Thus, the Woodland Trust believes that although it is easy to get drawn down
a route of considering muntjac, sika and fallow and Chinese water deer,
which are non-native, rather differently from red and roe deer, which are
native, the same principles should underpin the management of all deer
species.
In practice, the Woodland
Trust has:
- been on the Council of
the Deer Initiative since its inception and has been pressing for a
simple method by which site managers can assess deer impacts
- been a member of the
Deer Management Round Table in Scotland since 2001, which is appointed
by the Deer Commission for Scotland to provide policy advice
- commissioned the
University of York and the Central Science Laboratory to review the
impacts of deer and deer management on woodland biodiversity in the
English lowlands, key gaps in current knowledge and future research
needs; within individual sites, at a landscape-scale and regionally
- contributed to the
development of a project on collaborative management of deer funded by
the Rural Economy and Land Use Programme (RELU)(5) and
advocated further research into; relationships between deer densities
and deer impacts at a landscape-scale, the impact of interactions
between deer species and with other grazers, and longer distance
dispersal of plants by deer
- developed a case for
stronger measures for deer management planning in Scotland with other
members of Scottish Wildlife & Countryside Link
- helped to form deer
management groups, for example, at Fordham, Essex and Hoddesdon,
Hertfordshire
- acted as the secretary
for the Balquhidder Deer Management Group in the Trossachs and employs a
ranger who spends part of their time managing deer at Glen Finglas and
Milton
The
Woodland Trust’s wider view
In a wider context, the
Woodland Trust supports those neighbours and landowners who manage deer on
their estates in a similar manner to the Trust. In essence, the Woodland
Trust believes that landowners should:
- Ensure clarity of
management objectives for their property
- Consider deer on a
site by site basis
- Optimise deer impacts
through appropriate woodland management (given that impacts may be both
beneficial and detrimental)
- Cooperate with local
Deer Management Groups
- Only use humane
methods of control
- Take account of the
conservation interests of the wider area.
Further research should
address:
- The positive and
negative impacts of deer at wider than a site scale
- The impact of
interactions between deer species and with other grazers
- The practical and
political problems of wider collaborative deer management.
References
(1)
Derived from Harris, S., Morris, P., Wray, S. & Yalden, D. (1995) A Review
of British Mammals: Population Estimates and Conservation Status of British
Mammals other than Cetaceans. JNCC, Peterborough, and Munro R (2002) ,
Report on the Deer Industry in Great Britain. Report for Defra and Food
Standards Agency
(2) Kirby, K.J., Smart, S.M., Black, H.I.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Corney, P.M. &
Smithers R.J. (2005) Long term ecological change in British woodland
(1971-2001). English Nature Research Reports No. 653
(3) Amar, A., Hewson, C.M., Thewlis, R.M., Smith, K.W., Fuller, R.J.,
Lindsell, J.A., Conway, G., Butler, S. & MacDonald, M (2005) What’s
happening to our woodland birds? Long-term changes in the populations of
woodland birds. RSPB Research Reports No. 19. BTO Research Reports No. 169.
(4) White, P.C.L., Ward, A.I., Smart, J.C.R. & Moore, N.P. (2004) Impacts of
deer and deer management on woodland biodiversity in the English lowlands.
The Woodland Trust
(5)
www.macaulay.ac.uk/RELU/index.html
|
