On open range and above the natural tree line, deer have had a continuing variety of effects on their habitats. Although at appropriate densities they will maintain habitats, at high densities they can reduce botanical diversity, for example driving a change from heather moorland to grassland and at low densities can allow vigorous coarse vegetation to expand, thus reducing species diversity. There remains a need to develop a common understanding of what is meant by overgrazing in different habitats and there is a need to reduce pressure in the areas of remaining overgrazing.

Additionally, deer stalking is of cultural significance, being a historic and traditional use of the land. This is especially important where traditional techniques, such as the use of ponies for carcase extraction are still used. Although the hunting of deer is widespread throughout the world, the traditional practice of stalking on the open hills of Scotland is probably unique.

Deer management and sporting activities provide employment, which helps to sustain local communities. They are also an important tourism asset, providing enjoyment to many visitors. These important socio-economic benefits have not been adequately quantified and this issue is currently being addressed by the CNPA. It is important that the CSDMG remain engaged with the CNPA as this develops.
There may be more public involvement in deer management in future years due to opportunities to provide FC funding for deer management measures under the new Scottish Forestry Grant Scheme.

Woodland deer densities are estimated from dung counts as part of the Forestry Commission Scotland Deer Management Plans. Earlier estimates in Glenmore and Inshriach forests indicated higher densities than are compatible with woodland regeneration or the enhancement of biodiversity. However, these densities have now been reduced to the target densities of 5-10 deer km-2 in both Inshriach and Glenmore forests.

Deer numbers at Glenfeshie are currently being reduced to facilitate the regeneration of the native pinewoods. Deer population sizes have been reduced in some areas, such as Abernethy, Glenmore, Invereshie and Rothiemurchus, as a result of increased culling to reduce grazing impacts, resulting in considerable localised improvements in woodland regeneration.

“Deer fencing, when properly planned for, constructed and maintained, can be an effective way of controlling deer to allow different land-uses to co-exist in close proximity and to protect public safety.

Consideration must be given to the full range of options for achieving appropriate deer densities before deciding on whether or not to approve or financially support the use of deer fences. Decisions on whether to cull or fence should take account of objectives, costs and the pros and cons of each method. Where deer fencing is considered an appropriate approach, the process for identifying, assessing and mitigating any adverse effects, as set out in the following guidance, is to be followed. In circumstances, where it is not possible to satisfactorily mitigate adverse effects, approval or financial support should not be given. Otherwise, the final decision must be based on cost-effective long- term solutions, including the cost of fence removal. Deer dependent on the fenced off area should be culled.”

Deer fencing by CSDMG members will take account of this policy and recommendations. Deer fencing can be a valuable management tool. Fencing can effectively protect vulnerable habitats including woodlands, wetlands and riparian areas from overgrazing, especially where there are relatively high densities on adjacent range. Strategic fences can limit the need and reduce the total length of fences by enclosing several vulnerable patches. However, in some circumstances fences can present problems and in others they may be unacceptable. Fences can impact visually on the landscape and act as a barrier to access. Ecologically, fences can adversely affect woodland ecosystems due to the undesirability of a total exclusion of grazing, though this can be modified by reducing the time of exclosure. Fencing can also cause mortality in vulnerable bird populations, especially woodland grouse, due to birds flying into inappropriately sited fences. The use of appropriate specifications of fences, including the use of electrified wires and marking fences, can mitigate adverse impacts.