Powered by GDPR plugin

Privacy Overview

My website uses cookies to gather information about how visitors use my website to help me improve its performance, and secondly, to improve the visitor experience when using the website by delivering pages more quickly or remembering user settings.

Additionally, videos on the website may use cookies created by third-party providers such as Flash or YouTube.

The information I collect is anonymous – it cannot be used to identify you personally.

You can adjust all of your cookie settings by navigating the tabs on the left hand side.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

  •  01241 873 058
  •  graeme.dey.msp@parliament.scot
Graeme Dey
  •   Coronavirus  
    •   Angus Restrictions
    •   Graeme’s Office
    •   Key Primary Sources
    •   Health & Welfare
    •   Business & Employment
    •   Housing & Education
    •   Justice, Food & Transport
    •   Volunteering Your Support
  •   News  
    •   Latest News
    •   Motions
    •   Speeches
  •   About  
    •   About – Graeme Dey MSP
    •   Carer Positive
    •   Cookies
    •   Data Protection GDPR
  •   Surgeries  
    •   Surgery Times
    •   Surgery Locations
  •   Contact  
    •   Contact Graeme
  •   Coronavirus  
    •   Angus Restrictions
    •   Graeme’s Office
    •   Key Primary Sources
    •   Health & Welfare
    •   Business & Employment
    •   Housing & Education
    •   Justice, Food & Transport
    •   Volunteering Your Support
  •   News  
    •   Latest News
    •   Motions
    •   Speeches
  •   About  
    •   About – Graeme Dey MSP
    •   Carer Positive
    •   Cookies
    •   Data Protection GDPR
  •   Surgeries  
    •   Surgery Times
    •   Surgery Locations
  •   Contact  
    •   Contact Graeme

Deer Management Speech

Deer Management Speech

Yesterday in Parliament, Graeme Dey MSP led a debate on deer management in Scotland in his role as Convenor of the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee.

You can watch Graeme’s speech here …

http://www.scottishparliament.tv/20170502_debates1?in=00:00:01&out=00:08:36

Or you can read the speech below …

Graeme Dey MSP for Angus South;

The report that we are considering this afternoon is the result of extensive committee scrutiny of SNH’s report on deer management, which the session four Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, as part of its work on the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016, asked the Government to produce no later than the end of 2016.

We thank everyone—stakeholders, clerks, the Scottish Parliament information centre and the independent experts that we heard from—for assisting us in the process.

It is fair to say that the topic of deer management provokes strong views; it is also fair to say that so too did SNH’s report. The committee’s task was to sift through the diverse opinions being offered on the content, to consider the evidence and to come to a view as to whether the progress made thus far represented the step change required, or whether that would in any case be delivered were the situation left to continue as it was. Although we recognised that considerable progress had been made in some areas of the country, our unanimous conclusion was that that progress did not and would not represent a step change.

Those members of the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee who also served on the RACCE committee in session four had a strong sense of déjà vu while listening to the evidence from some deer management interests. They said that it was too early to judge and that they had not had enough time. That was exactly what the RACCE committee, on which Angus MacDonald, Claudia Beamish and I served, was told about the deer code back in 2014—that the code had only been introduced in 2012 and that we needed to give it time to see the positive impact.

Biodiversity targets have to be met—and soon. We can no longer proceed with mañana as the mantra. In the upland context, many deer management groups still do not have action plans that adequately address the public interest and will result in positive outcomes for the natural heritage. I will come to the lowland context in due course.

As convener of the ECCLR committee, I will lay out the series of recommendations that we have made to the Government. The committee has come at the topic from two directions. First, we have identified specific measures that should be implemented by the Government. Secondly, we have suggested that the Government might convene a short-life working group to consider other aspects. The group should call on a range of expertise and, although it should involve deer management interests, it should be chaired independently of those interests and of SNH.

I will deal with those other aspects in order. The committee recommends that the powers under section 80 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016 are brought into immediate use and effect and deployed as required. Although we recognise that significant challenges remain around deer management in lowland Scotland, we are looking for that to be addressed as a matter of priority.

We are calling for a strategic approach to managing deer numbers and impacts. SNH should be responsible for determining cull levels in the public interest, deer management groups should carry out deer counts using a clear and agreed methodology in their area on no more than a five-year cycle and return planned deer cull details to SNH, while the Scottish Government, through relevant agencies and local authorities, should undertake deer counts in areas not covered by a DMG.

Sitting alongside that work, the close season for stags should be reviewed with the aim of ensuring that such restrictions on shooting promote rather than hinder effective deer management from both an ecological and crop protection perspective. Access to such data will, over time, identify trends on densities and inform appropriate culling levels based upon impacts at a local level. That will allow for local flexibility, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

There is a need for much greater clarity on public objectives and their relative importance should be set against private objectives at a local level and in each DMG area. Appropriate densities could then be set and both the densities and impacts monitored.

The committee is further of the view that the current powers—namely sections 7 and 8 of the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996—are inadequate. As the SNH report illustrates, section 7 agreements are failing to deliver. At the time of the report, 11 such agreements were in place. Deer density targets had been met in only six; habitat targets had been met in just three and partially met in two others.

SNH’s failure to use section 8 powers is seen by many as being down to a fear that they would be open to challenge. The committee recommends that the Government takes urgent action to devise alternative measures and simple provisions that lead to action to protect and to restore habitats and sites impacted by deer. An effective back-stop power fit for purpose is needed.

With similar urgency, we recommend that the Government commissions an analysis of incentives and their use in supporting deer management in the public interest. We were also unanimously of the view that an action plan must be prepared to deliver—as the Scottish Gamekeepers Association has called for—a publicly funded network of deer larders across mainland and island Scotland to support greater opportunities for participation in deer culling.

The committee has offered its thoughts on Scottish Natural Heritage’s performance on deer management. We are of the view that SNH has not provided the leadership that might have been expected and there has been a failure to adequately set expectations for deer management in Scotland.

SNH appears to have been unable or unwilling to enforce the legislation to secure the natural heritage interests. Further, we felt that knowledge and data gaps should have been addressed at an earlier stage by the commissioning of work in time to consider and incorporate the findings into the report. That said, the committee is concerned that SNH may not have the capacity to fully deliver all its duties, including deer management, without additional resources.

I turn to the proposal for a short-life working group. When taking evidence, we were struck by the range of expertise and thinking on deer management. We ask for that to be tapped into, to identify how best to deliver the actions that we have called for. That is not about kicking things into the long grass—far from it. We need to bring people to the table to work with a clear remit and to a tight timeframe to provide the Government with practical advice on the way forward for deer management in Scotland. The working group should report back no later than early autumn 2017.

Time constraints prevent me from going into the full detail of the suggested remit, but I will expand on two issues. One of the most striking aspects of the evidence that we received on lowland management was just how little had changed from the RACCE committee inquiry of 2013-14. By way of example, despite those issues having been flagged up in the previous parliamentary session, and despite SNH advising that a range of work was under way, just one additional lowland deer group had been established in the intervening period. It was acknowledged in the evidence-gathering process that in large areas of lowland Scotland there was no collaborative approach, a lack of data—the local authority performance in that regard was patchy—and there was no model, or mix of models, of deer management to be rolled out. We also learned that the Lowland Deer Network Scotland had not consulted its individual member groups before making its submission to the committee. Richard Playfair of the LDNS told us:

“I would like to think that we promote their views, but we do not necessarily know what their views are at any given time.”—[Official Report, Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee, 13 December 2016; c 9.]

That admission seems indicative of an organisation that is, perhaps, not functioning as effectively as it might.

We call on the Government to do three things, albeit with input from a short-life working group: first, to look at piloting a variety of new approaches, taking account of best practice examples; secondly, to review the approach to involving local authorities in lowland deer management, exploring one that encourages rather than requires their involvement; and thirdly, to examine the role and operation of the Lowland Deer Network, consider whether it is sufficiently independent of the agencies that fund its work, and determine what role it should play in promoting deer management in the future.

With regard to fencing, the committee is concerned that the costs are considerable and will continue to rise as existing fencing deteriorates. It was unclear to us whether those significant costs to the public purse are justified, when set against the possible benefits of increased culling. Our opinion is that a rebalancing may be required, but we seek an SNH examination of the evidence base around that issue to inform such a decision.

That is an overview of the report. I look forward to hearing from members of the committee and others as they explore its contents further.

I move, That the Parliament notes the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee’s 5th Report, 2017 (Session 5), Report on Deer Management in Scotland: Report to the Scottish Government from Scottish Natural Heritage 2016 (SP Paper 117).

 

  • Posted on 3rd May 2017
  • By Robert
  • In
  • Previous Next

Post Tags


About The Author

Robert
Constituency Assistant

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More Support for B&Bs, Larger Self-Catering PropertiesMore Support for B&Bs, Larger Self-Catering Properties
9,511 in Angus to be Hit by Universal Credit Cut9,511 in Angus to be Hit by Universal Credit Cut
Graeme: PM Must Protect Rights of EU NationalsGraeme: PM Must Protect Rights of EU Nationals
No Scottish Tories Oppose Universal Credit CutNo Scottish Tories Oppose Universal Credit Cut
Update to taxi grant criteriaUpdate to taxi grant criteria
Support for taxi and private hire driversSupport for taxi and private hire drivers
Angus News Monthly ColumnAngus News Monthly Column
Tory Fisheries Minister Admits Not Reading Brexit DetailTory Fisheries Minister Admits Not Reading Brexit Detail
SCOTTISH SEAFOOD EXPORTERS LOSING £1M A DAYSCOTTISH SEAFOOD EXPORTERS LOSING £1M A DAY
Latest Restrictions – CovidLatest Restrictions – Covid
GRAEME: TORIES HAVE BROKEN PROMISE TO FARMERSGRAEME: TORIES HAVE BROKEN PROMISE TO FARMERS
56,000 APPLICATIONS FOR SCOTTISH CHILD PAYMENT56,000 APPLICATIONS FOR SCOTTISH CHILD PAYMENT
OVER £3.2M FOR COMMUNITY CLIMATE ASSET FUNDOVER £3.2M FOR COMMUNITY CLIMATE ASSET FUND
GRAEME WELCOMES 113,459 VACCINATIONSGRAEME WELCOMES 113,459 VACCINATIONS
PRE-DEPARTURE COVID TESTING FOR SCOTLAND ARRIVALSPRE-DEPARTURE COVID TESTING FOR SCOTLAND ARRIVALS
GRAEME WELCOMES EXTENSION OF EVICTION BANGRAEME WELCOMES EXTENSION OF EVICTION BAN
HUGE GAPS IN UK BUSINESS SUPPORT & MISSING £375MHUGE GAPS IN UK BUSINESS SUPPORT & MISSING £375M
Stay Home. Protect The NHS. Save LivesStay Home. Protect The NHS. Save Lives
Roll-out of Astrazeneca vaccine gets underwayRoll-out of Astrazeneca vaccine gets underway
Approval for new COVID-19 vaccineApproval for new COVID-19 vaccine
Carer Positive

c[p

Arbroath Office
This Website

There is no public cost as a result of the creation and maintenance of this site. All costs are personally borne by Graeme Dey.

The Living Wage
Living Wage
Graeme Dey
Theme By WordPress Eden

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

You can find out more about which cookies we are using or switch them off in settings.