Ahead of tomorrow\u2019s Stage 1 debate in the Scottish Parliament, the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) has warned that the Natural Environment Bill poses several risks to the balance of deer management in Scotland.<\/p>\n
BASC has briefed MSPs on its main concerns and is urging a rethink of proposals that could undermine effective collaboration within the deer management sector.<\/p>\n
The Bill seeks to amend the 1996 Deer Act which would allow NatureScot to use regulations not only to prevent damage but also to compel land managers to take actions aimed at preserving, protecting, restoring, and enhancing landscapes under the existing provisions of Sections 6, 7, and 8.<\/p>\n
BASC\u2019s Scotland director Peter Clark said:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Scottish Government claims the Bill will modernise deer management to tackle the climate and nature crises, however, we have significant concerns that the Bill adds unnecessary bureaucracy without clear criteria for measuring success and without significant financial incentivisation.\u201d<\/p>\n
Around 80 per cent of deer management in Scotland is carried out by private landowners, including estates, farms, and rural businesses. BASC warns this balance could be undermined by heavy-handed regulation granting NatureScot expanded powers to intervene under the vague term of \u2018nature restoration\u2019.<\/p>\n
Scotland\u2019s largest shooting organisation is calling on the Scottish Government and NatureScot to focus on promoting, incentivising, and enabling landscape-scale deer management and a thriving venison sector, rather than imposing new regulation.<\/p>\n
Mr Clark added:<\/p>\n
\u201cOur members risk being placed under increasing pressure to deliver higher culls without clear criteria of what the expected outcome should be.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe believe there needs to be greater safeguards around rural livelihoods too, such as protecting country sports tourism and the associated jobs and impact on the economy.<\/p>\n
\u201cFurthermore, the proposal for mandatory training lacks any scientific or peer-reviewed evidence to justify it. Policy and legislation must be evidence-led.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe imposition of mandatory training may deter new entrants and reduce the number of experienced stalkers at a time when higher culls are needed. The failure to recognise existing qualifications or experience through grandfather rights also risks losing vital skills just as government expects greater deer control to meet climate and biodiversity targets.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBASC is championing the strong record of self-regulation of our members when it comes to deer management, because we can foresee the damaging impact that mandatory training will have to recreational stalking and lowland deer management in particular.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Bill focuses on regulating deer management rather than incentivising good practice. It hands NatureScot new powers to step in and manage wild deer for nature restoration, with details still to be confirmed in a yet-to-be-published Code of Practice.<\/p>\n
BASC strongly opposes the Bill\u2019s plans to impose mandatory training on all deer stalkers, a point raised in the Rural Affairs and Islands (RAI) Committee\u2019s Stage 1 report. The association argues that self-regulation has already upheld high standards, and new requirements could block entry at a time when more stalkers are needed to meet rising cull targets. Both NFU Scotland and BASC have raised concerns in a joint letter to the Agriculture and Connectivity Minister Jim Fairlie MSP about the impact on lowland deer management.<\/p>\n
Looking ahead to Stage 2, BASC will continue working with MSPs to lodge amendments which seek to address these concerns.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"