In Newsletter 26, Autumn 2004, there were a number of contributions on the subject of deer and fences, including one from the WTS. The subject remains very much a live one for us, as we continue with our work of new native woodland establishment to the west of Glen Devon. I can comment as a forester, although we obtain specialist expertise to help us with decision making and the management of deer.
Our experience on the most northern of our Ochils sites, Glen Sherup, is perhaps interesting as it highlights the challenges of working without fences to manage deer. In 2004 we still had hopes of achieving woodland establishment on this site with only a "deflection" deer fence above the Glensherup Burn. The decision taken not to deer fence at Glen Sherup is in accordance with Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) best practice in situations where it is considered that there is scope to achieve deer densities that are compatible with woodland establishment.
Between autumn 2002 and winter 2005 there was a huge and ever-increasing input of management and contractors' time on deer observation and culling, browsing assessments and liaison with neighbours, all ultimately to no avail. Browsing remained at a level such that each year almost the entire annual growth on the trees was being eaten by roe deer. There is a narrow window of opportunity in establishing woodland, and we were increasingly at risk of not achieving the desired end result of healthy young trees with a future.
The approved Environmental Statement for this site required that, in the event that deer browsing damage were to become excessive, and should other options to limit damage fail, then the site be deer fenced. We explored those options and consulted with FCS, Deer Commission for Scotland, RSPB, FotO and others. Under the "Joint Agency Statement and Guidance on Deer Fencing (2004)" the assessment was that the impacts of a deer fence would be on landscape and access, but low in each case. In the spring of 2006, approval was given by FCS to heighten the existing boundary fence to deer height until such time as the trees are established. This included the erection of new gates and stiles at key access points identified by FotO, to reduce the impact on access. The fence-heightening and access works were completed by early summer 2006.
Even after only one season of growth, the difference is remarkable, with rapid height growth from trees held in check but still with vigorous root systems. Deer fencing is not the answer, nor a long-term solution. We continue with deer management and culling, and we will look to reduce the fences to livestock height once the woodland is established. In the longer term, I am hopeful that the deer fences will be seen as just a small hurdle to cross (no pun intended) to achieve a wonderful habitat for people and wildlife. In a future article, perhaps we can report the return of the mountain or bilberry bumblebee.