Dougan wrote:We've got a lot of deer in Dorset - the rate of deer shooting is more than sustainable, and you can get it in plenty of pubs and restaurants - but they can rarely tell what type of deer the venison came from, so I don't know which I prefer to eat. ....
Don't eat anywhere that can't tell you which venison they are serving nor where it came from. Each and every deer that enters the food chain must be registered with sex, species, general condition, any notifiable health concerns and location killed/stalked. The game dealer will have these and any place that is serious about their venison will ordinarily collect these details with the carcass/meat. Those places that are unconcerned are the types that would serve you red stag during the rut or perhaps source theirs from the local naughty boys.
There's a world of difference between fat farmed and lean hillside venison, robust red and sweet muntjac venison.
Dougan wrote:
As for spotting them - I find it easier to get close to the sika (but there are quite a lot down here), as I tend to see them on the edges of woods, where as the roe tend to be in the woods (although easier at this time of year, due to the rut). Last month I was walking down a path to some woods (on our range), and spotted a sika laying down in a bush about 70 yrds away - it had seen me, but I prettended not to have seen it - I continued down the path and got within 10 m of it - as soon as I stopped and looked at it, it was up and off....I could have dropped it with a hand gun if I'd wanted to.
You're not crediting the deer for the intelligence they have. I can guarantee you were spotted long before you think but were ignored as you perceived as not being a threat. It lost interest in you and then you surprised it by continuing to bore in on it. It's like when deer stand just on the other side of a hedge with heavy traffic or continue to feed completely unconcerned 20yds from the farmers tractor. Now watch their reaction when the stalker's car come along that forest lane or they spot someone they don't like the look of.....I've often thought the best way to observe deer is wear a bright orange mac, hide my rifle under a bobble hat and chat away to myself at the top of my voice.
Dougan wrote:
I've never really found it that challenging getting close (within 200 mtrs) to deer, so I'm not sure why it's called 'deer stalking' - would 'deer shooting' not be more appropriate? Now finding Adders - that's challenging...I've only ever seen a couple, when I've been deliberatly looking for them....
That's because you don't understand stalking. It would be 'shooting' if i shot at every deer i came across. Stalking is about managing a population of deer. I know roughly how many deer are on my patch, which sex and ages. I can even recognise on sight some of the louder characters. It's about observation and the only way you can do that is to get close to them. Can you consistently stalk into a group of deer to say 30-40yds, remain unnoticed for say five minutes and then get back out without ever spooking them? That's what stalkers do on a regular basis.
A stalker will have a cull plan and in most cases will choose a specific animal to cull long before they ever reach for the car keys. I may spend hundreds of hours on the land, but actually shooting the deer only totals perhaps a few hours in real terms, in total, e.g. small weak bucks/stags must be culled at the start of the rut to avoid excess stress on those whose bloodlines you wish to promote, spent bucks/stags should be taken at the end of the rut and unlikely to survive the winter, older does/hinds will require culling if weak or have had 2 or 3 dependants before the harsh weather. Spikers must always be taken before a rut and lame/diseased deer immediately.
So next time you go to that forest and spot a deer, consider if you could return and stalk into that exact same deer, regardless of it's location and take it on your own terms. Take it on your choosing and without spooking or causing undue disruption to the rest of the wildlife there?
