Control of Wild Deer in Scotland Authorisations Guidance for Practitioners

Transcription

1 Control of Wild Deer in Scotland Authorisations Guidance for Practitioners Purpose of this document This document outlines the legal framework surrounding the control of wild deer in Scotland including the role of Authorisations in permitting activities that would otherwise be an offence. It is aimed as an aid to practitioners to show - the different types of authorisation available - who can work under authorisations and how to apply for them - the information we require to process applications - how we assess applications for Authorisations - the responsibilities of Authorisation holders Background The Deer (Scotland) Act 1996 (as amended) sets out the law for protecting and regulating wild deer in Scotland. It creates a number of offences in relation to killing or taking deer at certain times of year, at certain times of day or by certain methods. Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) may authorise individuals thereby giving them legal permission to shoot deer in circumstances where they would not normally have the right to do so. The two main examples of this are culling deer during the close season (see Table 1 below) and culling deer at night. This document provides guidance on authorisations for these activities*. *Note that the 1996 Act also includes provisions for authorisations to be issued for driving deer with vehicles for deer management purposes or the taking of deer during close seasons for scientific purposes. Anyone wanting to discuss such instances should contact the licensing team to discuss. Close seasons The close seasons for wild deer in Scotland are provided in Table 1 below. Outside of these dates you do not need an authorisation to shoot deer unless you are proposing to shoot at night. Shooting at night is taken as being from one hour after sunset to one hour before sunrise. However, to shoot outside of the close season you must either be the occupier of that land or have permission from the landowner to do so.

2 Species Sex Dates Red and sika deer Stags 21 st October to 30 th June Hinds 16 th February to 20 th October Roe deer Stags 21 st October to 31 st March Hinds 1 st April to 20 th October Fallow deer Stags 1 st May to 31 st July Hinds 16 th February to 20 th October Table 1. Close Seasons for wild deer in Scotland Authorisations: Basic Principles Authorisations can only be granted to shoot deer at night or out of season for certain purposes and where there is a need, to test that there no other reasonable means to address that problem. Purpose In order to grant an authorisation control must be necessary for one of the following purposes; - to prevent damage to agricultural land - to prevent damage to woodland - to prevent damage to the natural heritage - in the interests of public safety; and No Other Reasonable Means This means that we have to be satisfied that there are no other means (other than use of authorisation) that could reasonably be adopted to address the problem(s) being experienced. How we assess these criteria is discussed in more detail later in this document. Types of Authorisation There are two main types of authorisation; the General Authorisation and individual (sometimes referred to as specific) authorisations. The General Authorisation does not need to be applied for but anyone using it must ensure that they meet the criteria for which it can be used and that they can comply with its terms and conditions. Individual Authorisations are specific to particular situations. They are subject to an application being made to SNH. If granted they are issued to an individual to permit control over specified areas of land subject to certain conditions.

3 What type of authorisation do I need? The type of authorisation required will depend on the issue that needs to be addressed and the means by which you are proposing to address it. Night shooting authorisations A Night Shooting Authorisation is required for anyone proposing to shoot deer between one hour after sunset and one hour before sunrise regardless of the time of year or target species. If the proposal involves shooting deer at night and out of season they would also need to be covered by an out-of-season authorisation (see below). Out-of-season authorisations An Out-of-season authorisation is required for anyone proposing to shoot male or female deer outside of the close season for that sex/species (see Table 1). The type of authorisation required will be dependent on the sex (and for females, the age) of the deer proposed to be controlled as well as the specific issue that an authorisation is sought for. The General Authorisation is required to shoot deer out-of-season during the day to prevent damage to improved agricultural land or enclosed woodland. It does not allow killing of female deer over 1 year old between 1 st April and 31 st August. You do not need to apply for the General Authorisation, just to ensure that you can and do comply with its terms and conditions. An Out of Season Authorisation is required to shoot deer out-of-season during the day to prevent damage to unenclosed* woodland, the natural heritage or in the interests of public safety. It does not generally allow killing of female deer over 1 year old between 1 st April and 31 st August. This is a type of individual authorisation. An Out of Season (Female) Authorisation is required to shoot female deer over 1 year old between 1 st April and 31 st August. It can only be granted to prevent damage to agricultural land, woodland, natural heritage interests or in the interests of public safety. This is a type of individual authorisation. *A definition of unenclosed land is provided in Annex 1 Who can apply for an authorisation? Applicants should be the person experiencing the problem for which an authorisation is sought. This may be the owner, occupier or an agent or other person authorised to apply on behalf of the owner or occupier of the land in question. The General Authorisation permits the occupier suffering damage, or certain individuals authorised by them, to carry out the activities permitted by it.

4 Who can carry out control under an authorisation? Under the terms of the General Authorisation the owner/occupier, an employee(s) or someone who lives on that land, or anyone registered as fit and competent. Applicants for authorisations can list other individuals to carry out control on their behalf. In most cases those individuals have to be registered with SNH as Fit and Competent. The only exceptions, i.e. where controllers do not have to be registered as Fit and Competent are; For the General Authorisation for the culling on agricultural land or enclosed woodland and for specific Out of Season (Female) Authorisations controllers, do not need to be registered as fit and competent if they are an owner/occupier, an employee or someone who lives on that land. How to apply for authorisations You can find application forms for authorisations here. If help is required completing an application the applicant should contact SNHs licensing helpline on Area of Land Authorised The application must be clear in the area of land over which the authorisation is being applied for. This information is most usefully provided in map form with the property boundary and proposed control areas outlined. How we assess applications As discussed above there are two main questions that we need to answer before an authorisation can be granted; is there a valid problem requiring an authorisation and (other than 5(6a)) that is there no other reasonable means by which the problem can be addressed? It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide the evidence to answer both of these questions. This may require to be verified during a site visit by SNH staff. Assessing Purpose: Is there a valid problem? The applicant is expected to provide the following information to demonstrate the need for an authorisation(s); - The objectives for the site in question - What they consider to constitute damage to these interests - Why they consider that deer are responsible for that damage

5 Where an application is for public safety we would expect applicants to describe the public safety risk as well as how culling under an authorisation would address that risk. SNH staff or those from partner organisation may carry out site visits for some applications. More details on how and when we carry out site visits is provided below. Assessing no other reasonable means Authorisations are issued as an exception, i.e. they should only be granted if there is no other reasonable means that could resolve the problem being experienced. The alternatives that should be considered include; - control in daylight - control in season - control under the General Authorisation - fencing (temporary or permanent) There are a number of factors that need to be considered in the assessment of no other reasonable means. This includes the level of effort to address the problem as well as consideration of the interests of neighbouring landowners and, where necessary, the appropriate collaboration in this respect. Assessing Effort In assessing what is reasonable, we expect that applicants can demonstrate that they have put reasonable effort toward resolving the problem(s) in hand with one or more of these alternatives. There are many types of controller and control effort. This varies from full-time employees who are expected to control deer as part of their job to leaseholders and contractors who may be expected to limit damage to those providing informal assistance on an ad hoc basis. SNH will not make judgement on the best type of controller, however where it is clear that it has been within the gift of the applicant to have used other reasonable means and no or minimal effort has been spent on these, which may lessen or negate the need for out of season or night shooting Authorisations, then the SNH officer will advise the applicant that this must be addressed. As every situation is invariably different, SNH will require the effort to be quantified by the applicant and make a judgement on a case-by-case basis as to what constitutes reasonable effort in relation to an application.

6 The Code of Practice for Deer Managers, Deer Management Planning and Collaboration The Code of Practice for Deer Managers sets out how land managers can deliver sustainable deer management. It sets out their responsibilities and helps them identify what they must do, should do and could do to manage deer sustainably. The Code stresses the importance of managing deer collaboratively, of talking to neighbours and of planning together. Deer Management Plans Deer Management Plans help set out land managers objectives and how deer will be managed to meet these. This includes preventing damage. This should also include consideration of neighbours interest and collaborative approaches to deer management. Plans are therefore extremely useful in being able to demonstrate to what extent other reasonable means have been considered to address problems. When considering authorisation applications we will take into account the following; - If the applicant for an authorisation is a signatory to a Plan, they should be able to show how they have kept to the management measures agreed within it. This will include how well any longer-term solutions identified in the have been taken forward. - If cull targets have been collaboratively agreed through the plan and where it is recognised and acknowledged locally that out of season control has potential collective benefits. - Authorising out of season culls within the context of agreed overall cull targets is likely to better support collaborative and sustainable approaches to management. This is particularly relevant in the context of preventing damage from Red Deer stags where targeted culling out of season or at night is likely to be more effective than taking culls over wider ranges in season to prevent damage occurring. - Recognising that most collaborative DMPs have a timeframe of 5-10 years, SNH will take into account any material change such as changes of ownership or management objectives when assessing the likely relevance of previously agreed management prescriptions. Situations where there is no Deer Management Plan As described above the role of deer management planning should negate any onerous requirements for applicants to enter into conversations with neighbours as part of the application process. This however only works where local deer management fora are developed to deal with such issues and in many cases Authorisation applications may stimulate discussion for the first time. Despite this, and in accordance with the Deer Code, we expect the applicant in such situations to attempt to collaborate or deal with the issue with neighbours. As a minimum applicants should contact their nearest neighbours who might be affected by any

7 Authorisation before applying and in order to look for collaborative solutions. Evidence of such discussions should accompany any application. Collaborative solutions may be discussed at local deer management group level or if this is not possible then SNH WMOs may be able to assist. Site visits Site visits may sometimes be carried out to examine and discuss evidence to help in the assessment of an application. This might include evidence of damage, the occupier s objectives for the site, monitoring of impacts or the evidence that deer are responsible. In addition the visit may allow for more detailed discussion or clarification of other reasonable means, effort, collaboration or details of the Deer Management Plan. Site visits may be undertaken by SNH staff or other government agency staff on our behalf. The decision on whether or not to undertake a site visit will be made on a risk-based approach and will take into account factors including; - The existence or otherwise of a DMP - The level of collaboration and alignment with the Deer Code - Animal welfare issues - Public safety concerns - Previous experience of controller - Levels of conflict between adjacent land-uses - Previous authorisation For 5(6) (a) (Female) Authorisations site visits will be carried out by a member of SNH staff for every new application. In such cases particular attention will be paid to exploring the exceptional circumstances required in order to proceed with the application as well as how the applicant/controller intends to limit the potential risk to animal welfare. Examples of such exceptional circumstances might include a small group of roe deer trapped inside a fenced enclosure causing damage to a high value crop, or situations where deer are present on an airfield and proving a threat to safety. How we issue authorisations Wherever possible we will issue authorisations by but hard copies are available on request Authorisations will specify; - Who is permitted to carry out control - When control is permitted - Where control is permitted - The period of time that control is permitted - Any other conditions that must be adhered to

8 Failure to comply with the terms of an authorisation could result in an offence being committed and/or the removal of the authorisation so it is essential to ensure that all those involved read and understand its requirements. How long will an authorisation last? Authorisations may vary in length depending on the nature and extent of the impacts and damage being managed, short term impacts may only require authorisations for one or two weeks. These issues may be caused by- Where deer seek shelter or forage in areas they are not normally resident. Within enclosed areas. Where a public safety issue is caused. Where authorisations are required to deal with a long term issue SNH may take the view that the Authorised period may be up to 3 years. These may be caused by - Deer resident across a property with multiple objectives Deer moving between properties with similar land use objectives Deer causing public safety risks e.g. within a designated airport area This decision would be based on their being evidence including that- Damage is occurring or likely to occur for the period Authorised Effort in season and during the day has taken place and will continue to take place for the period Authorised. There is a site wide DMP and a local collaborative DMP The Deer Code is clearly being applied and that there is a forum for this to continue There have been repeat applications for the site with successful delivery of previous authorisations including returns. There have been repeat applications for the site where the same F&C controllers have been used successfully. During the period Authorised the applicant would be expected to provide, on an annual basis, information on- Any evidence of damage occurring including monitoring results Number of deer culled under Authorisation Effort made in season and during the day Continued collaborative communication This information should be provided on request on by ing those details along with Authorisation number to licensing@nature.scot. Failure to do so would be a breach of the authorisation conditions.

9 Responsibilities of authorised persons Authorisations are legal documents allowing people to carry out activities that would otherwise constitute an offence. Failure to comply by the terms and conditions of an authorisation may constitute an offence. The authorisation holder has the following responsibilities; To ensure that all controllers understand the terms and conditions of the authorisation To submit a return within seven days of the end of the authorisation detailing what has been undertaken. Controllers operating under an authorisation have the following responsibilities; To adhere to the terms and conditions of the authorisation To ensure that they follow best practice To ensure that they comply with all other firearms and health and safety requirements. When might we refuse or amend an authorisation? There are a number of reasons for Authorisations being refused or where an authorisation may need to have additional conditions placed upon it. These include; Reason Discretion to refuse if: Public safety Any legitimate concern Deer welfare Severity of welfare impact outweighs damage Other reasonable means and No culling effort in season or during daylight hours. effort Fencing issues Timescale No DMP or collaboration evident Owner / occupiers definition of damage Public sector objective for land overrides legitimacy of owner / occupiers. Application is spurious or lacks legitimacy Regulatory Previous authorisation returns not received and not forthcoming Authorisation unlikely to Objective unlikely to be met by authorisation prevent damage Failure to deliver on Applicant refuses to contact neighbours requirements of the Deer Code SNH may choose to add additional conditions to an Authorisation in order to deal with these issues. This might include limiting the number of deer that can be controlled, limiting the

10 period of control or the geographical area. In the event of an Authorisation being refused or additional conditions being added, SNH will always contact the applicant by letter fully explaining the reasons for the decision. SNH s Balancing Duties & Authorisations. In delivering any of our work, including deer authorisations, SNH is required by statute to take account of a range of other interests when discharging its remit. These duties are referred to as balancing duties and reflect the Government s aim of achieving an integrated approach in which particular objectives are not pursued without reference to other interests. These balancing duties require us to be aware of and take account of a range of other interests. This is important in ensuring that natural heritage aims are fulfilled in a way compatible with society s wider needs. SNH will seek to understand the needs of others through liaison, consultation, and working in co-operation with relevant interests as appropriate. SNH Balancing Duties are available at: It is within this policy framework that SNH may take additional decisions on the suitability of certain Authorisations applications. SNH staff will use the recognised approach to applying its balancing duties. In undertaking the delivery of this this assessment: - SNH may seek to assess the applications themselves or look at their overall potential impact at a deer range scale. - SNH may ask neighbours, communities, interest groups and other stakeholders to provide evidence of any potential impact of the Authorisation in question over that local deer range. - SNH may take into account any locally agreed collaborative deer management plan or assess the impacts using against the Public Interest Criteria using the SNH DMG audit format. - SNH will also take account of the Code of Practice on Deer Management in exercising its powers to grant authorisations. - Any decision taken on an application regarding SNH balancing duties will be taken with the evidence available to SNH at the time, should additional evidence be presented which is relevant SNH may choose to revise the Authorisation outcome.

11 It is rare that Authorisations are refused, or additional conditions applied on the basis of SNH s Balancing duties, but this may happen. Where SNH has done this in pursuance of its balancing duties we will write to those affected to clearly articulate the reasoning behind the decision as per the agreed SNH approach. Complaints Procedure In the event of an applicant being unhappy with the handling of any application or authorisation a member of staff will investigate further informing SNH customer relations officer of the complaint in line with the SNH complaints procedure.

12 Annex 1 - Definition of Enclosed Land The Act defines enclosed land as 'land enclosed by a stock proof fence or other barrier' - in SNH s view the barrier may be constructed of man-made material or a natural feature which prevents the free movement of stock between, on to or out of a particular piece of land. In order to be stock proof any fence must be in a state of repair which would reasonably be construed as preventing movement of stock on or off a particular piece of land. A natural barrier would have to provide a similar function and may include features such as rivers, lochs, islands or peninsulas where these would prevent stock movement. Strategic fencing may fulfil the function of making an area enclosed where this does not include other landownership interests. It is up to the land manager and controller to satisfy themselves that any area is enclosed. The risk of not acting under appropriate legal authority lies with them. It may be helpful to consider the following questions: a) Is the site enclosed by a stock proof barrier? Natural barriers would have to perform the same role as a stock proof barrier in that they prevent free movement of livestock (cows, sheep etc.). In most cases fencing on three sides and into a loch would reasonably be construed as having the intention to restrict livestock access to a site. b) Is the enclosed area within the one ownership unit? The barrier should only include one ownership area. Where multiple ownerships are enclosed within a larger or strategic fence (such as some larger forestry complexes) then the site would not be deemed to be enclosed. If tests a and b above are met then are the land use objectives within the whole enclosed area consistent with the prevention of damage to the woodland interest? Strategic fencing is a legitimate means of barrier provided test a and b are met. If there are multiple objectives within an enclosed area then these need to be consistent with the prevention of damage to the woodland needing protected. Strategic fencing of large woodland blocks often incorporate moorland which would be termed a natural heritage interest. Management over these areas is in most cases consistent with what is required for protecting the woodland. If stock are enclosed within the wider area (e.g. for tick management) for any period and could gain access to the woodland then this would not be consistent with the management objective of protecting the woodland.

13 Annex 2 Example of Authorisation Application SNH Office Use Only Prev. auth Auth. no Field Officer 1. APPLICANT (Please note: Incomplete forms will not be considered) Title Mr Surname A Forename Plicant Initial Address Agents House Tel No Invernaewhere Estate Fax No a-plicant@hotmail.com Post Town: Invernaewhere Mobile No Post Code: I am the: (select all that apply) IN3 8NW Owner Occupier Agricultural tenant Sporting tenant Agent x If you are an agent, who are you acting on behalf of?: Owner, Mr A Owner, Owners House, Invernaewhere Estate. 2. PROPOSED CONTROLLER/S and FIREARM CERTIFICATE DETAILS Controllers without valid FAC will not be added to any Authorisation Initials / Surname A Plicant A Controller Address Agents House Controllers House Invernaewhere Estate nvernaewhere Estate Post Town Invernaewhere Invernaewhere Post Code IN3 8NW IN3 8NW Tel. No Mob Tel Address a-plicant@hotmail.com a-conroller@hotmail.com FAC Number: FC FC Calibres to be used under authorisation(s): Expiry Date:.270, 6.5 x55.243, 7mm 27/12/22 21/12/22 Continue on separate sheet, if required.

14 3. TYPE OF AUTHORISATION REQUIRED (please note you may apply for more than 1 type of authorisation on this form) Please tick all that apply. Night Shooting only 18(2) Agricultural Land x Woodland x Public Safety Out of Season 5(6) Unenclosed Woodland x Public Safety Natural Heritage x 4. PROPERTY TO WHICH THIS AUTHORISATION IS APPLICABLE Please list the name of the Property and Property Code (if known) to which this Authorisation is applicable Property Name Invernaewhere Estate SNH Property Code SR CONTROL AREAS TO WHICH THIS AUTHORISATION IS APPLICABLE Please list the name/s of the control area(s) with the OS Grid Refs for the centre of each control area Provide a map showing the property boundary, proposed control areas and locations of greatest deer impact. Control Area Name(s) Letters Grid Ref. (6 figure) Control Area Name (s) Letters Grid Ref. (6 figure) Invernaewhere Forest NH Invernaewhere SSSI NH Invernaewhere Farm NH Please use an additional sheet to list further sites for control 6. DATES AUTHORISATION APPLIED FOR I Authorise The Person(s) Named at Section 2 for the Period: From 01/04/2017 To 31/3/ DETAILS OF DEER INTENDED TO BE KILLED, TICK AS APPROPRIATE Red x Roe x Sika x Fallow x Other (Specify) FIT AND COMPETENT: In most circumstances, the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996 (As amended) requires SNH, prior to issuing an authorisation, to establish that a controller is fit and competent. If the controller(s) nominated are not already on the SNH fit and competent register they must apply and provide evidence by either: 1. Submitting a copy of a Deer Management level two qualification (DSC Level 2).

15 2. provide references( two for each controller one of which must have reached DSC level 1) from two separate individuals who: Have known the controller for a minimum of two years Have a sound knowledge of the aspects of Best Practice necessary to cull deer in a fit and competent manner. Reference forms and accompanying information are available on request from Scottish Natural Heritage or on the SNH web site 8. CONVICTIONS: Are you aware of any offences under the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996 (as amended) which any of the proposed controllers, to the best of your knowledge, have been convicted of in the last five years? If yes, please provide the name of the controller concerned. No Convictions. 9. METHODS OF DAMAGE PREVENTION TRIED TO DATE: Please detail the steps taken to date (e.g. scaring, control in season etc.) and explain why it has not been possible to effectively limit damage without recourse to an authorisation. Invernaewhere Forest- This woodland is currently under a sporting lease to one individual who lives around 300 miles away. In season and under the General Authorisation this season they have culled 15 deer mainly roe over the whole woodland. We as owners have concurrent rights and despite requests to increase culling effort the sporting leaseholder has been unable to limit damage to an acceptable level. We have also been in contact with our woodland neighbours regarding the damage and red deer incursion but they have not responded. Invernaewhere SSSI This area is managed by estate staff member Mr A Controller who devotes 50% of his time controlling deer on the open ground and birch woodland SSSI. 150 red deer have been culled this year over the SSSI in line with the SSSI management plan and Invernaewhere DMG Deer Management Plan Fencing not suitable due to landscape concerns and cost of 15km of deer fence. Invernaewhere Farm This area is under an agricultural lease, the tenant has tried various ways of scaring the deer who only come in at night including bangers and other disturbance. No deer have been culled as deer are only present at night. 10. REASONS FOR APPLYING Please detail what your objectives for the proposed control site/s are? Invernaewhere Forest- Successful establishment of newly planted mixed woodland which has been planted under a recent grant aided scheme. Target establishment of 2600 stems per hectare by There are also areas of mature riparian woodland which we also keen to see regenerating. Invernaewhere SSSI- Delivery of SSSI targets set by SNH under our management plan. The unenclosed woodland needs to show regeneration over approximately 60% of the area. With reference to the open ground the targets set are less than 10% high trampling in blanket bog and less than 33% browsing on dwarf shrub heath (heather).

16 Invernaewhere Farm The tenant wishes to see successful establishment of recently planted silage fields. What is your definition of damage for the site/s? Invernaewhere Forest- Damage levels on newly planted mixed woodlands (230,00 trees planted last year) should not exceed 15% which is the target set by our forest manager. Invernaewhere SSSI- Damage by deer and other herbivores is putting the sites statutory conservation objectives at risk. For the unenclosed woodlands SNH s site condition monitoring has identified that continued browsing of the woodlands under layer has meant that potential regeneration is not getting past seedling stage and the woodland is aging, without action it is likely the woodland will loose part of its extent within the next ten years. For the open ground habitats Invernaewhere Farm Excessive grazing and poaching of newly planted silage fields, which has damaged around 25% of the fields area. Replanting net cost was c 15,000 to the tenant. What evidence is there to confirm deer are responsible for the damage? Invernaewhere Forest- Our woodland manager has been carrying out woodland monitoring as per Wild Deer Best Practice. This springs results indicated that damage to leader shoots on newly planted trees is variable over the site but that most palatable species have damage levels of 24%. A walk through survey of the riparian woodlands by a local conservation charity has suggested that no regeneration is occurring. In addition these areas were highlighted in the Native Woodland Suvey of Scotland as being in high to very high levels of impacts. Invernaewhere SSSI- As described above SNH site condition monitoring in 2015 detailed the pressures facing both the woodland and open ground from browsing, grazing and trampling. Report available on request. Recent open ground deer census revealed that c 300 deer were still present on the site despite culling effort in season. Invernaewhere Farm Tenant has been seeing c40 deer present on the silage fields at night via checking with spotlight. Walkover assessment of the silage fields by the applicant and the agricultural tenant has confirmed that large areas have been poached and grazed bare. How will the prevention of damage be measured? Invernaewhere Forest- Repeat woodland assessment in line with Wild Deer Best Practice guidance next spring to assess the success of the culling under Authorisation. Invernaewhere SSSI- Under the new Invernaewhere DMG deer management plan the estate has undertaken to carry out open ground and woodland damage assessments in line with Best Practice on a yearly basis to monitor the success of the plan. Invernaewhere Farm Successful establishment of a good silage sward will be visually inspected by the applicant and the agricultural tenant throughout the growing season.

17 How many deer have been controlled in season to prevent damage during the last 12 months? Invernaewhere Forest- 25 Roe deer Invernaewhere SSSI 150 Red deer Invernaewhere Farm 0 Please quantify effort e.g. number of days / outings Invernaewhere Forest- 45 Outings Invernaewhere SSSI 50% of 1 full time staff members time. Invernaewhere Farm 15 evenings/nights attempted culling & scaring & surveying. Is there a current Deer Management Plan or documented agreement on local deer management and what is the agreed position on the use of Authorisations? Invernaewhere SSSI is part of the wider Invernaewhere DMG. Last year the DMG commissioned a Deer Management Plan to deliver on all aspects of the Public Interest, this included delivery of the statutory conservation objectives for Invernaewhere SSSI. In section 27 the plan details that there is agreement between all DMG members that an additional 15% of the hind cull can be added on a yearly basis should damage still be occurring to the site. Invernaewhere estate has contacted the DMG to let them know that we intend to cull an extra 50 hinds as we have seen an influx over winter. The DMG chair has indicated that in line with the plan this is acceptable and the population model will be revised to reflect this. If no local agreement exists what discussions have you had with others who manage deer on this land, neighbouring landowners and managers or, where applicable, the local deer management group, to try to address the damage? What has been the result of these discussions? Invernaewhere Farm- the farm is surrounded by Invernaewhere estate ground, deer present on the lowground silage parks are moving in from our ground. We have been in contact with the tenant ion the past few weeks after they indicated they were suffering damage to their interests. The tenant has no time to control the deer and has nominated A Plicant and A Controller who are estate staff to carry out the control. Mr Aplicant is also the agent for both the estate and the tenant farmer and is under the law therefore allowed to apply for this Authorisation. We estimate that an extra deer will be culled, some of these will be from the same groups as those culled on the SSSI. There is no local agreement with the DMG regarding these extra deer culled for agricultural purposes and the Invernaewhere DMP did not forsee this issue arising. Invernaewhere estate and the agricultural tenant have however been in discussion with the local DMG chair who realises that these deer could be legally culled by the tenant and that the issue is one requiring immediate action. The 65 extra hinds are within the 15% contingency of the DMP and the DMG are therefore content that for this year only these extra deer are culled. The estate and the tenant farmer have agreed that in order that his situation does not continue into next year they will co- fund a deer fence between the agricultural land and the open hill/woodlands. This will reduce incursion but not solve the problem so the estate have agreed that a portion of their in season cull next year will be taken in and around the farm area. Invernaewhere Forest- The woodlands are shared between Invernaewhere estate and Strathnaewhere Woodland Company Ltd. The woodlands are managed with similar objectives in mind. The two woodland areas are both under Forest Grant Scheme and their publically circulated Deer Management Plans both contain reference to Out of Season shooting. No adverse feedback was received on this public consultation. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY APPLICATIONS ONLY

18 What evidence do you have that deer are posing a threat to Public Safety? (Only complete this and the next question if applicable.) N/A How will culling under authorisation reduce the risk to Public Safety? N/A FOR OUT OF SEASON APPLICATIONS TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO WOODLAND AND NATURAL HERITAGE ONLY Are Sheep and cattle currently present? Yes present on Invernaewhere Farm. 600 Sheep and 40 Cattle. If Cattle / Sheep are present, how many and how would they be taken into account when measuring damage? Areas of damage are currently not being used by livestock. GROUND DESIGNATED AS SSSI, SAC OR SPA: Where you are undertaking control on ground that is subject to a designation such as a SSSI, SAC, or SPA you must ensure that the control carried out under this authorisation would not be damaging to the site and that any consents required are in place. 12. I CONFIRM THAT: 1. I am the occupier of the land mentioned in section above; 2. all other information given in this form and in support of this application is, to the best of my knowledge, correct; 3. the taking or killing of deer is necessary to prevent damage or in the interests of public safety; 4. the killing of deer is necessary to prevent damage to crops, pasture, human or animal foodstuffs, or to woodlands; I ACCEPT IT IS A CONDITION OF ANY AUTHORISATION ISSUED THAT I UNDERTAKE TO RETURN THE AUTHORISATION AND REPORT THE NUMBER OF DEER KILLED WITHIN 7 DAYS OF ITS EXPIRY. Details of Authorisations issued, including names and addresses of Authorisation holders, will be stored and processed on a computer database. This information will be used by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) to undertake Authorisation functions. To do this we may have to discuss applications with third parties or disclose information about Authorisation decisions. In these cases, we will operate within the Data Protection Act That Act gives individuals the right to know what data we hold on them, how we use it and to which third parties it is disclosed. We will respect personal privacy, whilst complying with access requests under the Environment Information Regulations 1992 and any future open government legislation. Print Name: Signed:.. Date:

19 Annex 3 - Further Information Code of Practice SNH Authorisations Forms SNH Fit & Competent Register Forms Wild Deer Best Practice Night Shooting Code of Practice Scottish Natural Heritage, Great Glen House, Leachkin Road, Inverness, IV3 8NW Tel: Fax: Dualchas Nàdair na h-alba, Taigh a Ghlinne Mhòir, Rathad na Leacainn, Inbhir Nis, IV3 8NW Fòn: Facs: