Richmond Park deer cull

georgee

Has this finished yet? also, what are the roads in the park like re: ice?

DonDaddyD

Why do they call it the Deer cull, are they killing deer?

Serious question.

Headhuunter

Big parks like Richmond often do deer culls. In the absence of natural predators like wolves and bears (which have died out in the UK), deer take over and destroy trees and other flora. This means that gamekeepers have to take the place of predators and remove the weakest specimens to keep populations at manageable levels... It keeps natures balances in check.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Why do they call it the Deer cull, are they killing deer?

Serious question.

Yes. Its either that or release wolves into the park to control the population that way. Tbh, I'd be all for that, would definitely help me get my 3x Lap times to where I'd like them.

asprilla

georgee wrote:

Has this finished yet? also, what are the roads in the park like re: ice?

Don't know if it's still on or not. I didn't notice the signs this morning, but I'll have a look on the way home.

Roads were fine this morning.

DonDaddyD

I did not once give a thought to the fact that Britian once had bear's and/or wolves....

Wonder when the last of each died out.

asprilla

DonDaddyD wrote:

I did not once give a thought to the fact that Britian once had bear's and/or wolves....

Wonder when the last of each died out.

Wolves were made extinct in the UK in the late 1700's. There is ongoing discussion about whether they should be re-introduced to Scotland and Northumbria.

Brown bears were extinct before 300BC and Lynx about 2,000 years ago.

Paulie W

I understand the notion that a cull has to take place in order to manage the deer population and preserve the eco-system but the irony that we have to kill these creatures because we've already wiped out their natural predators and because we restrict them to an area that is far too small for their development never escapes me.

notsoblue

Paulie W wrote:

I understand the notion that a cull has to take place in order to manage the deer population and preserve the eco-system but the irony that we have to kill these creatures because we've already wiped out their natural predators and because we restrict them to an area that is far too small for their development never escapes me.

Hmmm, I don't see any irony. The deer in Richmond Park are purely decorative. Its not like we wiped out the wolves naturally present in the park. Its hardly the wilderness . And besides, the deer have a pretty easy, nice life before they're shot.

Paulie W

notsoblue wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

I understand the notion that a cull has to take place in order to manage the deer population and preserve the eco-system but the irony that we have to kill these creatures because we've already wiped out their natural predators and because we restrict them to an area that is far too small for their development never escapes me.

Hmmm, I don't see any irony. The deer in Richmond Park are purely decorative. Its not like we wiped out the wolves naturally present in the park. Its hardly the wilderness . And besides, the deer have a pretty easy, nice life before they're shot.

Well, they're decorative now but they were there to be hunted originally. The irony, for me anyway, lies in the notion that we cull to protect an eco-system which we fcuked up in the first place.

notsoblue

Paulie W wrote:

Well, they're decorative now but they were there to be hunted originally. The irony, for me anyway, lies in the notion that we cull to protect an eco-system which we fcuked up in the first place.

Maybe, but putting it like that makes things seem like we have some kind of collective responsibility to preserve natural deer and wolf habitat and we failed. :P I'm not sure what our society would look like if we were still in a situation where wolves roamed the countryside hunting wild herds of red deer!

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

I understand the notion that a cull has to take place in order to manage the deer population and preserve the eco-system but the irony that we have to kill these creatures because we've already wiped out their natural predators and because we restrict them to an area that is far too small for their development never escapes me.

Hmmm, I don't see any irony. The deer in Richmond Park are purely decorative. Its not like we wiped out the wolves naturally present in the park. Its hardly the wilderness . And besides, the deer have a pretty easy, nice life before they're shot.

Well it (wot Pauile wrote) is technically irony....

Headhuunter

notsoblue wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

I understand the notion that a cull has to take place in order to manage the deer population and preserve the eco-system but the irony that we have to kill these creatures because we've already wiped out their natural predators and because we restrict them to an area that is far too small for their development never escapes me.

Hmmm, I don't see any irony. The deer in Richmond Park are purely decorative. Its not like we wiped out the wolves naturally present in the park. Its hardly the wilderness . And besides, the deer have a pretty easy, nice life before they're shot.

We DID wipe out wolves and other large predators, largely because they were killing deer and other game in parks like Richmond, which were the leisure hunting grounds of royalty and noblesin the Middle Ages. Gamekeepers were instructed to eliminate natural predators because landowners wanted as much game as possible available for hunts.

BigJimmyB

Look, sod all that....we're toying with the idea of having Venison on 25/12 - does anyone know if they have any going cheap?

notsoblue

Headhuunter wrote:

We DID wipe out wolves and other large predators, largely because they were killing deer and other game in parks like Richmond, which were the leisure hunting grounds of royalty and noblesin the Middle Ages. Gamekeepers were instructed to eliminate natural predators because landowners wanted as much game as possible available for hunts.

That was a *long* time ago. Its hard to view it now as some kind of breach of nature stewardship ethics :P

DonDaddyD

Try local butchers in the area. The more posh in appearance the better. Lovely one in Wimbledon.

Headhuunter

notsoblue wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

We DID wipe out wolves and other large predators, largely because they were killing deer and other game in parks like Richmond, which were the leisure hunting grounds of royalty and noblesin the Middle Ages. Gamekeepers were instructed to eliminate natural predators because landowners wanted as much game as possible available for hunts.

That was a *long* time ago. Its hard to view it now as some kind of breach of nature stewardship ethics :P

Yeah but it was a long time ago that wolves and the like were eliminated! It's been hundreds of years! It was a "breach of nature" carried out by our ancestors. Having said that, I'm sure wolves would have died out anyway simply due to the destruction of woodland and forests in the UK...

DonDaddyD

If Wolves were around today, poor people and their kids - you know the ones that live in blocks of flats and who have babies to get more benefits and a house in Kensington - would have tried to keep them as pets to defend their endz, their 'tag' name and postcode.

Pufftmw

BigJimmyB wrote:

Look, sod all that....we're toying with the idea of having Venison on 25/12 - does anyone know if they have any going cheap?

If they don't, then try http://www.denhamestate.co.uk - they supply many of the top restaurants & hotels throughout the UK, biggest deer farm in the UK

Kieran_Burns

BigJimmyB wrote:

Look, sod all that....we're toying with the idea of having Venison on 25/12 - does anyone know if they have any going cheap?

Nah.

Venison's very deer at the moment.









(I can't believe I'm the first to write that)

UndercoverElephant

Kieran_Burns wrote:

(I can't believe I'm the first to write that)

cee

in scotland at least, the deer commission (now absorbed by scottish national heritage) tells landowners how many deer are an acceptable number on their land.

the farmer is responsible for culling them, then, once a year, SNH do a headcount...

if there are more than there should be, SNH then come in...cull the deer, and charge the landowvers for the cull service at high enough rate that it is punitive.

rjsterry

Paulie W wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

I understand the notion that a cull has to take place in order to manage the deer population and preserve the eco-system but the irony that we have to kill these creatures because we've already wiped out their natural predators and because we restrict them to an area that is far too small for their development never escapes me.

Hmmm, I don't see any irony. The deer in Richmond Park are purely decorative. Its not like we wiped out the wolves naturally present in the park. Its hardly the wilderness . And besides, the deer have a pretty easy, nice life before they're shot.

Well, they're decorative now but they were there to be hunted originally. The irony, for me anyway, lies in the notion that we cull to protect an eco-system which we fcuked up in the first place.

We didn't fcuk it up in the first place unless you are referring to Bronze Age forest clearance: it's an entirely man-made environment (eco-system is way to grand a word to describe Richmond Park) created to provide somewhere for royalty to have fun hunting near their palaces in London. Even relatively wild areas like Putney Heath/Wimbledon Common are managed to maintain a particular heathland environment that wouldn't exist had we not cleared the forests in the first place.

Berk Bonebonce

Vehicles are much more efficient killers of deer than wolves.


Appropriate Action in Case of Non-Fatal Deer Strikes

Note that if you ever witness a deer strike, and the animal is not killed outright, there usually exists a 24 hr service that you can ring for the humane killing of the deer. I guess the local Police might have this number. Humane destruction of the injured animal is often performed by Forestry Commission Rangers, and what they most usually need is an exact location. Otherwise, injured deer can have a pretty miserable death in some ditch next to a road.

georgee

Nice to see at least one person answered the question!?

As for why it takes them two months, those deer are so tame i'm pretty sure I cuold do the same job in two hours armed only with a hammer.

itboffin

georgee wrote:

Nice to see at least one person answered the question!?

As for why it takes them two months, those deer are so tame i'm pretty sure I cuold do the same job in two hours armed only with a hammer.

Nice

I was almost taken out by a car that had just hit a deer then swerved across the road afterwards, pointless delayed reaction from the driver.

That deer was quite literally smashed to bits, the car (volvo) looked like it had just driven into a wall. I dragged the still twitching carcase into the verge, finding something solid to get a hold off wasn't easy, the best part was when the driver asked do you think it's dead? :shock:

:roll:

Nasty stuff

Dan_K

itboffin wrote:

georgee wrote:

Nice to see at least one person answered the question!?

As for why it takes them two months, those deer are so tame i'm pretty sure I cuold do the same job in two hours armed only with a hammer.

Nice

I was almost taken out by a car that had just hit a deer then swerved across the road afterwards, pointless delayed reaction from the driver.

That deer was quite literally smashed to bits, the car (volvo) looked like it had just driven into a wall. I dragged the still twitching carcase into the verge, finding something solid to get a hold off wasn't easy, the best part was when the driver asked do you think it's dead? :shock:

:roll:

Nasty stuff

Am I right in thinking that because it wasn't you that hit it, you'd have been entitled to take it home for dinner?
Would it be a grey area because it was actually you that performed the "death strike" ?(sounds like a WWE wrestling move doesn't it??!!)

itboffin

It would have been difficult to get home seeing as I was on my CX bike, plus we have all the game you could ever want.

CXXC

itboffin wrote:

plus we have all the game you could ever want.

can we all come round yours for a stag party then?

CXXC

CXXC wrote:

itboffin wrote:

plus we have all the game you could ever want.

can we all come round yours for a stag party then?

I'll save you all the bother...

[/quote]

Headhuunter

georgee wrote:

Nice to see at least one person answered the question!?

As for why it takes them two months, those deer are so tame i'm pretty sure I cuold do the same job in two hours armed only with a hammer.

I think the idea of a cull is to mimic nature and take out the weaker specimens, I suppose that takes time to observe herds and work out which are diseased and weak, it's not an excuse for Texas Chainsaw Massacre (with a hammer)! If it was a question of getting it done as soon as possible they could close the park, borrow a machine gun and just spray entire herds with bullets until they got the number required!