Kill deer or go to prison: Scottish Government must drop Lorna Slater's scary plan to force landowners to carry out culls – Tom Turnbull and Ross Ewing

After the minister responsible, Lorna Slater, departed her role, the question now is whether the Scottish Government will shelve the plans outlined in its consultation and instead work with landowners and deer managers, rather than against them, in managing Scotland’s deer population.

To some, deer are a much-loved component of Scotland’s natural heritage, rightfully in their place. To others, they’re a challenge when it comes to ambitious peatland restoration and woodland regeneration targets.

Trying to navigate those divergent positions can be tricky. It’s worth stating we do not disagree with the government’s desire to promote nature restoration. Some recent announcements are welcome, not least the creation of a national venison subsidy scheme and funding for larder facilities announced in response to the news that Scotland will miss key 2030 climate targets.

However, proposed ‘deer management nature restoration orders’ (DMNROs) are contentious. Their imposition by NatureScot would facilitate deer culling and other management activities to achieve nature restoration. So far, so good, but the DMNRO is not a request – it’s an order to kill deer, signed off by ministers if there are subjective benefits to be gained from nature restoration. If a landowner fails to comply, then there could be consequences as serious as those outlined earlier.

Get our weekly opinion newsletter for expert analysis from The Scotsman’s team of columnists

It really is scary stuff – made worse by the fact that the evidential threshold for imposing an order is predicated entirely on NatureScot’s discretionary assessment of the benefits of ‘nature restoration’. It’s hardly a high bar – and not an argument you are likely to win if you exercise your proposed right to appeal to the Scottish Land Court.

The DMNRO concept is completely flawed by an unassailable fact that even Lorna Slater was forced to acknowledge: wild deer are not Scotland’s only herbivores. How is NatureScot supposed to distinguish between the impacts of deer and other herbivores, such as the protected mountain hare, which may be providing a barrier to nature restoration?

The question of herbivore impacts is exacerbated further when you consider the areas which might be subject to a DMNRO in the future. They are not single landholdings – they’re vast expanses of land known as ‘deer management priority areas’. Is the Scottish Government seriously saying NatureScot will be assessing and differentiating herbivore impacts on that scale? It seems at best implausible.

The government has succeeded in uniting private landowners and deer managers against this policy. These are the very people who are already responsible for delivering some 80 per cent of the annual cull.

The DMNRO is not evidence-based. It looks and feels like a tool to beat landowners and deer managers for no obvious public benefit. Thankfully, government now has an opportunity to reshape its approach with a new minister at the helm. Our hope is that the government recognises that the DMNRO is unequivocally not what Scotland’s deer managers need to deliver for nature.

Tom Turnbull is chair of the Association of Deer Management Groups; Ross Ewing is director of moorland at Scottish Land and Estates