After blogging about how this sign breached access rights ten days ago (see here), I was delighted to be informed by the Cairngorms National Park Authority yesterday that it has now been removed by the Balmoral Estate. The CNPA Access Team have said that they now going to talk further with the estate about a new sign. I trust this will take account of the advice in the Scottish Outdoor Access Code that signs attempting to limit access to forest and woodland for deer stalking purposes “are generally not necessary”.
Since writing the post, I have been contacted by three separate people saying they had seen the signs on occasions going back at least a year. The signs have probably been up a lot longer. Experienced people who know their rights ignore these signs, and rightly so. The issue is that many visitors don’t know their rights and tend to follow “advice” from estates, including the notorious Welcome to the Moor signs (see here) which imply anyone stepping off a path is damaging wildlife.
This raises the question why more committed outdoor recreationists don’t complain to the access teams in Councils or our two National Park Authorities. I guess part of this is because of the perceived hassle. The Cairngorms National Park Authority, for example, won’t just accept a photo and a grid reference, they require a form to be filled in! It took me a month to fill in the form for the trespass sign at the MacDonald Aviemore Resort (see here). It’s also perhaps because of a perception that reporting signs that contravene the Scottish Outdoor Access Code makes no difference. The removal of the Balmoral sign in just ten days disproves that.
It will inspire me to have another go at getting the Welcome to the Moor signs amended or removed. The whole point of access rights is that, unlike rights of way, they give you the right to step off the path or indeed wander over the countryside without using any path at all.
Yes, these “Welcome to the Moor” signs all need to be removed or have the have the words “It is recommended to keep to paths and tracks when possible” obliterated. They are not compliant with the right to roam legislation (Part 1 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003) but have been spreading like a virus through Scotland in recent years. The main reason for this wording is probably that the estate does not want any members of the public to see what they are doing away from the path or track. This could include the illegal trapping, poisoning and killing of golden eagles and other supposedly protected species. As such illegal activity appears to be rife these days perhaps estates with Welcome to the Moor signs should be priority areas for investigation with as much public access as possible away from the paths and tracks given maximum encouragement by the National Parks and other Access Authorities.
Pity if someone got shot because they had no warning of deer management activities going on in the area.
JMT, NTS, RSPB and others all seem to manage to cull deer without resort to keeping folk off the hill for several weeks. And they do it very sucessfully too, judging by regeneration on their land.
Any stalker would be acting recklessly if they fired a shot without being able to see EXACTLY where the bullet might go. Stalkers are also required to be ‘fit and competent’, so there should be no risk.
Accidents happen. A carefree walker bumbling into view just as the stalker’s field is narrowed down to those crosshairs through a scope, could be most unfortunate.
The shooting accidents I am aware of involve people on pheasant shoots shooting each other, not professional stalkers who are normally employed to shoot deer in woodland. For anyone who is concerned however about walkers being shot by stalkers, however, this sign is likely to be counterproductive. I have now found out it had been there at least a year. On how many days during this time I wonder was Balmoral stalking in the vicinity of the road they tried to close? Such signs should only be up when shooting is taking place otherwise they become discredited.
Oh my ! Padded cell please
Utter clap trap. If a stalker is not a safe shot then they must lose their right to shoot.
The CNPA are being a little bureaucratic aren’t they? My local access team in the Borders just require an email to get going – I suspect most councils are the same.
Thank you, Nick, for getting the sign taken down. I agree that I need to get more active about complaining about such signs and will try and improve.
With regard to getting shot, I don’t believe that there is an appreciable risk of getting shot by a competent stalker. The problem is that you will ruin his shot and most of us want more deer shot, not less. I have been out a lot during the stalking season just past and made a point of calling the stalker a couple of days before planning to be there. i found them very helpful and, on the odd occasion that there was a problem, happy to suggest a mutually acceptable compromise. I still got to go where I wanted but by a slightly different route. More of us walkers should be speaking to the stalkers.
I suspect the biggest issue for stalkers is not having their shot spoilt but that of a paying client. A few weeks ago I was walking the ridge from the Battery to Carn Bhac on the Mar Lodge Estate – NTS says in Heading for the Scottish Hills that there are no issues with stalking – and lots of hinds, with a stag, flowed over the ridge in front of us. Further along the ridge we looked back and saw two people, one madly gesticulating at us. This is on the part of Mar Lodge where Field Sports are still practised and I suspect the issue was the stalker had a paying client. We were a bit apprehensive about descending into Glen Ey – on the Mar Estate – and passed two stalking vehicles near the ruined lodge. One, with a solitary stalker, passed us on our way back and waved very cheerily. I remarked that he knew where to shoot deer where he was very unlikely to ever come across walkers