Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill - deer management: final business and regulatory impact assessment

Section 3: Costs, impacts and benefits

Quantified costs to businesses

Direct costs and resource costs resulting from the changes to the 1996 Act made via the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill will mainly affect Scotland’s land-managing businesses and sectors, this includes: forestry, farming, crofting, conservation, estate management, water management and carbon management. Many landholdings may be involved in the management of some or all of these elements.

Cost Expenditure

Across Scotland landowners, managers, occupiers and deer practitioners from within the various sectors and groups affected by the proposals, are already expending considerable time, effort and funds to deliver modern and proactive deer management in order to:

• Reduce deer damage impacts and associated costs to their land and natural capital.
• To improve productivity and income stream potential
• To deliver a range of land management objectives and contribute to Scottish Government policies by enhancing and restoring nature and by developing mitigation and adaption of their land to improve climate change resilience.

These efforts include; the provision of accurate information and documentation to NatureScot (e.g. via cull returns), well-informed deer management planning, the delivery of increased deer culls, collaboration with neighbours, and use of competent stalkers who apply high standards of deer management practice and animal welfare.

The Bill will have a limited effect on most owners and occupiers of land in Scotland, as they are already resourced and carrying out appropriate deer management. While there might be an increase in the amount of deer management they are undertaking, this will be progressive over multiple years. In some cases, this might be a large scale increase in their deer management, this would be in circumstances where there is inadequate deer management already, we estimate for most the increase will be around 10-20%.

Likewise, the proposals should have minimal costs and impacts on professional, recreational, volunteer or fee-paying stalkers. If deer culls increase significantly, it is likely that there will be increased stalking opportunities for stalkers in the relevant locations.

The proposals will also benefit venison dealers who currently apply for and pay for a Venison Dealers Licence (“VDL”). Under the proposals (i.e. repeal of the provisions in the 1996 Act which require VDL ) they will no longer have to do so in future.

The businesses, organisations and individuals who will be most heavily affected by some of the direct costs relating to the proposed changes and potential interventions will be landowners, managers, occupiers and deer practitioners from across the sectors who are:

• Not currently engaged in any deer management on their land or are carrying out insufficient deer management on their land.
• Actively maintaining high deer densities for the purposes of commercial business.
• Carrying out deer management but do not hold any formal qualifications.

The changes the Bill makes are intended to support NatureScot’s use of regulatory powers, to enter into voluntary control agreements and compulsory control schemes for an additional purpose (nature restoration). This is likely to lead to a slight increase in the number of voluntary control agreements, and an increase of control schemes to around approximately one or two per year. There is, therefore, likely to be an increase in costs to owners and/or occupiers who are being asked to, or in some cases, required to cull more deer than they do currently. These direct costs to individuals and businesses are set out in the Financial Memorandum accompanying the Bill^[5].

With regard to qualifications, the Bill includes provisions to amend the existing power to introduce a register of those authorised to shoot deer in Scotland. It is the intention that this register be brought into effect shortly after the Bill is enacted. There may be some cost to individuals and/or deer management businesses to meet the standard of competence to register (ie via a Deer Stalking Certificate or similar), the Financial Memorandum also sets out further information on the potential costs of this. At this stage these costs are indicative, as the detail of the register of authorised persons will be set out via secondary legislation during implementation, and at that point, the impact of the regulations on businesses will be considered again. However, it is intended that the impact on businesses and individuals will be minimal.

Framework of Costs

As a result of a range of variabilities including; terrain, remoteness, upland/lowland, deer species involved, size of landholding, types of natural capital on the land to be protected/enhanced, existing resources etc, the costs may vary considerably from one landholding or business to the next.

NatureScot has therefore developed a Framework of Costs which includes a working range for each of the key costs which can be applied to the required measures and to specific landholdings to take into account the range of variable circumstances.

Costs relating to the proposed changes and the measures required by NatureScot may include expenditure for:

• Supplying Deer Management Plans within the timeframe requested by NatureScot, which can be no less than a minimum of three months.
• Carrying out proactive deer management (such as culling) and implementing section 7 Control Agreements.
• Agreeing, implementing and complying with a section 8 Control Scheme and measures.
• Costs for deer measures or actions paid for and delivered by NatureScot on a landowner's or occupier’s behalf.
• Supplying information or documentation relating to deer management to NatureScot.
• Registering as fit and competent to shoot wild deer in Scotland and/or to be authorised to carry out one or more specified activities (such as close season shooting or night shooting).
• Allowing NatureScot entry on to land following notice of between five days to one month, in order to quickly assess deer damage impacts and instigate urgent deer measure interventions, where required.

Scottish firms’ international competitiveness

The provisions in Part 4 of the Bill do not have any direct effect on Scottish businesses ability to compete internationally. Part 4 of the Bill does not have any direct effect on Scotland’s attractiveness as a destination for global capital investment

Benefits to business

Cost Savings and Benefits

Over the medium-long term, implementation of these provisions should result in savings to the public sector, and to businesses overall.

These savings and benefits can be realised by the significantly increased and sustained culling of deer in the public interest to help facilitate positive land use transformation and will include:

• Protecting and enhancing past, current and future investment in stewardship of the land by the private and public sectors.
• Improving carbon management by increasing carbon capture and reducing carbon (and methane) emissions.
• Reducing biomass/nutrient offtake from the land.
• Achieving afforestation programmes via the free-growth of planted and naturally regenerating trees and by enhanced plant and tree species diversity.
• Improving forest productivity by improving timber volume, quality and value.
• Increasing opportunities for business growth and added-value in agriculture by protecting crops, grazings and by, for instance, realising the potential for native woodland creation/restoration or agro-forestry on crofts and farms.
• Protecting and enhancing depleted and restored peatlands.
• Enhancing ecosystem services, habitat connectivity, the basic natural cycles of water/nutrients/life, and wider soil and ecological condition.
• Improving water flow/retention, quality and temperature.
• Significant savings on operational deer management costs for many land managers involved in the proactive and sustainable deer management as the incidence of deer migrating in from neighbouring properties gradually decreases.
• Gradual reductions in the use of deer fences and plastic tree shelters (as background deer numbers reduce).
• Short-medium term increases in deer carcass and venison production.
• Reductions in deer vehicle collisions

There should, as a result of the above deliverables, be widespread benefits to the wider community of Scotland of an economic, social and environmental nature. A range of forestry, agriculture, conservation, carbon management, water management, deer management and venison-processing businesses and supply chains should benefit over the medium-long term from the positive outcomes outlined above.

The proposed requirement for NatureScot to register confirmed deer control schemes in the Land Register of Scotland or record them in the General Register of Sasines introduces a measure of transparency rather than additional regulatory burden. This change applies only in situations where deer control schemes have been confirmed under existing statutory powers, typically following the failure of voluntary deer management plans under section 6 and deer control agreements under section 7 of the 1996 Act. Such action will only have occurred where a ground for intervention under sections 6ZA or 6ZB of the Bill has been met, establishing a demonstrable need for deer management on that land. The effect of this should be that a new owner who buys the land will be subject to the same requirements to take deer management action as set out in the control scheme as the previous owner of the land.

Under current arrangements, a confirmed control scheme applies to the current owner or occupier of land, but when the land is sold, any new owner is not bound by the terms of that control scheme. However, this does not remove the underlying requirement for deer control. Where a need for intervention has already been established under sections 6ZA or 6ZB, that need will persist regardless of ownership.

Deer management measures are likely to be long term measures spanning a number of years. The length of the measures will vary depending on the aims of the agreement. If land ownership changes then the new landowner will not be subject to any of the obligations imposed by a control scheme.

In practice, this means NatureScot must reinitiate the engagement and compliance process with the new owner, which will likely introduce delays, uncertainty, administrative inefficiencies and ultimately increased cost to the public purse. Given deer management actions need to be carried out consistently over the long term in order to have positive impacts on the biodiversity and climate crises, there is a concern that these delays will negatively impact the necessary progress that needs to be made in relation to deer management in Scotland. Inconsistent deer management will set progress back. If deer populations are reducing and then a change occurs that results in the deer management slowing or stopping, then the progress that has been made will be at risk.

Registering the control scheme ensures that the status of the land is transparently recorded, allowing prospective buyers to understand any ongoing land management needs before purchase. The introduction of a formal registration requirement is not expected to impose significant financial or operational costs on landowners or businesses. The registration itself is a one-time administrative step carried out by NatureScot . It does not alter the nature of existing obligations under the control scheme nor create new compliance requirements.

The potential impact of this measure on land prices is uncertain and will depend on a wide range of factors, including the characteristics of individual plots and the priorities of prospective buyers. While some purchasers may view the presence of a registered control scheme as a constraint, others particularly those with interests in conservation, natural capital, or sustainable land use may view such schemes as adding ecological value. This aligns with broader Scottish Government objectives on biodiversity and climate resilience and may not be a detriment to environmentally focused investors.

NatureScot is committed to a collaborative and proportionate approach to deer management. When ownership of land changes, NatureScot will engage constructively with the new owner to determine the most appropriate course of action, control schemes are not intended to exist indefinitely in any circumstance, throughout the time a control scheme is in place NatureScot will be working with the relevant land owner or occupier to ensure deer management is effective in the long term. Where a new owner takes control of land under a control scheme, NatureScot will engage with them as early as possible on their deer management responsibilities and consider whether there is a need to review the control scheme, or revoke the scheme, as appropriate. This ensures that each situation is assessed on its own merits and supports a flexible, outcome-focused approach to delivering effective and sustainable deer management.

National Costs of Deer Damage Impacts

It is very difficult to accurately forecast the financial value of savings from deer management, as an illustrative guide, the estimated savings for Forestry and Land Scotland are between £0.5 million to £1.6 million annually, discussed further in the Financial Memorandum to the Bill.

Deer-vehicle collisions resulted in an estimated £13.8 million in damage in 2016 across the UK The DWG concluded those figures were likely to be far higher now, and a 2022 report by NatureScot which analysed deer vehicle collisions between 2019 and 2021 found that figure had risen to in excess of £17 million. A breakdown of those costs for Scotland is not available. However, the NatureScot report also found that in Scotland “increasing deer populations and growth in traffic have led to an increased risk of DVCs”

Small business impacts

Small businesses may be impacted positively by the provisions in Part 4 of the Bill.

Smaller landholdings such as crofts, farms and estates who wish to be or are required to be proactive in deer management may require support and advice from the Scottish Government, NatureScot and Scottish Forestry. This may include signposting to existing financial support through the Forestry Grant Scheme, Nature Restoration Fund and Agri-Environment Climate Scheme (AECS). They may also require help with training and up-skilling.

Small businesses such as trainers, suppliers of stalking clothing/equipment/specialist vehicles and some deer stalkers should benefit from opportunities presented by the Scottish Government’s policy to significantly increase the deer cull and to thereafter maintain deer at low densities over the short-medium-long term.

There will likely be a positive impact on small businesses which are working to improve the natural environment. There may also be positive impacts on local community trusts and projects which are focused on improving green spaces or access to nature. These businesses and organisations are likely to benefit from reductions in deer populations generally, and in some circumstances from priority work local to them.

Investment

The proposed policy and its wider medium-long term outcomes could potentially increase Scotland’s attractiveness as a destination for global investment.

Deer management has an important role in land use transformation for the purpose of improved biodiversity, afforestation, habitats, ecosystems, landscapes and productivity which could potentially attract global capital investment in carbon management, afforestation, agricultural, re-wilding and tourism projects, developments and commercial opportunities.

Workforce and Fair Work

It is unlikely that Part 4 of the Natural Environment Bill will impact on Fair Work First Principles.

Climate change/Circular Economy

The Scottish Government is committed to reaching Net Zero by 2045, and promoting a Circular Economy in Scotland. High deer populations are a threat to Scotland’s significant public investment in mitigating climate change and improving nature.

Part 4 of the Bill is expected to positively impact on the ability of a wide range of land-management businesses and sectors to contribute to, and benefit from, Scotland’s climate and circular economy targets by reducing barriers to accessing deer management tools. The Bill may also support access to grant funding where deer populations are high as a result of inadequate control in the surrounding area and those may be a barrier to achieving the necessary outcomes. The Bill does not create new grant funding, instead it creates a new ground for intervention which will enable NatureScot to require deer management action (via the existing intervention powers in the 1996 Act) for nature restoration purposes where NatureScot are satisfied that the ground for intervention is met. There may be circumstances where a project that would otherwise improve the environment and therefore be eligible for grant funding is ineligible as a result of high deer populations within the local area which are considered to be preventing the success of the project. NatureScot may have control agreements in place with all of the surrounding landowners, but one landowner may not be complying with the terms of that agreement. This could then escalate and be subject to a control scheme which would support access to that grant funding.

In some parts of Scotland, where multiple landholdings work cooperatively to improve the environment via nature restoration projects, adjacent landholdings that fail to undertake effective deer management can undermine the efficacy and outcome of those projects and increase costs. The provisions in Part 4 of the Bill would allow NatureScot to consider implementing deer control agreements in such circumstances and progress to requiring action under a control scheme where appropriate deer management is not undertaken and NatureScot is satisfied that the ground for intervention is met.

The effect of these provisions is that a small number of landowners or businesses may be required to undertake additional deer management on their land where they have a high deer density that negatively impacts on nature restoration nearby. This may potentially increase costs to one business or landholding, however, it could have a positive impact on others, and for the public overall. NatureScot would consider the costs and benefits of any regulatory intervention before taking action under the provisions in Part 4 of the Bill.

Part 4 of the Bill is intended to support the Scottish Government policy to significantly reduce Scotland’s 1 million deer population over several years in order to maximise environmental and climate resilience benefits.

The delivery of significant and sustained deer culls across Scotland over future years should help create an increasingly positive, improved and resilient land management economy. Achieving a significantly reduced deer population to greatly reduce browsing, fraying and trampling impacts will help Scotland’s land managers and sectors contribute directly to climate resilience via improvements in mitigation, adaption, carbon management and ecosystem services achieved by:

• Improved site and soil condition, particularly across Scotland’s carbon-rich soils, especially peatlands.
• Enhanced management of water catchments, headwaters, watercourses and riparian woodlands.
• Development and expansion of habitat networks and landscape connectivity.
• Increased and enhanced natural capital via the restoration of Scotland’s natural environment and an increase in land use transformation.
• Delivery of new woodland creation, the restocking of productive forests and the natural regeneration and expansion of native woodlands and shrub layers.
• Realisation of the landscape’s productivity and biodiversity potential.
• Food production balanced with the development of nature and biodiversity on farms and crofts, such as farm/agri-forestry.
• An increase in the supply of local, healthy, quality venison products from Scottish wild deer into the food chain with the potential for a reduction in venison imports from countries such as New Zealand.
• Gradually reducing the need for, and use of, deer fences and plastic tree shelters across Scotland.

The need for goods and services to facilitate a significantly increased cull will include an increase in:

• Culling services to deliver an increased and sustained cull.
• Protective clothing and ancillary equipment (e.g. specialist all-terrain vehicles, night-sights, drones etc).
• The increased use of non-lead ammunition to shoot more deer and have produce more quality carcasses acceptable to the venison-processing industry.
• Fuel to access, extract and transport deer carcasses to deer larders and the venison processor.

Competition Assessment

There are no market effects considered to result from the proposals relating to deer management or venison in the Bill. Therefore, there is considered to be no competition concern to suppliers and consumers; including those providing and using public services.

Consumer Duty

Part 4 of the Bill is unlikely to have any significant impact on consumers.