Hansard

I am grateful to the BBC's "Landward" programme for alerting the public to the subject of this debate. The programme is a great champion and watchdog of rural stewardship and a great credit to the BBC. I am also grateful to the many people who have sent letters and e-mails, and to the academics Professor Tim Clutton-Brock from Cambridge, Jo Pemberton from Edinburgh and Steve Alban from Aberdeen for their invaluable information on the deer project and the natural environment on the isle of Rum.

Let us make no mistake. The subjects of this debate—the island of Rum and the herds of red deer living there—are national treasures and an important part of Scotland's natural heritage. I am not alone in saying that. I represent a large number of people who have written letters and e-mails because they have been horrified by the suggestion that Scottish Natural Heritage might cull the red deer herd on Rum from its present level of 1,200 to 1,300 animals down to a population of 300 to 400.

The reason that SNH gives for the proposed cull is to regenerate trees in Rum without using appropriate fencing. It is using the basis of four deer per square kilometre, which would be a tiny stocking density compared with the current figure. That would be a calamity. Remembering that Rum is publicly owned, I maintain, along with many others, that that flawed policy will result in a very low regeneration of trees at the expense of the destruction of the most important red deer herd in Scotland, which is a vitally important asset.

The herd has been the subject of a 35-year research project, sometimes referred to as the Kilmory project. The findings will increase in importance because they will be of huge value in monitoring the effects of climate change and global warming on a group of mammals on which there is already such a databank of knowledge. No other deer herd in the world has been monitored to such an extent, and it would be an act of extreme folly and—dare I say—ecological vandalism to destroy or harm in any way the subjects of such an important scientific project. The red deer herd on Rum has never been infiltrated by sika deer, which is most unusual in Scotland. It is remarkably pure.

As I have said, there are between 1,200 and 1,300 deer now on Rum. They have already been culled from the 1,600 that were there some time ago. In the north block, which is the research area, there are 300 deer, and most of our current understanding of the ecology of red deer in Scotland is based on the research done in the north block over the past 35 years. For the past 30 years, all 300 deer using the north block have been individually identified and their reproductive success or failure and their longevity and condition have been closely monitored.

SNH talks about overgrazing on Rum, but where is the evidence of that? Who says that there is overgrazing? A leading British expert on grazing ecology, Professor Michael Crawley, has been to examine the ground, and he disagrees with SNH's assessment. The number of deer remains constant and healthy, which is not a situation consistent with overgrazing, and there is certainly no evidence of any reduction in the diversity of plant species in the north block.

Professor Steve Albon of Aberdeen, who has studied Rum for 30 years, is adamant that there is very rich flora on Rum but that it is short, rather than rank and overgrown—perhaps the difference between stubble and a beard. The plants can obviously cope with the present grazing level.

Professor Albon reminded me that there has been continuous research on Rum since 1957, when the island was taken into public ownership. This year is the golden jubilee of its status as a true open-air laboratory. He said that the knowledge of managing red deer that has been gained from the project was internationally acclaimed to be of enormous importance and that there was still a great deal to be learned about the reaction of red deer to climate change.

People like to watch red deer. That was amply shown by the huge popularity of the BBC's "Autumnwatch" programme with Bill Oddie and Kate Humble. The programme brought images of red deer into many people's living rooms, and they were delighted and excited by the natural behaviour of such magnificent, beautiful and intelligent creatures. It is not surprising that people worry about the fate of hero stags such as Maximus, Brutus and Caesar, and would be appalled by their slaughter. What reasons would SNH give the public for why any such slaughter is necessary? What would be the value of it?

I would like to think that another Executive body—VisitScotland—has noted the popularity of the Rum deer on "Autumnwatch" and is planning to promote an obvious Scottish tourism opportunity rather than allowing it to be rubbed out. That would be joined-up thinking.

Rum is an exceptional place. It lies within the red deer refuge, which, I remind members, was created in 1999 by a variation to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The refuge also includes the outer Hebrides, Islay, Jura and Arran, but it is hardly a refuge if slaughter takes place.

Rum is also the nesting home of one third of the world's population of Manx shearwaters and many other huge colonies of different sea birds. It was also the launch pad for the reintroduction of sea eagles into Scotland.

Since the two "Landward" programmes and the furore that has followed on the Rum issue, both Scottish Executive answers to my written questions, and a reply from Ian Jardine of SNH to my letters, have indicated a more conciliatory approach to killing the deer on Rum. I am very glad of this apparent softening of attitude, and I cautiously thank them for listening. As SNH moves into planning its policy for the next 10 years, I respectfully implore it to work hand in hand with those running the continuing deer project. That project must go on for another 35 years—at least.

One letter that I received from a constituent in Wester Ross asked:

"Why can't SNH fence their trees like everybody else?"

That is the key point. There are no capercaillie or black game on Rum, so that old argument is not relevant. SNH could use conventional deer fences or the new electric fence system that the Scottish Gamekeepers Association would be only too happy to show it. That fence system is lower than a normal stock fence, but extremely effective. It is best to have circular plantations and to build jump-outs so that deer that are trapped inside a plantation can be driven out.

Any significant cull of the deer on Rum will ruin the deer project, because the figures on which the deer monitoring calculations have been done will no longer be constant.

It is quite possible for this famous red deer herd to live in sustainable co-existence with a tree regeneration programme. However, it will be necessary to use appropriate fencing to achieve results that are good for both projects and good value for the public.