Just a rumination.
I've read many documents over the years from Forestry and Woodland organisations making the sweeping claim that shooting grey squirrels, as a method, is inefficient and some have argued its the most inefficient method of culling. However, I never really found the reasoning behind this claim or what they mean by inefficient. The other day I found a document that simply said shooting was inefficient because.....and wait for it....grey squirrels were hard to see and thus, inefficient...
.......and it went on to say particularly in the summer months. Now, this is odd for the following reasons
1# = Drey poking with shotguns takes place in winter when the woodland is fairly clear of foliage. I've seen guys taking 80+ on a single foray.
2# = With an air rifle coupled to a feeder, visibility is not an issue as the squirrel comes to your chosen place which should ensure visibility.
3# = Stalking with an air rifle is much easier in the winter months (visibility) but now elevated even further with the use of thermal imaging.
So I remain unconvinced by the arguments put forward. Now, don't fall into the trap of thinking its just because the authors are anti-shooting - many sources I've read are not anti-shooting. However, to my mind they don't fully understand shooting or the varied methods at our disposal. I think the forestry commissions position is political and represents other reasons, but even other organisations make similar claims.
Nonetheless it does raise a general issue of efficiency. When we consider the time we spend versus the numbers we get - is it efficient? This decision is perhaps also mediated by whether the goal is to control the expansion / numbers of greys versus the goal of eradication in woodlands. Other methods include poisoning, trapping, introducing other species (Pine Martens), Gene Therapy and contraception. All likely have advantages, but all also bring disadvantages as well - some of them not insignificant and some arguably just as inefficient as shooting (if you accept the argument it is inefficient). So what do we think - is shooting inefficient and if so, in what way?
I've read many documents over the years from Forestry and Woodland organisations making the sweeping claim that shooting grey squirrels, as a method, is inefficient and some have argued its the most inefficient method of culling. However, I never really found the reasoning behind this claim or what they mean by inefficient. The other day I found a document that simply said shooting was inefficient because.....and wait for it....grey squirrels were hard to see and thus, inefficient...
.......and it went on to say particularly in the summer months. Now, this is odd for the following reasons1# = Drey poking with shotguns takes place in winter when the woodland is fairly clear of foliage. I've seen guys taking 80+ on a single foray.
2# = With an air rifle coupled to a feeder, visibility is not an issue as the squirrel comes to your chosen place which should ensure visibility.
3# = Stalking with an air rifle is much easier in the winter months (visibility) but now elevated even further with the use of thermal imaging.
So I remain unconvinced by the arguments put forward. Now, don't fall into the trap of thinking its just because the authors are anti-shooting - many sources I've read are not anti-shooting. However, to my mind they don't fully understand shooting or the varied methods at our disposal. I think the forestry commissions position is political and represents other reasons, but even other organisations make similar claims.
Nonetheless it does raise a general issue of efficiency. When we consider the time we spend versus the numbers we get - is it efficient? This decision is perhaps also mediated by whether the goal is to control the expansion / numbers of greys versus the goal of eradication in woodlands. Other methods include poisoning, trapping, introducing other species (Pine Martens), Gene Therapy and contraception. All likely have advantages, but all also bring disadvantages as well - some of them not insignificant and some arguably just as inefficient as shooting (if you accept the argument it is inefficient). So what do we think - is shooting inefficient and if so, in what way?
