(a) the size and density of the deer population and their effects on natural heritage; 5. A control agreement defines the agreed measures for deer management, necessary to prevent damage, injury or risk. A control agreement can be established: 39 The working group recommends that the Scottish Government ensure that more attention is paid to the introduction of effective deer management in peri-urban and urban areas to limit damage to public interests, and that Scotland`s natural heritage takes a more targeted approach to achieving this. Who would pay for the management of deer under an agreement? 33 SNH must also be included in the management of deer in urban areas for their responsibilities under the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996, including those relating to public safety, deer welfare and damage to other interests. However, the application of SNH`s regulatory powers in the Land Act administered by local authorities and other public bodies should be considered unnecessary, since the 1996 Act requires public authorities to comply with all guidance or advice given to them by SNH. This requirement does not apply to all private sites where deer are present in urban areas. 16 This definition defines sustainable deer management as a horizon for deer management in Scotland, while ensuring that public interests are properly protected during this trip. The group believes that these two elements, which effectively protect public interests and promote sustainable deer management, are the only ones needed to establish a clear objective for Section 1(1)a legislation. 14 Local engagement can be made by deer hunters in the areas where they operate, and engagement needs are identified in the Wild Deer Best Practice (WDBP) guide on deer in cities. In addition, on the recommendation of the NHS Authorisation Verification Body in 2016, WDBP 2018/19 guides will be added to comprehensive guidelines on interaction with the public.  35 The concept of this type of „regulated area“ in a specific urban area, where the local authority is responsible for the management of deer, could be considered as an alternative urban development measure to the „control zones“ of existing legislation.
Such a measure would not eliminate, for example, the hunting rights of landowners in the area. Instead, they could seek permission from the local authority to shoot Resen to ensure that all safety and consultation requirements are met, while the local authority may have the power to shoot deer on land that is not covered by a licence, provided the owner is informed. (2) In this Act, references to the Hirsch functions of SNH refer to the functions related to the deer entrusted to it by or under that law or other decree. 5 When the 1959 Act was passed, the functions it represented reflected the compromise that had been negotiated between the interests of the sports court who wanted to „preserve“ the deer population and the agricultural, forestry and other interests that wanted to „control“ the number of deer. For example, in paragraph 1, paragraph 1, of the 1959 Act, the DRC was given the „general function“ of „strengthening the conservation and control of deer and verifying all deer issues.“ 8 Dandy et al. (2009) Op cit; Lowland Deer Panel (2019) Op cit; Brown, G. (2018). A study of environmental damage caused by deer (Capreolus capreolus) and the social perception of a high density of deer in peri-urban Aberdeen.