I can tell you that. At the moment, there are nine control agreements in place across the country, ranging from small agreements with two or three properties to a fairly significant agreement in Breadalbane, where the whole deer management group is signed up to a section 7 control agreement involving 27 estates and where we have taken a population over 75,000 hectares down from 12,000 or 13,000 to 8,000. In another agreement with 10 estates in Kinlochan, we have taken the population down from just over 12,000 to 5,000 deer.
That demonstrates that we can negotiate meaningful agreements over large tracts of Scotland with very different and complex ownership patterns. Obviously, the length of time that it takes to negotiate a solution will depend on the number of people you are trying to negotiate with, which means that some negotiations might take longer than others. However, the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011 tried to ensure that section 7 and section 8 were more integrated, and we can now put a very clear timescale on securing a voluntary agreement. That is time-bound to six months, and we have good experience of being able to secure some complex agreements within that time period.
That shows that, as I tried to point out earlier, the current provisions can work, and we have good examples of where they have worked and where we can secure environmental gains. In each of the agreements, we can demonstrate meaningful progress in habitat outcomes and improvements in habitats as a result of the interventions while at the same time ensuring that they are reasonably compatible with on-going sporting management. To me, that is quite reassuring.
I think that the process is reasonably well understood by those who have been exposed to it. That said, whenever we introduce the concept of a control agreement, it is not universally well received. People still think that it is state intervention and that it is not always necessary, and we still have to do a little bit of a selling job to make it clear that the agreement is voluntary, that we can negotiate and that we are willing to be sensible and reasonable. However, we need to be clear about what success looks like, and that will be dictated by habitat response and environmental outcomes. I do not know whether that goes as far as you would like as a response to your specific question.
With regard to the use of section 8, we tend to flex our muscles as and when we need to if negotiations become difficult. The very fact that we can threaten the use of section 8, which offers less room for manoeuvre and negotiation, actually helps the discussions reach a voluntary outcome. We are never that far away from such a move if we are having very difficult conversations.