Oh Deer!

On the BBC website* we read that an estate owner has warned that the culling of red deer has damaged Scotland's deer stalking economy. I raise a slight eyebrow over his warning us about things that have already happened, but I am interested in deer and stalking and culling and the like, so I read on. Jamie Williamson of Strathspey— for it is he— tells us that:

What we are seeing are less mature stags on the hill

Now this is of course important to know. But however vital his information is, he really ought to say fewer mature stags, as that is clearly what he has in mind; particularly since less mature stags means something entirely different, namely more immature stags. Presumably the sort more likely to misbehave at stag parties.

But don't blame Auntie. Not for this at any rate. For what is the BBC to do? You need to report oratio recta as it happens, warts and all, and may only correct in oratio obliqua. And if you put '(sic)' after the offending phrase it would be as socially acceptable to your interlocutor as jabbing him in the eye with an antler. Quoting is quoting.

The usage "What we are seeing is X", is of course pleonastic. I used to know someone who went around prefacing far too much of what he said with "What I say is", or "What I do is". But to say, "What I say is 'the sky is blue'" when all you have on your mind is the proposition, "The sky is blue"; or to say "What I hate is pork pies," when you wish merely to convey that "I hate pork pies"** does deserve a poke in the eye with the antler of a rutting stag. Not all people are good at speaking well or interestingly; but if you can't make it sweet you should at least make it short.

Life is too short to add an extra set of parentheses to every proposition. That's like wearing gloves to everything.

* Here's the link, since you ask:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-20875309

** Yes, Ludwig, except when it is called for by some poetic, metalinguistic or philosophical purpose. For example I make an exception for those deep discussions where philosophers doubt the very existence of things while busily scoffing my doughnuts.