Your thoughts on completing DCS level 1 or something similar ?

My thread has gone a little off the mark
One of the questions I asked was As I live in north yorkshire where and who with do you recommend that i take some trainning.
Thanks In advance Ian
take a look at course dates near you or where your prepared to travel too,book on it. you should receive a pack with all the info in it
read and learn there is also DVDs`s on the market!...when you turn up its all lectures and slide shows etc then the tests and shooting test.whatever part you fail you can take again at another test date at a part cost! when i done mine there was only one failed,and that was on the shooting part! all`s he had to do was turn up at another day/venue just on the range part, at a cost of £30!! this was through the bds...i notice theres a bds date 9-12 sep 2010 at ilkely,to late in the day for you,but there will be others keep a look out for basc/bds!!
 
My thread has gone a little off the mark
One of the questions I asked was As I live in north yorkshire where and who with do you recommend that i take some trainning.
Thanks In advance Ian

Ok to get you back on track try researching here.

http://www.dmq.org.uk/assessmentcentres.htm

Although Paul from Barony College may give you further information as to when they are doing courses its not all that far away.

http://www.barony.ac.uk/deer-stalking-short-courses/
Regards
Stu
 
However it seems there is a core here that believe that everything cannot be accomplished well or safely without a bit of paper telling others than they are qualified. That is a very sad world and is closer to facism or communism than anything else. which is why the plods love it. Control that's all their after control. Do you really think they care about us and our safety? :-|

I guess this is part of what I was getting at in my earlier post - and I notice that nobody appears to have given much thought to the imposition of what is basically an unofficial qualification (DSC1) by plod to get them off the hook in their decision making process in issuing an FAC. The last time I looked we still lived in a semi-democratic society that had some checks and balances in place to ensure that legislation was at the very least discussed before being put in place. Is that happening with this creeping introduction with what is a voluntary qualification?

I feel that we have to work with a best fit at the moment and L1 is a best fit qualification for deerstalkers........................................... I like the idea that someone has shown they are competent before they get their ticket.

Do you really think that DSC1 shows a level of competency that is comensurate with the ability to handle firearms safely? Isn't it the case that someone with the ability to handle a classroom exam type scenario but very little real interest in deer, and who hasn't even picked up a firearm before doing the shooting test, (and who might not do so afterwards), can achieve DSC1? I know they can because I've seen it happen.

That IMO is why supporting the 'official' sanctioning of DSC1 as a basis for issuing an FAC or any other function is a step too far. To use the current vernacular - it's not fit for purpose if it is adopted as a type of 'hunters safety test' without serious revision.

And that brings us to another point. Why is everyone so keen to roll over and accept the imposition of DSC1 (or whatever certification) without expecting something in return? Why, if we have demonstated competency, shouldn't we be freed from the stupid territorial or quarry conditions on firearms certificates? You take a quite stringent exam and test - maybe taking several weeks to complete - obtain a 'Hunter's Licence', and can then apply for an unresticted FAC because you've demonstrated competence. Similar schemes appear to work well in Europe, and at a stroke would end who knows wasted man hours of police time.
 
I guess this is part of what I was getting at in my earlier post - and I notice that nobody appears to have given much thought to the imposition of what is basically an unofficial qualification (DSC1) by plod to get them off the hook in their decision making process in issuing an FAC. The last time I looked we still lived in a semi-democratic society that had some checks and balances in place to ensure that legislation was at the very least discussed before being put in place. Is that happening with this creeping introduction with what is a voluntary qualification?



Do you really think that DSC1 shows a level of competency that is comensurate with the ability to handle firearms safely? Isn't it the case that someone with the ability to handle a classroom exam type scenario but very little real interest in deer, and who hasn't even picked up a firearm before doing the shooting test, (and who might not do so afterwards), can achieve DSC1? I know they can because I've seen it happen.

That IMO is why supporting the 'official' sanctioning of DSC1 as a basis for issuing an FAC or any other function is a step too far. To use the current vernacular - it's not fit for purpose if it is adopted as a type of 'hunters safety test' without serious revision.

And that brings us to another point. Why is everyone so keen to roll over and accept the imposition of DSC1 (or whatever certification) without expecting something in return? Why, if we have demonstated competency, shouldn't we be freed from the stupid territorial or quarry conditions on firearms certificates? You take a quite stringent exam and test - maybe taking several weeks to complete - obtain a 'Hunter's Licence', and can then apply for an unresticted FAC because you've demonstrated competence. Similar schemes appear to work well in Europe, and at a stroke would end who knows wasted man hours of police time.


A very good observation as well.
I can vouch for that as I have seen it happen as well where a candidate who has never ever before shot an High Velocity Rifle completed the shooting test first time with an exceptional bit of shooting and that was up at Ronnie Roses place at Etteric wether he went on to do his DSC2 I cant say but he passed all the questions without any problem whatsover so as regards gun handling and Markmanship he was fine so how can you account for that no experience yet proved proficient.
 
PAB, Prior etc wrote some great books, but when they wrote them they never had a L1 or anything else, as for dazzling you with my deer knowledge I am sure there is nothing I could teach you, as for not understanding the animals I hunt that is your opinion, but i seem to be good at it or perhaps just lucky.
Are you sure you know what a high powered rifle is, "deer legal" what about 22.250, 50cal and yes it is legal to own but not for deer and what about some of the wildcat rounds in the 222 range,
As for hunting restrictions I am against them and went to London on all the CA marches attended the labour party confrences, lobbied th NT and attended the final debate in parliment (though they threw us out before we got through the door) I hope you were there somewhere in the crowd.
 
PAB, Prior etc wrote some great books, but when they wrote them they never had a L1 or anything else, as for dazzling you with my deer knowledge I am sure there is nothing I could teach you, as for not understanding the animals I hunt that is your opinion, but i seem to be good at it or perhaps just lucky.
Are you sure you know what a high powered rifle is, "deer legal" what about 22.250, 50cal and yes it is legal to own but not for deer and what about some of the wildcat rounds in the 222 range,
As for hunting restrictions I am against them and went to London on all the CA marches attended the labour party confrences, lobbied th NT and attended the final debate in parliment (though they threw us out before we got through the door) I hope you were there somewhere in the crowd.

Your wrong Taff both those 22-250 and 222 calibres are legal North of the Border for shooting roe deer only and the 22-250 are is also legal south of the border on CWD and Munties but not Roe deer
And I might add if you had done your DSC1 you would have been aware of those facts
 
Last edited:
22-250 and 50 cal can be both deer legal Taff?, 22-250 for roe in scotland, cwd and muntjac in England with 50gr developing 1000 ft/lb of energy and providing in scotland you have muzzle vel of 2450 to meet minimum standards for deer. As for 50 cal, if the police approve it for use on deer which they could possibly since there is no maximum calibre limit then it meets all the legal requirements for energy, bullet weight and velocity for Scotland and would satisfy minimum criteria in England.

There is no legal minimum calibre in Scotalnd to shoot deer providing you meet the minimum standards and for the whole of the UK no legal maximum. Yes you can tell you haven't done level 1.
 
22-250 and 50 cal can be both deer legal Taff?, 22-250 for roe in scotland, cwd and muntjac in England with 50gr developing 1000 ft/lb of energy and providing in scotland you have muzzle vel of 2450 to meet minimum standards for deer. As for 50 cal, if the police approve it for use on deer which they could possibly since there is no maximum calibre limit then it meets all the legal requirements for energy, bullet weight and velocity for Scotland and would satisfy minimum criteria in England.

There is no legal minimum calibre in Scotalnd to shoot deer providing you meet the minimum standards and for the whole of the UK no legal maximum. Yes you can tell you haven't done level 1.
:rofl:
 
For those in any doubt

a legal rifle for the killing of deer in Scotland must conform to a minimum specification combing bullet weight, velocity and muzzle energy this is laid down in the deer firearms Scotland Order 1985

for shooting deer of any species a bullet of an expanding type designed to deform in a predictable manner of not less than 100 grains with a MV of not less than 2450fts and a muzzle energy of not less than 1750ftp (2373joules must be used on all species of deer with the exception of Roe deer only a bullet of an expanding type designed to deform in a predictable manner of not less than 50 grains (3.3grams) with a mv of not less than 2450fts and a muzzle energy of not less than 1000ftb (1356joules) may be used

The table indicates quite clearly that a 222 Rem with either 50grain 55g and70g bullet all come wthin the acceptance of the act Likewise all bullets in 22-250 range from 50 grains upwards also complies with the requirements of the act.
 
Last edited:
for shooting deer of any species a bullet of an expanding type designed to deform in a predictable manner

There lies the rub :rolleyes: as anyone with any experience knows bullets and predictable deformation do not belong in the same sentence. No two bullets will deform exactly the same. Minute difference in angle on hitting the beast and the range, temps weather and maybe what you had for breakfast seem to effect the way the bullet behaves once it hits the hide.

Now correct me if I am mistaken but the law in Scotland seems to have changes as it used to mention minimum calibres the same as in England and Wales n and surelt it uses to be 1700 ft Lbs not 1750??? :confused: hmmmm :-|
 
13.32 Section 3 of the Deer (Firearms etc.)
(Scotland) Order 1985 makes different
provisions for the shooting of Roe Deer in
Scotland. A calibre is not stipulated but the
bullet weight must be not less than 50 grains,
the muzzle velocity not less than 2,450 feet
per second and the muzzle energy of more
than 1,000 foot pounds. In practical terms,
this means a calibre of .222 or greater, rather
than the .240 or greater required in England
and Wales. For deer in Scotland other than
Roe, bullets of not less than 100 grains, and
a muzzle velocity of not less than 2,450 feet
per second and a muzzle energy of not less
than 1,750 foot pounds are all required. The
1985 Order also allows the use of a shot gun
in certain limited circumstances, but for land
management reasons only.
 
There lies the rub :rolleyes: as anyone with any experience knows bullets and predictable deformation do not belong in the same sentence. No two bullets will deform exactly the same. Minute difference in angle on hitting the beast and the range, temps weather and maybe what you had for breakfast seem to effect the way the bullet behaves once it hits the hide.

Now correct me if I am mistaken but the law in Scotland seems to have changes as it used to mention minimum calibres the same as in England and Wales n and surelt it uses to be 1700 ft Lbs not 1750??? :confused: hmmmm :-|

Nope wrong on both counts not since the 1985 order anyway.

Heres a question for you
Is a .357 mag rifle legal in England or Scotland? or is a 44 mag rifle legal in Scotland or England?
 
13.32 Section 3 of the Deer (Firearms etc.)
(Scotland) Order 1985 makes different
provisions for the shooting of Roe Deer in
Scotland. A calibre is not stipulated but the
bullet weight must be not less than 50 grains,
the muzzle velocity not less than 2,450 feet
per second and the muzzle energy of more
than 1,000 foot pounds. In practical terms,
this means a calibre of .222 or greater, rather
than the .240 or greater required in England
and Wales. For deer in Scotland other than
Roe, bullets of not less than 100 grains, and
a muzzle velocity of not less than 2,450 feet
per second and a muzzle energy of not less
than 1,750 foot pounds are all required. The
1985 Order also allows the use of a shot gun
in certain limited circumstances, but for land
management reasons only.

Since the last ammendment last year to the act that statements incorrect
Smaller centrefires may be used on the smaller species of deer such as Muntjac and CWD only but no other species of deer
 
Last edited:
Wasn't that the Regulatory Reform (Deer) (England and Wales) Order 2007. ;)
Blimey is it 3 years ago time flies:)

This is BASCs take on it

The law regarding the killing and taking of deer is not consistent throughout the UK. In both Scotland and Northern Ireland the legislation is different from that governing England and Wales.
In summary, the following are some of the more important provisions, but this is NOT to be taken as a complete or authoritative statement of the law.


Although the Deer Acts and Orders contain exceptions, particularly to allow occupiers to protect their crops (certain conditions apply) from excessive damage, and to permit mercy killing of an animal to prevent suffering, the stalker must NOT...
  • use anything except legal firearms to kill deer
  • shoot out of season unless authorised to do so
  • shoot at night (one hour after sunset to one hour before sunrise) except under licence
  • shoot from a moving vehicle, or use a vehicle to drive deer (vehicle includes aircraft)
  • sell venison in Northern Ireland, except to a licensed game dealer
  • sell venison in Scotland, except to a licensed venison dealer.
A Game Licence is no longer needed to kill or take deer, except on unenclosed land in Scotland and Northern Ireland This is will alter shortly.
Firearms and ammunition

The stalker must only use a rifle and ammunition which are legal for the species of deer being shot. In addition to compliance with the law the stalker should be guided by knowledge, experience and personal preference in their choice of a rifle and ammunition. The legal requirements are laid down in the several Deer Acts and Orders. For example:
England and Wales

For Muntjac and Chinese Water deer only- a rifle with a minimum calibre of not less than .220 inches and muzzle energy of not less than 1000 foot pounds and a bullet weight of not less than 50 grains may be used.
For all deer of any species - a minimum calibre of .240 and minimum muzzle energy of 1,700 foot pounds is the legal requirement.
Northern Ireland

For all deer of any species - a minimum calibre of .236 inches, a minimum bullet weight of 100 grains and minimum muzzle energy of 1,700 foot pounds is the legal requirement.
Scotland

For roe deer, where the bullet must weigh at least 50 grains AND have a minimum muzzle velocity of 2,450 feet per second AND a minimum muzzle energy of 1,000 foot pounds may be used.
For all deer of any species - the bullet must weigh at least 100 grains AND have a minimum muzzle velocity of 2,450 feet per second AND a minimum muzzle energy of 1,750 foot pounds.
It must be stressed that all these figures are the minimum legal requirement.
For all deer stalking the bullet must be of a type designed to expand/deform on impact.
To ensure safe and humane shooting, stalkers must practise and maintain their skill with the rifle and must check at regular intervals that their rifle is still zeroed correctly - i.e. that the bullet is striking a selected point of aim at a chosen range.
The rifle must ALWAYS be test-fired, and the zero verified or corrected, after a knock or other impact, or after any unaccountably wild shot. No one should continue stalking in such a case, until this zeroing (or sighting-in) has been done.
 
Last edited:
There lies the rub :rolleyes: as anyone with any experience knows bullets and predictable deformation do not belong in the same sentence. No two bullets will deform exactly the same. Minute difference in angle on hitting the beast and the range, temps weather and maybe what you had for breakfast seem to effect the way the bullet behaves once it hits the hide.

Now correct me if I am mistaken but the law in Scotland seems to have changes as it used to mention minimum calibres the same as in England and Wales n and surelt it uses to be 1700 ft Lbs not 1750??? :confused: hmmmm :-|

Scottish law has never had a minimum calibre, for large deer species to meet the criteria bullet weight muzzle energy etc, in effect to reach the required standard .240 no different from down south we do allow smaller calibre' for Roe
i.e ,222 still must meet criteria of bullet weight muzzle energy etc.

Hope this makes sense been partaking of the falling down water again.
 
Back
Top