Level 2

Browning X Bolt 2 Cashback
sikamalc said:
Trouble is some of the Assesors are probably less experienced than some of the full time Deer stalkers who are AW's. I know that comment will ruffle some feathers, but I don't really care:)
Click to expand...

I've no doubt there's more than an element of truth in that.

As an AW I fully accept that there will be some Candidates with more experience than me - I think I posted here some time ago about having to witness the professional stalker up in Sutherland who shot more deer in a year than I am likely to in a lifetime. It seems a little crazy, but not when you view it as just witnessing that they meet the necessary criteria to legally, safely and humanely cull deer and deal with carcasses hygienically.

So long as they meet the standard they qualify - if they don't then they can carry on amassing evidence until they do. I find it refreshingly simplistic!
 
One of my favourite questions that got most people is " why do you use that rifle" and the usual answer was because it complies with the Deer Act, etc, etc, I would then point out that a lot of rifles in a gun shop are the same. They would get there in the end which was, I keep it in good condition so won't let me down and I zeroed it recently so can ensure a humane kill or words to that effect.
I agree with Malc's above statement ref assessors because I had an assessor assessing me and some of my candidates that I introduced to Stalking in the first place not many years ago.
One assessor in particular was always referring to Roe Stags and didn't see the need for binoculars when he had a perfectly good scope that could be adjusted up to x12 .
I don't know how he got to L2 but he did, and quite quickly too.
 
Last edited:
Looking for evidence of a hit
A little thing that I compiled was a small clump of hair from the different areas
stuck them on a bit of card, all marked up

it really helps if you think you have struck a deer outside the normal shot area, at least you can get an idea of the shot placement and what signs to look for as you follow up - focus on the evidence you get from the shot and reaction, it is a game changer on whether you find the deer

The most consistent way of getting L2 experience is to book some stalks out with a AW to get the best guidance and ask him to show you the preferred way, get some experience and choose your own way to undertake a full gralloch in compliance to the guidelines, enjoy the time and experience eventually you’ll know your ready and have some confidence
in what you’re doing

its not a fail test, you can continue the training until you feel and do the right things to fulfill the requirements

keep learning and absorb all the experience you can and above all enjoy the time
 
One of the real positives I see in the recent development of DSC2 is that it has removed a lot of the variability that was inherent amongst the AW community.

My personal view is that I think some AW's forgot that they were simply there to witness that a standard was being met. They were not being asked to train Candidates, nor test them with tricky questions, nor were they being asked to show off their own knowledge and expertise of deer, firearms or ballistics. They were just being asked to observe and, through careful and appropriate questioning, ensure that the necessary standard was being met.

As much as possible a witnessed stalk shouldn't be intimidating, even though it is quite unnatural. Many people have trouble with someone observing everything they do, so the last thing they then need is to face a grilling!

Removing most of the need for AW's to ask questions and centralising questioning back with the Assessors can only help to ensure consistency amongst DSC2 Candidates, at least IMHO.
 
Sometimes questions are needed during a witness stalk, not necessarily a grilling but sometimes there are more ways than one of doing things so an explanation as to why the person did a certain thing a certain way might be called for.
 
EMcC said:
Sometimes questions are needed during a witness stalk, not necessarily a grilling but sometimes there are more ways than one of doing things so an explanation as to why the person did a certain thing a certain way might be called for.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I always enjoyed the questioning part of being an AW, but with the new process there is far less requirement for that.

I think the challenge with it was that it was very difficult to standarise the way questioning was used across all the AW's. Some liked it, some didn't. There were banks of questions that could be looked at, but there was no way to ensure that AW's took the same approach.

The new way of working basically reduces the majority of questioning to the Assessor, which should reduce the variability. On the other hand I think facing an Assessor over the phone is probably more intimidating for Candidates than speaking face-to-face with an AW. I remember getting a call from my Assessor when I did my DSC2 whilst I was waiting at Heathrow for a flight. He seemed a little put out to be told that it wasn't a convenient time to "have a chat", but I was blowed if I was going to go through questioning whilst boarding a flight :)
 
Last edited:
I was very fortunate to do my DSCII with the same chap up in Sutherland. I was up there twice a year and managed to complete three witnessed stalks with him over those visits during the three year period. I think the clock starts running when they receive your payment and it seemed to run down fairly quickly as I recall.

Nice chap - moved down to Central Scotland now - and reassuring to have that 'relationship' with him. He (quite rightly) cut no corners and I really enjoyed the experience.

willie_gunn is right - the phone call from the Assessor did feel a wee bit more intense but nothing terrible.
 
This is everything I hate about the current system and approach to training in general.

You are ready for DSC2 when you feel ready.
Its a short test of a minimum standard.
Nerves come into every testing or assessment situation.
Your AW should be able to put you at ease not make you feel like its the Spanish Inquisition!

Yes you should be able to engage an AW to walk you through some areas both in the field and outside, without the assessment taking place.
Its a pre-MOT check.
Who better to ask than the person who will be testing you in the field?
It is a box ticking exercise and was turned into that the minute it stopped being a CPD based accreditation. ("Continuing" being the key word!)

We have the aversion to training in the UK.
Far too many people are afraid to ask questions and will instead tell you how much experience they have.
We can all learn more.
Just go stalking with someone else and don't carry a gun. You will pick up many tips and tricks especially in new environments!

We all (probably) know how to drive, but many of us would fail a driving test if we were required to take it today!!
You would have to research the test and what is required. Not how to drive, just how you are expected to drive for the test!

If an AW doesn't ask you questions in the field because they no longer have to then they have failed in my opinion.
I ask more questions on an IC assessment than the assessor ever will!
How on earth do you judge someone's ability without asking any questions!?
There are plenty of opportunities to speak to a candidate during an IC assessment that will get more info out.

I want to see a cock up or unusual situation arise on any IC assessment.
Consider it the "Emergency Brake Test" in your driving test.
If I haven't seen it or asked about it then how do you know what the candidate is capable of?

AWs and Assessors should be required to be much more collaborative on sharing experience and offering opportunity for CPD between those in the industry.
We need more people with DSC2, more AWs, not give them a reason to delay it.

Learning doesn't stop with your second badge.

Keep asking questions
Go out with other people
Watch people gralloch in their own way live or on Youtube etc.

Learn more.....
 
Edinburgh Rifles said:
If an AW doesn't ask you questions in the field because they no longer have to then they have failed in my opinion.
I ask more questions on an IC assessment than the assessor ever will!
How on earth do you judge someone's ability without asking any questions!?
There are plenty of opportunities to speak to a candidate during an IC assessment that will get more info out.
Click to expand...

Don’t get me wrong, as I absolutely get this, but It is barely within the remit of the current role of an AW to ask questions. Comparing the old portfolio to the new one highlights this.


“A question is only now required where indicated.”

Right or wrong, the requirement for the AW to question the Candidate about their overall knowledge and experience has been significantly reduced and replaced by questioning from the Assessor.

I personally believe the reason behind this is that ultimately there was no qualification required to become an AW other than a willingness to do the task and attendance at a briefing. As a result there was inconsistency between AW’s.
 
willie_gunn said:
I personally believe the reason behind this is that ultimately there was no qualification required to become an AW other than a willingness to do the task and attendance at a briefing. As a result there was inconsistency between AW’s.
Click to expand...
Phew !! that is some statement and I feel totally wrong.
I didn't know many Aw's when I first became one because from what I saw was that they needed several years experience under their belt and not only what to do to take an animal from the field and present it fit for human consumption but also to know what to do when things go wrong.
Also they needed to know a bit about the various quarry and their hierarchy so that you could take the correct animal among a group for the benefit of the others.
Yes, there was a lot more to becoming an AW than just wanting to be one and attending a briefing, there was also the requirement of holding L2.
 
EMcC said:
Phew !! that is some statement and I feel totally wrong.
I didn't know many Aw's when I first became one because from what I saw was that they needed several years experience under their belt and not only what to do to take an animal from the field and present it fit for human consumption but also to know what to do when things go wrong.
Also they needed to know a bit about the various quarry and their hierarchy so that you could take the correct animal among a group for the benefit of the others.
Yes, there was a lot more to becoming an AW than just wanting to be one and attending a briefing, there was also the requirement of holding L2.
Click to expand...

I didn’t expect everyone to agree with me!

So now I’ll put the cat amongst the pigeons ;)

I will caveat my comments by saying that none of this is intended to downplay the excellent and valuable work that many individual AW’s did - rather it’s to recognise the flaws inherent in the system.

What you say might have been true in the early days, when AW’s were themselves consistently mentored through DSC1, DSC2 and on to being AW’s. But I’m not so sure it applied in more recent years. As stalking increased in popularity the demand for AW’s naturally became much higher in order to meet the increasing demand. With ever more candidates and ever more AW’s I think it became apparent that there was less and less consistency in terms of witnessing. There was great, there was good, and there was the rest.....

Now if it was working so well, why did DMQ feel the need to change the process so radically? Also why the comments in the briefing about Candidates being signed off without clearly not knowing the basics as to lymph nodes, etc?

Let’s consider the basics for a moment. What were the official criteria for being an AW? Holding L2, wanting to be an AW and attending a briefing every few years.

It’s not exactly demanding, nor rigorous in terms of a specific and consistent level of competence, would you agree? There was no requirement to re-qualify, no programmatic and constant training, and no re-assessment with regards to suitability

Looked at dispassionately, this doesn’t really sound like a recipe for success, does it?
 
willie_gunn said:
Let’s consider the basics for a moment. What were the official criteria for being an AW? Holding L2, wanting to be an AW and attending a briefing every few years. There was no requirement to re-qualify, no programmatic and constant training, and no re-assessment with regards to suitability Looked at dispassionately, this doesn’t really sound like a recipe for success, does it?
Click to expand...
I can only talk of my time as an AW, which was up until a couple of years ago, but to become an AW you had to be recommended and recommendation was based on your level of experience as assessed by other experienced stalkers.
As for on going training, the AW was 'assessed' every time a portfolio was submitted and a follow up call from the assessor as well as periodic briefs to keep up to speed to make sure you were up to speed with any new legislation.
The reason it was changed, or some of the reasons it was changed, was to do with story's of mega bucks being charged by some AW's and the assessors only getting peanuts and portfolios taking too long to be returned to the candidate.
Some portfolios got lost in the post and some assessors were out of action due to work commitments so Portfolios were sat on someone's desk until they came back from tour, in some cases, or holiday.
Now there is no excuse for portfolios taking so long to be returned to the candidate as the assessor has access to it no matter where they are.
Also, Hard Copies are so old hat ;)
 
willie_gunn said:
Rather it’s to recognise the flaws inherent in the system.
Click to expand...
gonna be a long thread this one then.....


willie_gunn said:
Let’s consider the basics for a moment. What were the official criteria for being an AW? Holding L2, wanting to be an AW and attending a briefing every few years.
It’s not exactly demanding, nor rigorous in terms of a specific and consistent level of competence, would you agree? There was no requirement to re-qualify, no programmatic and constant training, and no re-assessment with regards to suitability
Click to expand...

I certainly had to sell myself a lot more than just show willing and have L2.
But I agree the current system of becoming an AW is flawed.

Some see it as a cash cow and a way to bolt on a paid for service to the provision of stalking.
Therefore an AW popping up in their area is seen as a threat.
The very people that probably need to give you a reference to become an AW....don't want you to become and AW....
 
do some stalking with an aw .then when you feel comfortable register for your level 2. join a syndicate do a lot of solo stalks and grallochs will give you all the experience you need prior to level 2. and when you do go for it find somewhere with plenty of deer . nothing more frustrating than getting blanks .
goo luck tom
 
Well I shall continue to ask searching questions to all those that take a Level 2 stalk with me. Watching a candidate undertake various parts of the stalk is one thing, but I feel that asking questions and expecting the right answer is all part of knowing that the person really has put the time into learning the art of deer stalking.
Watching how someone handles a deer after taking it, the approach, the extraction. I have AW'ed on all 6 species, including in Scotland where extracting a Red Stag is a whole world of difference to a Muntjac in a wood in Bedfordshire.

When I did my AW assessment I was surprised at how many really young men where attending, some probably only had their FAC less than 5 years. No disrespect to anyone, but I failed to see how they would have gained enough knowledge and experience to become an AW. The AW list has been reduced somewhat, many left due to the threat of being asked to pay for being an AW, which was never going to work. I certainly considered leaving, but decided to wait and see what occurred, there was no way I could afford to not charge, although its only the outing fee that I normally charge when taking clients out. I have never charged extra for undertaking Level 2 stalks.

I think the system in place now is more secure. There were a number of people passing their level 2 that should not have passed in my opinion. But I will say that with the number of Level 2 candidates I have had I have only had one who had NO IDEA what so ever what he was doing, but insisted that he knew it all and was fine.

In general the design of Level 2 is a good idea, but in hind sight I think they did not look into the security, and forward development very well. At this point in time it is a much better system on line than on paper, less chance of faking it. However I think that some Assessors are not as experienced as some AW's, and I know for a fact that one internal verifier who I had issues with had just started in the job, and until quite recently his previous job was a TAX INSPECTOR. This was a few years back, whether he is still a verifier I don't know, I hope not.
 
my experience was that I had gralloched 3 or 4 deer before I did my dsc1, but couldn’t get into a syndicate place without the level 2 so I paid to do mine like the intensive driving test places which get you through the test in a set time. I did my three AW stalks over two days, on ground that had an abundance of deer so I could get the stalking opportunities and then demonstrate the larder work. Before the level2 I revised the gralloch and inspection repeatedly and treated it like a work training thing and put the time in before the ‘practical’.

i know there will be plenty of people who disagree with this route and it won’t be for everyone but it helped me hugely. I had plenty of firearms experience but only a few stalks with estate rifle before The dsc1 and then one with my own rifle with an SD member after that. I did the level 2 8 months later when an opportunity to join a syndicate came up but required the level2.

getting into the syndicate then gave me the opportunity to gain lots of experience with my stalking partner who taught me a lot and in the process of making mistakes learned what not to do as well. I learned what Happens when I wounded a beast taking an unsupported shot that I wasn’t certain of, what happens with a liver or gut shot beast, the limitations of head shooting small deer, the experience I have gained in 7 years on ‘my own’ ground would have taken far longer if I hadn’t got the Dsc2 early and quickly to get into the syndicate. So for me it was the right way to do it.

i would add though, that I continued learning from my mentor post level 2 and am still learning now. I went out with a stalker in the highlands last January and learned new techniques for the gralloch, just little tips and better ways to do it, and also the practicalities of using the knife to dispatch a poorly shot beast. You aren’t taught those in the level 1. You need experience to know what to do when something goes wrong but if you don’t have
level 2 you can struggle to get that experience. So I don’t judge however someone goes about it, but the concentrated route worked for me. I didn’t feel I was an expert after getting the cert and recognised I was still learning. and after 7 years I still wouldn’t think I’m competent to be a proper AW although I am confident in what I do. Having the
level 2 and a willingness to be an AW does seem a bit light. I would want my AW to be more experienced than i am.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Does DSC 2 open up more opportunities?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
4K
Chris Richardson
C
Introduction
Replies
3
Views
376
ian25-06
I
Available: Accompanied Stalking & Approved Witnessing Availability
Replies
1
Views
1K
Tim.243
Tim.243
Available: Stalking & Approved Witnessing Availability
Replies
5
Views
2K
Deer Management Services
Deer Management Services
For Sale: Landrover defender Molle panels
Replies
0
Views
225
viking90
V
The No1 App in Europe for Hunting Area Management - MyHunt
Back
Top