For me it isn't about a test really, it is about ensuring people (everybody) gets the training which they then demonstrate their understanding of in a 'test'. Getting hung up on ranges and group sizes misses lots of other points.
A number of things occurred to me. More random thoughts rather than a coherent view but ...
There should be a development of all skills as people progress. DSC1 should ensure people can set up their rifle, handle it safely at all times and hit vital zones at reasonable ranges for shooters of their experience in a variety of scenarios i.e. woodland off sticks and prone up the hill. That way the shooter can be confident that if they are expanding their horizons they will have some idea what performance is expected and some confidence that they can achieve this. A basic simulated stalking element to the course where safe handling and competence in placing the shot would seem appropriate.
On DSC2 I think there should be a requirement to demonstrate competence at a different level. I would add a similar shooting test to DSC1 but adding in a couple of longer shots off sticks and prone to the maximum normal shooting ranges, and showing competence in making a follow up shot. There are simulated stalking 'ranges' popping up so there is an appetite among stalkers for more shooting, easy enough to do some sort of competence test on the back of it. We don't need to make it needlessly difficult, find ways to provide training.
At the moment DSC2 seems to be just about demonstrating competence in food hygiene and a basic bit of stalking. No consideration for a wider range of skills or competence in ethical game killing. Whack something at 50 yards, gralloch it and larger it correctly and in Scotland you are deemed fit and competent. I don't think so. If the need for 3 stalks has gone away there should be some provision to demonstrate wider skills. It is all very well rushing people through it, but what does it mean, what value has it if in fact they have limited competence?
When I did my DSC1 many years ago it would be the first time I was on anything like a range. I had not one clue as to what to do. Nowhere in Best Practice are there any guidelines/rules on how to handle a firearm safely in that situation. Stalking sure, but not on a range. Given that we all set up an informal range to practice zero then I would suggest there should be specific sections about how to do this safely, bore sighting in detail and firearms handling when on a 'range' ie nick the barrel elevation, empty chamber and safety catch elements from the NRA safe shooting system. We should be teaching people to handle firearms differently. Handling as per stalking is the exception not the acceptable standard in other situations. As stalkers we are too used to swinging a loaded gun around.
So I think the Best Practice guide on Firearms needs updating as does the question pack for DSC1. What I can or cannot do as a 17 year old in Northern Ireland is not a major risk to public safety so we can have a lot less arcane questions on firearms law and a lot more detailed questions on the practicalities on bore sighting and firearms handling on and off range, as this is fundamental knowledge.
I don't think there was much wrong with the shooting test I did all those years ago. I did the highland test. I think there should be one test and it should have shooting off sticks and prone to ranges we would expect a beginning stalker to be competent at. Dunno what that means on sticks as I never did it, but certainly 150m prone. I would have a bit which was on paper range style really to shoot a basic group to establish that the rifle is zero and the shooter is good to do the next bit. Key points here being rifle is NOT loaded until on the target and safety is not off until about to shoot. Shooter initiated NOT RSO commanded.
Then I would have a shot simulated stalk of say 3 targets, 2 off sticks and one prone. With practical accuracy requirements. The key point being safe handling of the firearm and correct usage of the safety catch. This is a better reflection of reality, better training and actually more fun. But we need to give people resources that they can easily find to understand how to set up and zero a new rifle and scope as well as safe use of a firearm in all situations ie range and the field.
That's a stalking perspective. Personally I would split the shooting instruction and test out from DSC and make it a requirement for all firearms applicants.
A bit like my other post, I am not terribly interested if people disagree with me. I don't accept that we should take people on trust (anymore) when it comes to the safe handling of firearms. These things are dangerous and people should have to demonstrate competence before being let loose with one. We have game hygiene certificates but for some reason firearms competence certificate are unthinkable.
