Set both on, keep on the best.
38 years of shooting/stalking,around 25 places i'm on now and never ever,not once,has anyone ever asked for proof of qualifications.I honestly can’t believe that people have never been asked for proof of qualifications. Every single piece of land or syndicate I have stalked on (unaccompanied) over the last 30 years has needed to see proof of DSC1 and 2 together with proof of insurance and more recently EFAW+F and annual skills testing.
I can’t see anything wrong with this initiative from BASC. It’s a great service for members and landowners if it takes off.
Not doubting it is honest at all. I think it’s great if you have that experience. Perhaps it’s a regional thing. No one gets a look in around here without all the bits of paper!38 years of shooting/stalking,around 25 places i'm on now and never ever,not once,has anyone ever asked for proof of qualifications.
Can't believe you can't believe this to be honest.
I don't believe BASC is intending to publish it.Would basc publishing a register not be against data protection unless each member has signed an agreement allowing their name to be publicly published ?
Perhaps it’s a regional thing. No one gets a look in around here without all the bits of paper!
Particularly if that already paid up member happens to be the current lease holder for the bit of land that they've just recommended someone else forNo doubt BASC is well intended but doesn't that risk antagonising any fully paid up member who they arbitrarily decide is not competent?

They probably wouldn’t know they have been black listed, not for a while anyway!No doubt BASC is well intended but doesn't that risk antagonising any fully paid up member who they arbitrarily decide is not competent?
I'm afraid I don't agree, they have stated the often get approach by landowners which I believe could be potentially true, it's also fair enough for them to say "we don't really know who local to you can" and then it's not a million miles off to go "let's make a list" if it drive more people to be members then win win providing some stalkers get a crack as intendedThe issue here is what was not said. Logically, there's no point in such a register unless the relevant landowners, entities etc. are aware of it and can inspect it. I have asked, but received no reply, how this register is being presented to the landowners. The flavour of previous initiatives has been to present things as benefitting the "industry", helping large entities, stakeholder waffle, and the direction of travel moving from the individual to the corporate. This is not necessarily healthy.
We have been told that this scheme is being run "by BASC members for BASC members", which raises further questions. Which members? How? Personally, I think it is more likely being run by BASC staff for large landowning entities, and misrepresented by BASC staff in this thread.
Opacity and spin do not inspire confidence that this represents a net benefit.
No doubt BASC is well intended but doesn't that risk antagonising any fully paid up member who they arbitrarily decide is not competent?
Interesting. If you did DSC1 before the LGMH element was moved to level 2 then that will have given you the necessary "trained hunter" number.The press release they link to states that "The register is designed primarily for those who have achieved their DSC2 as this is the minimum qualification that most landowners require."
When you register you are asked for your Trained Hunter number, which allows them to check if you have DSC2.
How is that arbitrary?
If for any reason they decline your application of courseThe press release they link to states that "The register is designed primarily for those who have achieved their DSC2 as this is the minimum qualification that most landowners require."
When you register you are asked for your Trained Hunter number, which allows them to check if you have DSC2.
How is that arbitrary?
Yeah it lists the relevant qualifications and you tick those you haveInteresting. If you did DSC1 before the LGMH element was moved to level 2 then that will have given you the necessary "trained hunter" number.
Also, "primarily for those who have achieved their DSC2..." . So not exclusively, then? Therefore other qualifications must be acceptable instead of DSC2. Which ones?
Therefore other qualifications must be acceptable instead of DSC2. Which ones?
If for any reason they decline your application of course