DMQ Aw Re brief

sikamalc you and other's on this site could run some thing from start to finish for a deer stalker.
If PDS can start up from being a police office you could with other's help
I know gamekeeper1 does training for large game and meat .
Lots of great mentors on this site and all I have meet have the know how and not completed five stalks then class themselves as professional's

I am a OAP and still new to stalking so if I am wrong sorry (bloody novice)

Lets save shooting
 
Last edited:
sikamalc you and other's on this site could run some thing from start to finish for a deer stalker.
If PDS can start up from being a police office you could with other's help
I know gamekeeper1 does training for large game and meat .
Lots of great mentors on this site and all I have meet have the know how and not completed five stalks then class themselves as professional's

Lets save shooting
It's not providing the training that's the problem. Lots of people do that. But they're doing it for existing accredited courses (such as the LGMH that you say your gamekeeper friend teaches).
Starting a completely new course, and getting it accredited to the same standard as DSC / PDS etc, and trying to persuade the wider industry to recognise it, would be a proper ball ache.
 
Although I would like to know who accredits those people holding and assessing PDS?

Frankly from what I have seen of some of these people that have been so called trained, and the certificate of two individuals who according to the examiner passed with approximatley a 75% pass written on their certificate.........................well either they passed or didn't ?

Maybe its changed, but at the time I was NOT impressed.
It's not providing the training that's the problem. Lots of people do that. But they're doing it for existing accredited courses (such as the LGMH that you say your gamekeeper friend teaches).
Starting a completely new course, and getting it accredited to the same standard as DSC / PDS etc, and trying to persuade the wider industry to recognise it, would be a proper ball ache.
 
DMQ is a registered Company number 04955215 Registered office address Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL.
According to the gov.uk website there are 2 officers.
They are not a charity and seems that they gross a fair amount of money from candidate's and want volunteers (AWs) to pay for this brief.
Have a look on the gov website to confirm above I'm sure most will agree its time to leave.
 
DMQ is a registered Company number 04955215 Registered office address Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham, LL12 0HL.
According to the gov.uk website there are 2 officers.
They are not a charity and seems that they gross a fair amount of money from candidate's and want volunteers (AWs) to pay for this brief.
Have a look on the gov website to confirm above I'm sure most will agree its time to leave.

DMQ is a "not for profit company, limited by guarantee", see Deer Management Qualification – Setting the standards for wild deer management

No-one is compelled to be an AW - it is a choice, down to the individual.
 
PDS is Lantra accredited.
So it might be, but having had experience of some people who have taken it, I would hope its improved vastly since the candidates I had stalking with me had passed with little knowledge and a certificate that said an approx 75% pass.

Please tell me how you can have an approx 75% pass? That was the actual wording used. So did they pass or not??

A candidate either failed or passed. Plus they attended a one day course, which I find laughable, and paid £500 each, x 3 of them, so someone made £1500 for a days course with their knowledge from that course being very poor, in my opinion and thinking they could then take DMQ Level 2 to gain a syndicate place. Which at the time would, and to my knowledge would still not be possible.
 
Last edited:
DMQ is a "not for profit company, limited by guarantee", see Deer Management Qualification – Setting the standards for wild deer management

No-one is compelled to be an AW - it is a choice, down to the individual.
It was a choice for me and my new choice after knowing they want cash (I got the email) when i have never charged has put DMQ in a bad light. Not for profit does not mean a thing they can still pay them selves shed loads of cash and draw moneys from other places involved BASC BDS etc. Even if they call off the cash and add it to the candidate its defo time for me to cal that part of deer management a day.
 
Gentlemen,
As an update, I have still not received any Email from DMQ.

However as of a few minutes ago I have sent an Email to Admin at DMQ pointing out, that in my opinion this is not a good move on their behalf. It will I fear destroy the good relationships with Approved Witnesses, many of who are long standing stalkers with many years experience who do not except any payment for carrying out what is in all circumstances a free service for DMQ.

To ask people to give up 5 hours of their working day, and pay £40 for the privilege is a step too far, which I fear will leave DMQ loosing some highly professional people, some of whom no doubt have had more years and experience than those on the board of directors. Plus many folk cant afford £40. Times are hard for many people these days and its enough that many Approved Witnesses receive nothing for their services, and yet still pay for their time and fuel to undertake an ICR for a candidate.

I have also informed them that if I receive any such request from them, they can except my resignation from being an Approved Witness from today. I have guided all sorts of people over many years, and I am all in favour of good sensible deer management with best practice at the heart of all of it. But I am anxious that this may well be a step to far for many, and if Approved Witnesses leave in numbers, it will certainly decrease the value of DMQ.

Without good, experienced Approved Witnesses DMQ could well find themselves in deep trouble.
 
Becoming an Assessor is a joke in my opinion, I've given lectures at universities, colleges, schools and institutes over my career, and have been involved with wildlife all my life, including being involved with DNA sampling with Stellenbosh University over a period of years. Yet it always seems to be a few become Assessors, some of whom are not even full time deer stalkers.
I agree - the Assessors are absolutely laughable.

I do assessment at degree and post graduate level, as well as quality assurance across universities. Set, mark and oversee assessments that are orders of magnitude more complex than DSC2, for thousands of people a year, with real consequences for employability and scientific standards.

I get very fed up being lectured at by some semi retired blow-hard with half baked opinions, a giant chip on both shoulders and a power complex.

They are almost all a shambolic collection of has beens scrabbling for recognition and relevance. Who clearly have far too much time on their hands! They need to find a more constructive hobby.
 
I agree - the Assessors are absolutely laughable.

I do assessment at degree and post graduate level, as well as quality assurance across universities. Set, mark and oversee assessments that are orders of magnitude more complex than DSC2, for thousands of people a year, with real consequences for employability and scientific standards.

I get very fed up being lectured at by some semi retired blow-hard with half baked opinions, a giant chip on both shoulders and a power complex.

They are almost all a shambolic collection of has beens scrabbling for recognition and relevance. Who clearly have far too much time on their hands! They need to find a more constructive hobby.
I agree up to a certain point in what you have said. I have met and know two Assessors who are experienced and are good at what they do. But I would say that all are not the same, certainly not.
I well remember an ICR I performed some time back where it was still the green paper portfolio. The last of the 3 ICR's I witnessed was questioned as I was not standing right next to the candidate. He happened to be a good stalker, who I knew, and someone who held a position within the environment agency.
I certainly was about 10ft away from him when he shot a white Fallow doe out of a herd of about 8 in the early morning. No issue at all with his abilities.

The internal verifier questioned my not holding hands with the candidate. When I questioned who this was, it turned out he had just started in the position as internal verifier for DMQ and furthermore his previous employment was a Tax Inspector.................................:rolleyes: who had already made a name for himself within DMQ, by all accounts.
Most of us who guide for a living have met this type. You know the guy who goes out once every 3 months, shoots one deer and then puts his rifle back in the cabinet.
I know I shouldnt generalise, but that's how I felt at the time.

And get this, I was asked to then think of another deer the candidate had shot whist I was with him to complete the ICR. You could'nt make it up, but that's the truth of what happened. Even the Assessor thought this was uncalled for and crazy. At that point I was going to leave my position as an Approved Witness, but decided to hang on.

There was to my knowledge never any place in the DMQ Level 1 when first brought out, to cover the disability act. Quite a number of people are dyslexic or colour blind. One assumes this is now corrected within the course?

I enjoy taking people out and seeing them go through their Level 2 and on there way into the world of deer stalking, its one of the reasons I purchased this site some years back, to help stalkers to connect and help each other out. One can only hope that this recent demand from DMQ is a temporary blip. It needs re thinking quickly in my opinion before too much damage is done.
 
Join the dots.
You currently have no recognised national qualification for deer stalking/deer management , but Scotland has indicated strongly that this is not going to continue, a mandatory certification process is being rolled out.
DSC, quite rightly, is positioning themselves to be one of the approved course providers. To be in with a chance they will have to ramp up I their course delivery very significantly. They are ensuring that they can tick the box on current training being up to standard when the time comes.
I suspect that you can expect a lot more of this as course organisers are required to “demonstrate” that their qualification process complies with the standard.
 
Well I emailed DMQ stated I never charged for witnessing and resigning due to this cost they have decided to introduce. I received a response back the same day accepting my resignation, they stated that “it is unfortunately the sign of the times “. I wonder how many AW’s DMQ are losing due to this charge they have decided to implement?
 
For those who have been an AW for a long time you might not be aware of some "recent" changes. I only signed-up at the beginning of 2022 and received the following:

Your application has been considered and we are pleased to inform you that it has been approved in principle.
To progress your application further, you are now required to attend an AW introductory briefing event where the requirements and role of a DMQ approved witness will be fully explained. This will be followed by a short assessment which after passing, your name and contact details will be added to the DMQ Approved Witness list. This list is made available to those already registered for DSC2 via a secure internet portal.
The provisional dates and locations of the next briefing events are as follows:
· Friday 4 March 2022 – Moffat area, South Scotland.
· Wednesday 16 March 2022 – East Midlands Airport area, England.
Nearer the time, we will write to you again confirming the locations and times of the briefing events and will request an approved witness application fee of £127.00.
So to become an AW I had to attend a briefing and assessment, with only 2 held in 2022 (one for England, the other Scotland) and to pay the £127 application fee. As I live in the South-West, East Midlands airport wasn't close but I did understand DMQ's logic of choosing a central location, but that also incurred expense. At that briefing it was made clear that DMQ needed to conduct regular re-briefings in order to demonstrate to outside bodies (FE, FLS, LANTRA, DEFRA, etc) that their system conformed to recognised training and qualification best practice. I am aware in a similar vein that one of the FSA's concerns with the Trained Hunter LGMHC qualification is that it is not subject to any update, refresher training or re-assessment. Contrast this with EFAW+F where I have now conducted 4 sets of training over the years at not insignificant expense, essentially covering the same ground to demonstrate a current level of training.

Moreover, DMQ admitted that prior to these briefings, there had been limited action in this respect and this was compounded by there being many AWs on the "books" who were inactive or conducted relatively few witnessed stalks over a considerable number of years. The inference was DMQ would be using these briefings to reduce current AWs to those who signed-up and supported these sessions; I was not surprised therefore to see this thread start (and I haven't yet received a similar email).

I won't argue the rights and wrongs of this strategy, but I do understand the need for DMQ to outwardly demonstrate a commitment to updating and refreshing AWs skills and knowledge relevant to the process and assessment. I too do not charge for my services as an AW and similarly enjoy the opportunity to see a candidate confidently demonstrating the required practical skills in the field, paying forward the debt I owe to those who similarly supported me in my early deer stalking journey.
 
I agree - the Assessors are absolutely laughable.

I do assessment at degree and post graduate level, as well as quality assurance across universities. Set, mark and oversee assessments that are orders of magnitude more complex than DSC2, for thousands of people a year, with real consequences for employability and scientific standards.

I get very fed up being lectured at by some semi retired blow-hard with half baked opinions, a giant chip on both shoulders and a power complex.

They are almost all a shambolic collection of has beens scrabbling for recognition and relevance. Who clearly have far too much time on their hands! They need to find a more constructive hobby.
Now Mungo, don't hold back, say what you're thinking :lol:
 
DMQ is far from perfect, I think we all agree on that.

Can we change/improve it, our avenues of influence are weak, however:
BASC are advocates.

BDS also apart from the stillborn DMQ Deer Management certificate that may have competed with their LANTRA certificate?

If DMQ collapses that puts PDS as the only game in town. Any weakness we see in DMQ are greater in this organisation, with our influence even less.
 
For those who have been an AW for a long time you might not be aware of some "recent" changes. I only signed-up at the beginning of 2022 and received the following:

Your application has been considered and we are pleased to inform you that it has been approved in principle.
To progress your application further, you are now required to attend an AW introductory briefing event where the requirements and role of a DMQ approved witness will be fully explained. This will be followed by a short assessment which after passing, your name and contact details will be added to the DMQ Approved Witness list. This list is made available to those already registered for DSC2 via a secure internet portal.
The provisional dates and locations of the next briefing events are as follows:
· Friday 4 March 2022 – Moffat area, South Scotland.
· Wednesday 16 March 2022 – East Midlands Airport area, England.
Nearer the time, we will write to you again confirming the locations and times of the briefing events and will request an approved witness application fee of £127.00.
So to become an AW I had to attend a briefing and assessment, with only 2 held in 2022 (one for England, the other Scotland) and to pay the £127 application fee. As I live in the South-West, East Midlands airport wasn't close but I did understand DMQ's logic of choosing a central location, but that also incurred expense. At that briefing it was made clear that DMQ needed to conduct regular re-briefings in order to demonstrate to outside bodies (FE, FLS, LANTRA, DEFRA, etc) that their system conformed to recognised training and qualification best practice. I am aware in a similar vein that one of the FSA's concerns with the Trained Hunter LGMHC qualification is that it is not subject to any update, refresher training or re-assessment. Contrast this with EFAW+F where I have now conducted 4 sets of training over the years at not insignificant expense, essentially covering the same ground to demonstrate a current level of training.

Moreover, DMQ admitted that prior to these briefings, there had been limited action in this respect and this was compounded by there being many AWs on the "books" who were inactive or conducted relatively few witnessed stalks over a considerable number of years. The inference was DMQ would be using these briefings to reduce current AWs to those who signed-up and supported these sessions; I was not surprised therefore to see this thread start (and I haven't yet received a similar email).

I won't argue the rights and wrongs of this strategy, but I do understand the need for DMQ to outwardly demonstrate a commitment to updating and refreshing AWs skills and knowledge relevant to the process and assessment. I too do not charge for my services as an AW and similarly enjoy the opportunity to see a candidate confidently demonstrating the required practical skills in the field, paying forward the debt I owe to those who similarly supported me in my early deer stalking journey.
Most of what you have commented is true. They did weed out a lot of people who just wanted to be an Approved Witness for the kudos, but rarely if ever took a candidate out. I also believe one or two Assessors were also culled out.

I did my assessment with BDS. Dave Goffin was the chap running it, which would have been about 16/15 years back now, in Hampshire. No payment was required, but I remember looking around the room and seeing a lot of young faces, none of which had any experience in highland stalking on Reds and Sika.

I am also aware that once you are an AW you will be requested to attend updates from time to time. However there was never any mention of paying for it.

As yet I have had NO response to my Email. The silence is palpable.
 
Few points:

I am an AW and, like most it seems - do not charge for witnessing so was a bit irked at seeing the £40 cost. However, trying to be positive: all of my candidates have offered to pay so perhaps I'll let the next four give me a tenner to cover this

As for having to take a days annual leave to attend I note from above that weekend dates will be available in the future

I get the need for CPD training and I gather DMQ have never charged anyone for the admin or newsletters so are trying to recoup the cost of the training. (Fair enough but I personally feel the candidates should fund this)

I gather many of the AWs are inactive, perhaps the DMQ should introduce a stipulation that an AW has to, for example conduct one witnessed stalk per annum

DMQ stated that the move from three successful outings to one was supported by the majority of AWs

I gather the DMC will be properly launched this year, it was, it seems announced a bit prematurely

In summary I agree DMQ is far from perfect but I believe the DSC framework to be more robust than the PDS one so will continue to support it, not least as I have two candidates in the pipeline for witnessing
 
Back
Top