DSc 2 - Witnessed stalks - Advise please

[Pointer]

I would appreciate any comments, especially from Approved Witnesses on the following.

I recently had 4 stalks as part of DSc 2 and during these I lifted my rifle to one muntjac buck only, before he quickly disappeared. During the 4 outings I was asked lots if questions and told by the AW that he was very happy with everything I did, but because there was no cull he could not sign off any section of my portfolio. The trip cost me £700 including fees, fuel , hotel, tip etc.

Discussing it with a friend after the trip he said that the AW could have signed off those elements that were witnessed and covered by questioning (after all DSc accepts that not all competences may be covered in an outing e.g. Follow up of deer) and that the cull / gralloch element could have been covered on a desperate day (e.g.if deer shot from high seat ).

I would appreciate any views on the above.

Thanks

 

[Tackleberry270]

I would appreciate any comments, especially from Approved Witnesses on the following.

I recently had 4 stalks as part of DSc 2 and during these I lifted my rifle to one muntjac buck only, before he quickly disappeared. During the 4 outings I was asked lots if questions and told by the AW that he was very happy with everything I did, but because there was no cull he could not sign off any section of my portfolio. The trip cost me £700 including fees, fuel , hotel, tip etc.

Discussing it with a friend after the trip he said that the AW could have signed off those elements that were witnessed and covered by questioning (after all DSc accepts that not all competences may be covered in an outing e.g. Follow up of deer) and that the cull / gralloch element could have been covered on a desperate day (e.g.if deer shot from high seat ).

I would appreciate any views on the above.

Thanks

Your friend is correct. You will need to ask your AW why some of the other PCs could not be signed off. If you are still not happy with the answer you need to get in contact with your assessment center or an assessor to talk it through with them. The SD is probably not the best place to sort it out! Good luck with it all.

 

[Pointer]

Your friend is correct. You will need to ask your AW why some of the other PCs could not be signed off. If you are still not happy with the answer you need to get in contact with your assessment center or an assessor to talk it through with them. The SD is probably not the best place to sort it out! Good luck with it all.

Thanks for the response. AW said that unless the stalk ended in a cull he could not sign off any of my competences. I did politely question this but was told that that was the way it is done.

I have no intention of identifying the AW, but just thought that SW would be the best place to receive a response, especially from those that carry out AW. I trust this thread will also help other members doing DSc 2.

Many thanks to those that have sent me PMs, I appreciate the advise.

 

[Moray Outfitting]

As TB270 has said.

Keeping things in general terms as opposed to direct comment on your situation.

Each PC stands 'alone'. If you complete that PC before an AW or where appropriate answer questions on that PC satisfactorily then they may be signed off. If an AW refuses to sign off any PC he must be able to tell you in very clear terms why. Essentially your friend appears correct.

In such a situation, I would contact the AW and ask for the relevant PCs to be signed and if he/ she feels unable to do so, then for them to provide written confirm as to his/ her position on the matter.

AW's will be working to a named Centre - BDS, BASC, FC etc - if you have a dispute with an AW and cannot amicably resolve it, you should raise the matter with their Centre. Equally via your named Assessor. Systems are in place to look at such issues.

 

[Psyxologos]

Where is the AW based? Maybe share your experience so others can avoid using AW who may abuse their position for financial gain, as I suspect is the case here.

 

[timbrayford]

I am not sure why your AW was unable to fill in any of your PC's but looking forward you still have to complete your 3 witnessed culls anyway. Appreciating that things have got off to a bad start I suggest that you cut your losses with the current arrangements and contact Mike at Jelen to see if he can assist.

atb Tim

 

[6pointer]

I think this part of the Level 2 should get a good looking over because as an AW I do not write up a ICR unless it has a deer safely on the ground. I do not charge for Witnessing and they are told before hand. I have do a few in the passed and they become a shame. Can you imagine sitting your driving test and some one say well you crashed in to the round about but its ok you can do roundabouts next time. I do sympathise with you Pointer but as long as you new the prise and was told no cull no write up then what's the problem .Like said you will still need to demonstrate most PC,S by the sound of it.
While I don't agree with doing it in a deer park I would phone the BDS and get it done. Sometimes enough is enough.

 

[willie_gunn]

You might perhaps want to direct the AW to page 5 of the latest edition of the Witness Handbook (May 2014):

While it is preferable that all of the PCs on one ICR are completed on the same stalking outing using the same animal, this may not always be possible, so ICRs may be completed cumulatively. If, on an individual outing, a particular PC is not completed, then evidence from further outings can be included. For instance, if you have been on a witnessed stalking outing and failed to shoot a deer, you will probably still have completed a number of PCs which will count as evidence. The remaining PCs (including cull deer) can then be accomplished on a subsequent occasion.

willie_gunn

 

[willie_gunn]

Can you imagine sitting your driving test and some one say well you crashed in to the round about but its ok you can do roundabouts next time. I do sympathise with you Pointer but as long as you new the prise and was told no cull no write up then what's the problem .Like said you will still need to demonstrate most PC,S by the sound of it.

The problem with your driving test analogy is that a driving test is something you either pass or fail. The DSC2 is not like that, as you well know. To quote again from the Witness Handbook:

A candidate cannot “fail” DSC2. If they have not demonstrated the required DSC of competence, you explain why, do not sign off the associated PCs, and then remind the candidate that they can repeat the specific PC assessment at some time in the future.

So in that respect they can keep going round the roundabouts until they get it right, as that is exactly how the DSC Level 2 assessment process is designed!

Perhaps this comment to AW's is also worth bearing in mind:

Opportunities for witnessed stalking are relatively rare, the candidate may have gone to great effort or expense to be with you and you may therefore need to be imaginative as to how you can use every available opportunity for gathering evidence

If he was told "no cull no write up" then that should have got the warning flags going, but we don't know that for sure.

willie_gunn

 

[6pointer]

Willie you are correct and isn't that a shame it could have saved a lot of candidates a lot of money. I am just glad the deer sector didn't make me sit my Lev one three times after reaching the required standard.

 

[timbrayford]

While I don't agree with doing it in a deer park I would phone the BDS and get it done. Sometimes enough is enough.

A major advantage of doing some PC's in a park is that you can be sure that there are deer there,somewhere! The rest is down to the stalker.

Before those who have never done a park cull get the wrong idea these are not tame "deer farm" animals, that is not permissible for DSC2, they have to be able to behave as true wild animals to count.

atb Tim

 

[willie_gunn]

Willie you are correct and isn't that a shame it could have saved a lot of candidates a lot of money. I am just glad the deer sector didn't make me sit my Lev one three times after reaching the required standard.

Strangely enough I agree with you, both that the system itself is not perfect, and that some candidates end up spending more than they need to. (I can't speak for the level one bit though)

Surely the whole point of a national standard is that it is exactly that - a national standard. Anything else is not in the best interests of candidates, witnesses or anyone else, which is why the role of AW's does not include that they can invent their own rules!

As this quote from the handbook says:

What a witness must NOT do

Your role is key to the credibility of the DSC 2 assessment. You must not refuse to sign off a PC without good reason, nor should you sign off any PC without good evidence. The system of portfolio verification by Assessors, Internal and External Verifiers (EVs) is, in part, designed to highlight weaknesses in witness performance. If, despite advice from an Assessor, you are unable to act as a witness to a satisfactory standard you should expect that any evidence submitted by candidates and witnessed by you will not be accepted.

Even if it makes us feel better, and perhaps despite our fervent wishes, complaining about the system on the Stalking Directory is not the best way to get it fixed. That will only come from engaging with DMQ and the Assessment centers.

So whilst I do not think the AW concerned should be publicly "named and shamed" as some seem to be demanding (as ever, we only hear one side of the story in these threads) I do think that a call from the Candidate to the relevant Assessment Center would be appropriate.

willie_gunn

 

[6pointer]

I agree Willie and that's why I have in the passed and at present and in the future will continue to try and make the Lev1 and 2 an assessment with credibility through the full deer sector and beyond. EG FC and Local Authority,s.
When I get a call from a person wanting to do there lev 2 I make it clear what I expect from them. I also make it clear what they can expect from me. Most don't fone back but the ones that do get a full and thorough assessment and a certificate they are proud of.

 

[Moray Outfitting]

As WG ably pointed out, the new Guidance notes are quite clear - on many areas.

ALL AWs are subject to a contract with their Sponsoring Centre and the terms are quite clear - if you wish to become/ remain an AW you will abide by that contract - including following the Guidance Notes. In strict legal terms there is a contradiction there - 'Guidance' as opposed to 'Rules', but as we aren't in an episode of 'Pirates of the Caribbean' , measured against the contract terms, the Guidance notes would be most likely construed as definitive.

If any AW - however noble the intent - is not following that Guidance, they render themselves liable to be considered in breach of that contract. Accidental breach is one thing, wilful imposition of alternate 'rules' because someone doesn't feel happy with things is entirely another. Regardless of whether the result is pride on the part of the candidate or ill feeling at potential mistreatment - the result is the same and unacceptable. Ultimately the system suffers and there are seemingly plenty waiting in the wings to criticise/ cast the first stone.

I would urge all potential candidates to read the issued Guidance Notes. That's your source data. If someone is telling you something at odds with that guidance, do yourself, the system and stalkers a service - raise the query with the Assessor and/or the Centre. Constructive feedback is the way that most entities improve.

I don't think that even the simplest of systems ever wholly survives full contact with human ego!

 

[Tackleberry270]

As WG ably pointed out, the new Guidance notes are quite clear - on many areas.

ALL AWs are subject to a contract with their Sponsoring Centre and the terms are quite clear - if you wish to become/ remain an AW you will abide by that contract - including following the Guidance Notes. In strict legal terms there is a contradiction there - 'Guidance' as opposed to 'Rules', but as we aren't in an episode of 'Pirates of the Caribbean' , measured against the contract terms, the Guidance notes would be most likely construed as definitive.

If any AW - however noble the intent - is not following that Guidance, they render themselves liable to be considered in breach of that contract. Accidental breach is one thing, wilful imposition of alternate 'rules' because someone doesn't feel happy with things is entirely another. Regardless of whether the result is pride on the part of the candidate or ill feeling at potential mistreatment - the result is the same and unacceptable. Ultimately the system suffers and there are seemingly plenty waiting in the wings to criticise/ cast the first stone.

I would urge all potential candidates to read the issued Guidance Notes. That's your source data. If someone is telling you something at odds with that guidance, do yourself, the system and stalkers a service - raise the query with the Assessor and/or the Centre. Constructive feedback is the way that most entities improve.

I don't think that even the simplest of systems ever wholly survives full contact with human ego!

I agree with this.


It doesn't look as tidy if the PCs are completed over a series of outings and by different Witnesses but if individual PCs have been completed then it should be down to the Candidate not the AW if they want to wait for a Culled deer before they record them. Its clear in the guidance notes that they can and should count towards evidence. Having said this, if a cull has not been achieved then there is a large percentage of the PCs that cannot be signed off. The guidance also says that as far as is possible an AW should witness as much of a completed stalk as possible. It is easy to cover all the PCs running up to the parts that need a deer the next time but not exactly fair on the candidate unless there is good reason to start afresh.

 

[Tackleberry270]

A major advantage of doing some PC's in a park is that you can be sure that there are deer there,somewhere! The rest is down to the stalker.

Before those who have never done a park cull get the wrong idea these are not tame "deer farm" animals, that is not permissible for DSC2, they have to be able to behave as true wild animals to count.

atb Tim

You are right in what you say but there are still many parks out there that range from the very small to the truly massive. Still a grey area and by doing the assessment with wild deer you can be sure there will be no comeback on that issue.

 

[Monkey Spanker]

What on earth did you 'tip' the AW for???
MS

 

[Pointer]

What on earth did you 'tip' the AW for???
MS

In relation to recent responses to my request for advice, I would comment as follows:

1) Firstly, thank you to everyone who has provided their opinion and recomendations; inparticular the large number of PMs I have received. Eveyone is saying the same thing and this has helped me decide hoow to move this forward.

2) I would clarify that I have not complained about the issue, I simply asked for advice from those more experienced than me in the role of an AW. Again, thank you to those that have provided it.

3) I shall not be disclosing the name of the AW, everyone makes mistakes [in this case the AW does not appear to fully understnd the Guidance]. I hope that the route I take to resolve this will not result in any negative impact on the AW, but that future clients are made fully aware of his rules prior to agreeing to spend their hard earned money.

Thank you again, your guidance has been a great help.

 

[sikamalc]

I have just seen this post on the site, so please excuse my being late in responding.

Your AW and some of the comments on here are wrong. You can sign off a partial stalk on an ICR. I would agree with some of the comments by the more experienced stalkers on this thread in that you should speak with your AW and also your Assessor and seek a partial sign off for the stalk on the Muntjac.

There is no mistake on the AW's side of things as we (as in all AW's ) are all kept up to speed with currant criteria, and I suggest your AW takes note of this as he is in the wrong.
I would look for another AW.

Regards

Sikamalc AW.

 

[sikamalc]

I think this part of the Level 2 should get a good looking over because as an AW I do not write up a ICR unless it has a deer safely on the ground. I do not charge for Witnessing and they are told before hand. I have do a few in the passed and they become a shame. Can you imagine sitting your driving test and some one say well you crashed in to the round about but its ok you can do roundabouts next time. I do sympathise with you Pointer but as long as you new the prise and was told no cull no write up then what's the problem .Like said you will still need to demonstrate most PC,S by the sound of it.
While I don't agree with doing it in a deer park I would phone the BDS and get it done. Sometimes enough is enough.[/QUOTE

Davie,

I have no doubt that as an AW you will have received your latest update from your assessment centre regarding the signing off for Level 2 candidates. I should point out to you that your comment regarding NOT signing off a partial stalk for a level 2 candidate, and in your own words you would only sign off if a deer is on the floor, is contrary to the rules laid down for Aw's and as such is doing a disservice to any candidate and is not in the best interest of the scheme or of being an AW.