DSc 2 - Witnessed stalks - Advise please

[Cut+Squirt]

I think when preparing to start your L2 portfolio one of the most important things to do is call and chat to a few different AW's.

By doing so you will get an idea of pricing and what the AW can offer you. . .
Some are witnessing for no monetary gain, others quoting ridiculous amounts.

From my experience, and I say this as having been through the L2 process, the cost of the stalk and witnessing dosnt always correspond to the likelihood of success. .

The AWs I used were excellent, however like anything stalking related, research and choose with care.

 

[SussexFallow]

I would be more concerned with having 4 stalks and not getting a shot on at least 1 deer. Where you on the AWs ground or your own?
Atb steve

 

[2130martin]

You mentioned a "tip" in the costs,why did you tip him?....no deer,no write up......unsatisfactory service,tips should only be given for exceptional service ie over and above your expectations......

 

[Wingy]

I would be more concerned with having 4 stalks and not getting a shot on at least 1 deer. Where you on the AWs ground or your own?
Atb steve

My thoughts exactly, when I did my level 2 I knew exactly where I stood and what was expected of me. I was lucky and got mine done in 4 stalks.
First was a blank, we saw the deer but couldn't get a safe shot
Second again saw the deer but only one suitable - ICR 1 done
Third got a deer early in the stalk - ICR 2 done
Although I went on to shoot another at no extra cost to me I was clear that my AW would not sign off my third ICR he wanted me to use someone else independent. He did say he would sign off individual elements if needed but he liked to keep things neat and tidy ie 1 ICR done in 1 stalk start to finish
Fourth with another AW and 3rd ICR done
Wingy

 

[Monkey Spanker]

Whilst I can fully understand your frustration, there are two ways of looking at this really. Yes, the AW could have signed off some of the PC's at your request, but there is actually very little point in doing so with the situation you describe. If you had actually got into a position where you could have safely shot the muntjac, then he could have signed off up to and including PC 1.5. This would have meant that you could have then gone out again and shot a deer from a high seat having already completed a 'stalk'. However, because you didn't manage to get the shot off, it would be fair to assume that you did not complete PC 1.5?:

[TD="width: 33%"] 1.5 Locate and approach deer to a distance where a safe and effective shot can be taken, taking account of the natural features of the location.
[/TD]
[TD="width: 33%"] Locate and approach deer taking account of the natural features of the location.
Intended shot must be safe and from a reasonable distance.
[/TD]
[TD="width: 33%"] [FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]Observation
[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Arial] [FONT=Arial,Arial][/FONT] [/FONT][/TD]

If that is the case, then there is little point signing off PC's 1.1 - 1.4 as you will invariably do them again on the next successful stalk anyway!
It is best to keep the portfolios fairly 'tidy' with complete stalks rather than partial ones. It makes the job of subsequent AW's easier by avoiding duplication or areas where required evidence may be missed. It also makes the life of the Assessor much easier if he has only one or two AW's to contact. I'm sure you feel that you should have got at least something for your money, but it is actually better if you can complete an ICR in one 'holistic' lump rather than fragments. I hope that makes some sense?
I'm not saying it is the case here, but we must also consider the fact that a successful stalk is probably more down to the ability of the candidate than that of the AW (assuming that there are actually deer on the ground!). I've actually been on DSC 2 stalks where I have seen as many as 11 deer and the candidate hadn't seen any! It's not always the AW's fault that a stalk is unsuccessful.
I'm sorry to hear of your experience though and hope your luck improves in the future. I would maybe look for another AW though and a different piece of ground.
MS

 

[6pointer]

Good post MS and sadly like you I have walked for hours wondering if the chap in front of me will ever stop and look around. Lucky there are others who can walk the walk and they balance the scales.

 

[willie_gunn]

Good post MS and sadly like you I have walked for hours wondering if the chap in front of me will ever stop and look around. Lucky there are others who can walk the walk and they balance the scales.

That's an interesting one, particularly that both you and MS experience the same thing. I hear the same from other AW's as well.

I often feel the dynamics of stalking shift quite dramatically when you're out with someone else that you don't know well. Let me try to explain what I mean.

If I'm out on my own my progress can mostly be described as positively glacial, typically spending far more time scanning than walking. In fact I will often stop for 10 minutes or so and just scan, believing that most success comes from seeing the deer before they see you, rather than the other way around. At least when it comes to woodland stalking it's not a deer I'm looking for, but a bit of a deer - a leg, a twitching ear, a horizontal back, etc. - which you won't necessarily catch sight of with a hasty scan.

When out with someone else, guiding for example, I find myself thinking about how they might be perceiving this slow progress and the questions they might be asking - why are we standing here where there are no deer, why don't we move on somewhere else, etc. These days I worry less about this, but certainly early on I found myself moving too quickly through the woods as a result.

I wonder if the same is true of candidates under assessment conditions with an unfamiliar AW? Having an AW on your shoulder must have an impact, and I wonder if psychologically they feel the need to keep moving when they know they should be spending more time glassing?

Probably a University thesis in there somewhere!

willie_gunn

 

[SussexFallow]

Good posts from MS and 6 pointer above. Im sure most AWs would agree a portfolio is best kept "tidy" .

 

[norma 308]

That's an interesting one, particularly that both you and MS experience the same thing. I hear the same from other AW's as well.

I often feel the dynamics of stalking shift quite dramatically when you're out with someone else that you don't know well. Let me try to explain what I mean.

If I'm out on my own my progress can mostly be described as positively glacial, typically spending far more time scanning than walking. In fact I will often stop for 10 minutes or so and just scan, believing that most success comes from seeing the deer before they see you, rather than the other way around. At least when it comes to woodland stalking it's not a deer I'm looking for, but a bit of a deer - a leg, a twitching ear, a horizontal back, etc. - which you won't necessarily catch sight of with a hasty scan.

When out with someone else, guiding for example, I find myself thinking about how they might be perceiving this slow progress and the questions they might be asking - why are we standing here where there are no deer, why don't we move on somewhere else, etc. These days I worry less about this, but certainly early on I found myself moving too quickly through the woods as a result.

I wonder if the same is true of candidates under assessment conditions with an unfamiliar AW? Having an AW on your shoulder must have an impact, and I wonder if psychologically they feel the need to keep moving when they know they should be spending more time glassing?

Probably a University thesis in there somewhere!

willie_gunn

I think you're spot on wg and to go on from what you said while you're thinking what the clients thinking your not quite in the "zone" and nor are they .
norma

 

[willie_gunn]

I think you're spot on wg and to go on from what you said while you're thinking what the clients thinking your not quite in the "zone" and nor are they .
norma

Very true - I catch myself thinking "must find a deer", "don't want to disappoint", "time to move on", etc rather than focusing purely on the stalking.

When you're stalking on your own you have no-one else to consider and nothing to prove. Whatever pressure there is, is on you and you alone. If you mess up, you only mess up your own stalk. You may figuratively kick yourself, but the only person's time and money you have wasted is your own.

I am sure that stalking with someone else - whether as a witness or as a client - has an effect, albeit marginal. That internal voice shouting "there's the deer, over there", "take the shot...now", "walk quietly, deer have ears" sometimes makes itself evident externally, if not verbally then psychologically.

I was fortunate that two of my AW's were people who had guided me for some years, so any chance of getting an attack of the yips was minimised. But for Candidates who book, say, an intensive weekend of 3 or 4 stalks with an unfamiliar AW to try to get the ICR's out of the way in one shot, put both themselves and the AW under a fair bit of pressure. This is why I think, if someone unfamiliar requires a witnessed stalk, it may not be unreasonable to suggest the first one be unwitnessed, to give each side the opportunity to "get to know" the other. That way a lot of perhaps needless expense and wasted time could be saved.

Doubtless some would see this as another way of extracting cash from Candidates, or a meaningless exercise because Candidates shouldn't put themselves forward for a witnessed stalk unless they are fully prepared, and that argument has some credit as well.

willie_gunn

 

[6pointer]

My feeling is the system could be simplified and strengthened if only some one would look out side the box. Taking some one out when it all goes well is great and I feel as happy as they are (Nearly) That said if things are not going well and the deer are not moving they can be the longest 3 hours ever. Being out on your own is totally different and will always have more positive results.

 

[old man]

My feeling is the system could be simplified and strengthened if only some one would look out side the box. Taking some one out when it all goes well is great and I feel as happy as they are (Nearly) That said if things are not going well and the deer are not moving they can be the longest 3 hours ever. Being out on your own is totally different and will always have more positive results.

Understand the comments here But not?
? ? ? ? the picture?

Didn't think Belted Galloways were permitted quarry?

 

[6pointer]

The picture was just for the posing dose suggest WG point about not seeing a full deer when out stalking.
Funny how some times they are so visible then next they disappear. A quick scan can miss them even at close range.

VIDEO

 

[Monkey Spanker]

I would even go as far as to say that the chances of success on a DSC 2 stalk are limited by the nature of the qualification requirement itself! The easiest way to get a deer in the larder is quite often to just stalk quietly to a high seat or suitable vantage point and then wait. Well I'm afraid that DSC 2 doesn't afford us that luxury! The clue is in the title, it's a 'Stalking' assessment and the candidate is required to 'stalk' deer. The candidate has to strive continually forward on the mission to stalk deer, when actually the most chance of success may be to just wait somewhere? However, speed of progress is not an issue regarding the performance criteria, but it is often the difference between success and failure. Deer stalking is really a game of 'who sees who first'! If they see you first, then you generally lose. This may then be exacerbated by what I call the 'Deer Domino' effect! The deer that you have just lost to then runs off and takes the rest that you haven't seen with him, or at least alerts them to your presence. You have now lost big time! Stalking too fast and not looking enough is probably the most common fault with novice stalkers. If you think you may be in this category, my advice is quite simple. Half the speed of everything you do and double the amount you scan with your binoculars. Try it and become a winner!
MS

 

[Tackleberry270]

Isn't it a good thing that it is hard to achieve the PCs relating to the spot, stalk and shot? Money aside. It is up to the AW to put the candidate at ease and impress on them that they are there just to witness rather than be critical. Assessment conditions inevitably put some people on edge but surely an experienced stalker will overcome that to achieve a successful stalk sooner rather than later. After all this is not a qualification for novices. It is to prove that you have experience and know what you are doing!?

 

[willie_gunn]

It is up to the AW to put the candidate at ease and impress on them that they are there just to witness rather than be critical. Assessment conditions inevitably put some people on edge but surely an experienced stalker will overcome that to achieve a successful stalk sooner rather than later.

Absolutely.

Fortunately one need only peruse the posts on SD to appreciate the level of sensitivity, cultural awareness and well-rounded inter-personal and man management skills of the stalking community at large, and realise that putting Candidates at rest should be no problem.

willie_gunn

 

[6pointer]

Tackleberry you say this is not a qualification for a novice. I need to disagree I have done many many DMQ2 Stalks and most were novices the ones that did well were well ready but I have only took a few out that were experienced stalkers and they did the qualification because they had to or loose there ground.

 

[Tackleberry270]

Tackleberry you say this is not a qualification for a novice. I need to disagree I have done many many DMQ2 Stalks and most were novices the ones that did well were well ready but I have only took a few out that were experienced stalkers and they did the qualification because they had to or loose there ground.

Perhaps I should have fleshed out what I was saying. You need both sufficient experience and knowledge for the qualification. If you are lacking in one or both then it is going to take you longer to achieve the qual. This is a strength of the system rather than a weakness.

 

[6pointer]

Tackleberry I agree that to pass lev 2 you need to be fully competent at a base level.My worry is when I get some one who has got one and a half ICR complete and I find them to be un fit both in terms of safety and doing the gralloch what do I do then ?Do I fill the bit in that they were good at and ignore the other sections because some one else wrote that they were fine. Its not easy is it.
I know that DMQ are currently looking at the system and I hope they cut out some of the crud that weighs this Assessment down.

 

[Mickeydredd]

Perhaps I should have fleshed out what I was saying. You need both sufficient experience and knowledge for the qualification. If you are lacking in one or both then it is going to take you longer to achieve the qual. This is a strength of the system rather than a weakness.

Very often though, the reason that novice stalkers put themselves forward for these qualifications is that they simply do not get considered for available stalking ground without the qualifications as a minimum.

I know from personal experience, as I have contacted a number of members on this forum who have advertised syndicate places within very reasonable proximity to where I live and they simply wont entertain me without a minimum level 1. I have years of experience of fieldsports, am relatively mature and sensible, am the chairman of the Scottish region of a national fieldsport body and have insurance through three separate fieldsport bodies, but the door is firmly shut in my face every time. Consequently I'm sitting my level 1 in the next couple of weeks.

Will this make me a better/safer stalker and more fit for consideration of a syndicate place?? or would being a syndicate member and going out with fellow members to both observe them and have them provide the benefit of their experience be more of a practical benefit??

It is something of a chicken and egg scenario tbh.