DSC2. A Question, and an honest answer required.

www.yorkshireroestalking.

Distinguished Member
Hi, I'm after your honest opinions to a question REGARDLESS of what you think to the DSC.
The DSC2 system is all change now (post june 1st).
The "credible witness's" will be phased out with the old portpholios over the next 3 years.
So then the system will be ALL "Approved witness" stalks.
So WHO do you think in your eyes should form the basis of the system.
WHAT should qualify them for this job??
In therory a newly passed DSC2 candidate could pass through the filters and become an A.W. having only shot deer on their 3 successful stalks. They would need an understanding of the portpholio but that would be given at the briefing.
((Though its certinally not this simple in practice it could possibly be achieved)).
SO MY QUESTION IS
WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON WHAT AN "APPROVED WITNESS" SHOULD BE/HAVE TO QUALIFY
This is an open question to all on this forum, weather stalkers or otherwise...the more views the better
 
that's hard to answer as depends what level of experience the candidate has when he took his level two,
remember some of the old sweats, sorry chaps no offence meant and have been doing this 10+ years and never needed to have 1/2 qualifications.
once they now get it they fall in this category of new Level two pass candidates. this by nature under sells there experience.
i agree to assess any one you must have experience and qualifications but its got to be a mixture of the two.

i have not read the paper yet on this but does the Aw need to do any form of other assessment before taking out a candidate
although not the answer would a couple of years from doing the level 2 to been appointed an Aw.
but mind if that is the case why not leave it as it is.....

good luck understanding it all
 
Maybe i'm not clear but as you say it takes some understanding.
What if any, background, field experience do you think they should have other than just a dsc2.
 
hi

I agree, i don't think its just as simple as field experience thats required mate.
but what is required is not been laid out yet..
does, in your opinion, the level two qualify any man/women to assess another stalker.
 
sorry wrong terminology

does, in your opinion, the level two qualify any man/women to witness for another stalker.

if the answers no then you need another qualification.

i would have to ask why remove that link out of the equation

does the current system have a flaw
 
I feel it does, but should be backed up by experience in the field.
I know where you are coming from but the system is changing and C.W's are been phased out.
Most did a good job.
You maybe right A.W.'s maybe should have another test?
Say you've shot 1000's of deer as your job and some one who is newly qualified (3deer) is witnessing you. There is no wonder people get a little rattled.
3-300-3000 where do you draw the line?
 
Any new 'approved witness', i.e. one who has not converted from the previous 'Accredited Witness' list, has to have two referees to nominate him (or her!) before they can attend one of the AW briefings. This should ensure that each potential AW has the required level of experience and competance to fulfill the role.
So who can be a referee then!?:confused:
MS:D
 
Yes i've seen this but as said in theroy some one could get in with just 3 deer to their name.
Didnt want a debate just an answer to the origional question.
regards john
 
john,

as stated i am on your side with this but,, as there is always a but,
when you set the bar at a certain height how do you maintain that height.
what is the height and who sets it.


some good witness's shoot only 10 deer a year, some a 100.

there is some whom shoot 100s a year and to be honest they shouldnt have a driving licence let a lone a Fac...
there has never been a system that has no flaws....

i will read the paper and try to digest what recommendations there are, but mind, as on another thread here about the lead content i swear they do this to justify a job mate....:banghead:
 
I know I'm probably going against the flow here but...

I suspect that it is probably possible to be a very good AW just because that is the task/job you happen to be good at. It may be that someone who has only shot their 3 deer for DSC2 might make an excellent AW even if they are not a stalker just as, for example, someone might be an excellent English teacher/examiner but never have written an aclaimed novel.

So, I would assert that a properly trained AW might be much better at the job than an experienced stalker with no training or talent for the job. I suspect that the system of semi-self selection, for want of a better term, isn't ideal for selecting those that are good at the job and what it in fact selects is those who are keen to be seen by their peers to be fit to test others.

Despite this I don't see any better system than the current one as full time, professional, AWs probably wouldn't work or would make level 2 so expensive as to be beyond most of us.
 
Yes i've seen this but as said in theroy some one could get in with just 3 deer to their name.

regards john

John, theoretically you are right. However, it is extremely unlikely that someone with just 3 deer to their name would have the experience and depth of knowledge required to get a level 2 in the first instance. I've seen some try but with no success!
It is inconceivable to think that the same said person could then find 2 AW's to act as referees as well!
It's just not going to happen. DMQ also require knowledge of the experience level of the applicant. I can't see anyone slipping through that net to be honest! This is what gives the new system more credibility IMHO.
Regards,
MS:)
 
Would it not be sensible for the AW to also be a trained assessor, this way not only would they have the stalking skills but also the skills to bring out the best in the candidate?
 
Would it not be sensible for the AW to also be a trained assessor, this way not only would they have the stalking skills but also the skills to bring out the best in the candidate?

Along the lines of an NVQ assessor? I know when I did my NVQ assessors course I was assessed by an NVQ verifier who assessed me assessing a trainee. This was to ensure I had the relevant experience and knowledge to be able to competently carry out the assessment. The drawback of going down this route will be more financial outlay, level 1 + 2 then if you want to be registered as an AW you'd need to do an assessors course and I cant see those being free.
 
This is the way I went my sponsor watched me conduct a witnessing which luckily produced a deer even with 3 of us in the field.
He also watched over me conduct the questioning and paperwork.
But indeed I had also shot many many deer before even doing my level 1 back in 99.
Then conducted about a dozen dsc2's as a C.W.
 
my opinion of what a witness should be! is a witness can be anyone who has been trained to be a witness!! Al's he has to do is observe and tick a box as it were to make sure all candidates are trained to the same standard across the board!! eg, i took my bike test a few years back the DSA assessor said two Min's ile just pull my car round!! i said wheres your bike? he said Ive not got a license for a bike!! i was told dont worry hes a "trained assessor" he knows what to look for!!! so,, my opinion as who can be is anyone that is trained to be!! BUT!! when someone askes me where did you do your level 2? ide rather say John the deer manager than John the milkman!!:D
 
Would it not be sensible for the AW to also be a trained assessor, this way not only would they have the stalking skills but also the skills to bring out the best in the candidate?

I think you may be missing the point there mate. The AW is a 'witness' only, not the 'assessor'. He is effectively the eyes on the ground for the assessor who is the next level up in the process and must also be a NVQ assessor.
 
In my opinion :rolleyes: anyone who is or wants to become an AW, should have long field experience first, and also certainly understand the porfolio as well. It goes without saying that they must have Level 1,2.

However having both 1 and 2 does not make you an experienced stalker, and anyone who gets through the process of being an AW with just three deer under their belt........well it is making a mockery of the system.

Having two referees who are also AW's is a bit like friends with friends to me :rolleyes:. To me any potential AW should have a raft of referees, and have land or leases that they have managed for a period of time and has stalked and managed for at least 10 years and shot all the species in the UK. Might sound a bit onerus to many on here, but then if someone is going to witness a candidate, the AW should to my mind have covered all the species and have overall field experience. After all one does not stalk CWD in the same environment as a Scottish Red Stag, or Stalk Muntac in a wood, and apply that to managing Sika in a pine forest. It all takes experience and time.

Now await incoming ;)

ATB

Sikamalc
 
Back
Top