Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: Can the Forestry legally insist on DSC .... ???

  1. #1

    Can the Forestry legally insist on DSC .... ???

    Hi all, I'm not a legal bod so would welsome input paricularly from those who are. However, I did work for a Local Authority for many years and know how they are required to work when recommending external services.

    The Forestry Commission is a public body (?) so is limited in ways similar to the Local Authorities .

    A Local Authority simply cannot say that, for instance, if you are applying for planning permission to build a concrete box, then you MUST buy your concrete from a particular concrete provider. Even if they argue that they trust this provider and are certain it will give good quality concrete. If they were to insist, then other providers of concrete could say they were being excluded from the market.... so how does this relate to the BDS?

    I am open to debate on this - obviously -

    The BDS has set up the DSC's as a measure of 'quality' amongst stalkers, but there are other providers of similar certificates. When the Forestry Commission states that you MUST have the DSC to go onto their land then they are EXCLUDING other quality certificates. This creates a monopoly for the BDS.

    I don't think that the Forestry can even argue that the DSC is a recognisable quality mark. The DSC was set up by the BDS in a self appointed role, and is managed by the BDS so that it generates income for them, it is simply one of their products. It is not an independently established quality mark such as the ISO standards. Accordingly, I do wonder that if there was an incident on Forestry land which led to legal action against them, and the Forestry tried to argue that they had discharged their health and safety requirements by insisting on people having a DSC, then they may have problems because the DSC is nothing more than a BDS 'standard' which is not established in law as being a good standard.

    I can see that there may be need for a quality mark of some sort in stalking, but I think that it should be an independently established quality, set up so that independent companies can provide accreditiation and not be a money pot for the BDS. The monopoly the BDS has must end.

    What do you think?????

  2. #2
    I think you will find that the FC can ask for qualifications and they do not state you need to have DMQ,Alone i am sure when i read the lease agreement that is was or .DMQ LEV2 OR Equivilent. There is also a meat hygene cert with the certs that is EU driven.

  3. #3

    I think you might have the wrong end of the stick here. The DSC deer management qualifications (DMQs) are not the sole preserve of BDS.

    They are adminstered by Deer Management Qualifications Ltd which has a number of supporting organisations - BDS, BASC, etc. etc. and admin handled at BASC Marford Mill.

    Might be something toask about directly via BASC who already have a Q&A thread running on here?

  4. #4
    I suspect they have a good argument on health and safety grounds, they wouldnt allow anyone without a chainsaw licence to use one on their grounds either. Its not about a free market society, merely who has the bit of paper to show competence and document that you have reached an appropriate level with regards to the application of deer management skills.

  5. #5

    The BDS have NO monopoly of DSC/DMQ.
    BDS are one of 29 supporting groups/associations etc.
    Administration support for DMQ is provided by BASC at Marford Mill.
    Assessment materials for DSC1 are maintained and supplied by the BDS.


  6. #6
    MrBarn Door having worked for a Local Authority, I would have expected you to know that any Public Body has to set standards to which their suppliers work. This is either to demonstrate that they satisfy quality requirements or comply with health & safety obligations. ISO 9001, 18001, 14000 etc etc, Member of IOSH, BSC, Construction Online etc etc.

    The Forestry Commission have to ensure that anyone undertaking an activity whether by payment or lease is competent and in ensuring this duty under the HASWA Etc 74 they have used the DSC as the recognisable standard to prove competence. If you look at the DMQ web-site and see the supporting organisations this appears to be most widely accepted as the main qualification to demonstration of someones ability to shoot deer within compliance of legislation, best practice procedure and safety. It is also recognised as the main qualifying criteria to get onto the Scottish Natural Heritage 'fit and competent' register.

    In addition to the DSC qualification you have to satisfy other elements that accummulate to give you a score that demonstrates your competency and thus may permit an invitation to interview with the FC. Once selected, you also have to pass a safety/shooting test before they will allow you onto their ground with induction at each site. Therefore, the DSC is not the only qualifying criteria.

  7. #7
    What about that damed government saying you need a driving licence to drive on the roads and then the DVLA is the only place you can sit your driving test to get a driving licence. We all know people can know how to drive safely with out a licence (i've been driving since i was 14) but you need one before you drive on the roads. Its the same thing in stalking. There are pleanty of people out there who have been stalking all there lives and are more than adequate at it. However insisting one level 1 and 2 it assures the people applying for the lease know how to kill a beast cleanly and have demonstrated how to properly prepare a carcass and know about rifle safety and so on. It takes a lot of work from the FC and saves Joe bloggs who has just gotten his FAC and never shot a deer in his life applying for a lease and lying about experience or whatever. Its an outside of the box way of looking at it but thats how i see it.


  8. #8
    I think it would be quicker, less hassle and probably cheaper just to do your DSC2 than to try and get the FC to change their requirements, whether legal or not... If you still think it is unfair, I would ask whichever country sports lobbyist you support to consider looking into it! Don't hold you breath though...

  9. #9
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    No I think that the original poster has a valid point of view. Personally I don't agree with the DSC 1 or DSC 2 testing system at all. If there is going to be a certification of competence it should be a test set down in law by the government through, ultimately, the democratic process.

    Not Fred, Freda or Tom saying "We are XXX and we have decided to introduce a test of competence for deer stalking". A lot of DSC 1 and DSC 2 is totally irrelevant to many people anyway.

    If I ONLY shoot muntjac (maybe because that is all I can fit in my freezer or car) why do I need to know the seasons for roe or red? Why do I need to know what calibres are legal in Scotland if, again, I only shoot those muntjac in Forestry Commission land in England? Or anything at all about sika?

    It is simply "empire building" and it is wrong.

    Looking at the car analogy you have to have an MOT - that's the law - but you don't have to get an MOT from a certain garage. So there is competition on price from one to the other but the "benchmark" is the MOT itself. And the standard of that is set by the government NOT by a self appointed body out to make money from it.

    Far better would be a government standard of competence that is tested without independent organisations making a profit from it. A test set down in law. Like a driving test. The French "Permis de Chasse" model.

    Now people can make money TEACHING how to pass. Yes. But if you think you are competent enough then you are not in any way obliged to pay for that teaching. You just sit the test. The fee for which is nominal - a few pounds only.

    The other example is the two Proof Houses. Again it is the law BUT why can't I set myself up as a Proof House? Limited maybe just to certifying de-activated weapons only. But nevertheless legally a Proof House? After all how would it be if there were just two garages ONLY that were allowed to issue MOTs?

    But, lastly, back to cars. And licences. No you don't have to have a BRITISH LICENCE to drive on British roads. Sorry that is wrong. You can drive by reciprocal agreement on any number of foreign licences.
    Last edited by enfieldspares; 12-03-2011 at 19:57.

  10. #10
    Here here!

Similar Threads

  1. Forestry cuts
    By widows son in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 06-02-2011, 21:34
  2. Fountains Forestry
    By csl in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-09-2010, 19:49
  3. forestry rules
    By mickjgardner in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 27-03-2010, 13:41
  4. Forestry Commission
    By dieseldan in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 17-03-2010, 22:06
  5. Forestry Commission
    By Coal in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 31-07-2009, 17:31

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts