6Pointer - your language!
You word things as if its an announcement rather than a question.
The topic per se has been covered before - the foundation of the matter is in the wording of the Wildlife and Natural Environment legislation that came in recently. At risk of misquoting it, I would refer people to the source material.
Effectively, there is no definite decision on Compulsory DSC1 or any other measure of competence. There is a provision that SNH must report back on the issue of competency to the relevant minister by ( I think ) April 2014, unless some other measure has been taken in that regard in the interim.
Thats it - report back - upon which ( if nothing happens in the interim ) a process may or may not start to bring in some form of competency standard.
Now I fully appreciate it sounds a bit like a foregone conclusion and generally reads as quite a weird thing to have put in the legislation. So the half facts and general atmosphere understandably give rise to the query about DSC1.
I believe ( not a certainty ) that the provision stems from the original consultation exercise on the WANE Bill - during which SNH asserted that a number of accidents/ fatalities were attributable to stalking and a general thrust to dispense with close seasons and rely upon stalkers assessing the individual situation and acting accordingly.
These aspects were roundly 'commented' upon by the various bodies - including ( I believe ) SGA, BASC et al and many individual respondents - include me in that. As a result the elements that would have addressed competency in the WANE Bill did not translate over into the Act. I concede fully that this is purely my interpretation only. But against that background, the above mentioned 'weird bit' starts to make a bit more sense.
I have no facts as to what SNH are doing or proposing to do about their report or the shape it will actually take.
But our arguments regards safety and competency were persuasive previously, that gives a very good chance they maybe again - especially when focussed upon that single issue rather than within the wider context of the original Bill. Clients who are senior Civil Servants all indicate there is little current appetite for Government to take on yet more layers of work - how that is affected by a certain persons determination to become El Presidente - who knows?
Vested interest because 1. we deliver DSC1 training and assessment and 2. without Dieter Dent and all those who put effort into the early BDS Deer Management course at Stockbridge in the early 80's, I would likely not be a stalker now.
DSC1 works, its pretty darn good, it stands scrutiny against much more expensive and burdensome schemes elsewhere in Europe and has demonstrably raised overall standards. Its voluntary level of take up is frankly outstanding. That doesn't go unnoticed. But yes - it 'aint perfect!
Price wise? Who knows? We don't know what will happen or what the requirements will be - if any change at all. The current competitive provision system works well to affect the price - eg BDS recent price changes and their part reversal in stance on home/self study packages from that in Mr Goffin's article in Deer Magazine last year.
Opening comment meant as no disrespect to 6Pointer - cant find a tongue in cheek emoticon - but its like saying Angelina Jolie has the hots for JAYB; it's perfectly understandable - he's a good looking dude. But any debate would be circular without facts ( like them being pictured in Heat Magazine ).
The debate should be to ensure all those with an interest make sure the representative bodies are well on the case, we each contribute to any consultation and we collectively & individually do all that we can to maintain the highest standards of conduct.