Badger Cull Training Coarses?!?!

HuN73R666

Well-Known Member
What are everyones views on the training coarses shooters are having to take in order to cull badgers?

Do you think its a good thing or a bad thing for shooting in general?

Do you think the DSC should be manditory for deer stalking? If so then where should it end (i.e. foxes? Rabbits?)??
 
I believe we should all strive to be better. Not everyone has relatives that shoot to get them into the sport. I'd be quite happy if DSC 1 was made compulsory. Just because you have been doing something for a long time doesn't necessarily mean you are good at it.

The badger issue is a bit different - the government has to be seen to do everything they can to ensure the cull is humane, so yes I am fully supportive of the training there.

IF there was training available in small vermin then I don't see that as being a bad thing per say. Why not have it available? Even if you either got some experience with a mentor or did some training. When I was starting out I'd have done them if they were available.
 
The course is apparently part of " fit for purpose" for the cull, in a nutshell transferring onus on the operator to comply, general requirement, to sign you off as competant, nothing too serious, lantra run a fox reduction course which is supposed to be of true grit, better off to spend your money on that.
 
Anyone who knows anything about Badgers would know that they would be the easyist thing in the world to shoot.
With a good wind and a red lamp you could poke them with a short stick never mind shoot them
 
Anyone who knows anything about Badgers would know that they would be the easyist thing in the world to shoot.
With a good wind and a red lamp you could poke them with a short stick never mind shoot them

Don't even need that, I sat in highseat the other day with at least six on the field in front of me!
 
I believe we should all strive to be better. Not everyone has relatives that shoot to get them into the sport. I'd be quite happy if DSC 1 was made compulsory. Just because you have been doing something for a long time doesn't necessarily mean you are good at it.

The badger issue is a bit different - the government has to be seen to do everything they can to ensure the cull is humane, so yes I am fully supportive of the training there.

IF there was training available in small vermin then I don't see that as being a bad thing per say. Why not have it available? Even if you either got some experience with a mentor or did some training. When I was starting out I'd have done them if they were available.

Does not mean that you are bad at it either.
A piece of paper means you passed an exam not that you are good at something.
I would be very unhappy if dsc were made compulsory.
 
The problem is EVERYBODY has to learn at some stage of there shooting, be it at 8 years old or 80 , and yes I fully agree there are alot of very capable and experienced guys out there who would do it very well in there sleep, but there are also alot of guys who couldn't , and in my experience the newcomer to the sport isn't that guy , but he is enthusiastic to be that guy, they do need guidance! I have seen it on pheasant shoots for example, where they are full of it but no very little and watching them try to kill a pricked bird is not good , the same people need to be shown , now the problem is who is capable to do the job on Merritt of a conversation on the phone or email, for all you no I could be a complete novice ora an experiaced guy ! So the tests may give some light on who is fit or not, just my thought on it
 
Well I have just taken my DSC1 and I agree that it was very useful and informative but mainly with regards to identification and meat/food hygene. The shooting test IMO isnt much of a test of skill, I think I could have hit the target with a slingshot let alone a rifle.

I am all for coarses as I am sure there is always something we can learn. My concern is why they are making shooters take tests to shoot badgers!?! IMO its because there is an outcry from the anti's and DEFRA are playing in to their hands.

Once the uproar about badgers is over, the next issue will be that people are shooting foxes without any form of training and then where does it stop?!?

The whole things paints a picture of shooters as irisponsible blood thursty idiots who take potshots at quarry and do not concern themselves with the welfare of the animals they control. The people who are raising these concerns have no knowledge of shooting what so ever, yet we are taking tests to proove to these people we know what we are doing. I watched a news debate clip yesterday where one of Brian's lot where questioning how on earth a shooter can locate, identify and shoot a badger in the pitch dark and how dangerous it is to have people shooting at night! This just shows that these people have no idea about what we do, yet we are having to answer to them with regards to prooving ourselves compitant.

Seems a bit like prooving you can paint a picture to a blind man!
 
Well I have just taken my DSC1 and I agree that it was very useful and informative but mainly with regards to identification and meat/food hygene. The shooting test IMO isnt much of a test of skill, I think I could have hit the target with a slingshot let alone a rifle

Maybe but a lot of people fail on the shooting, in fact I would not be surprised if the greatest number of failures are on the shooting.
 
Hi
Just like the DSC people will end up paying for every part of shooting how much will the mole despatching course cost its all just a big money maker
 
Last edited:
Maybe but a lot of people fail on the shooting, in fact I would not be surprised if the greatest number of failures are on the shooting.

And the answer to that is range time, using the rifle and getting competent on paper.
Dsc teaches sweet fa about how to use a rifle it is a pass / fail for the shooting segment.
 
I did mine with David Stretton and to be fair to him, he did give quite a bit of advice on how to be comfortable with the rifle, not put yourself in to stress positions and breathing and so on. I cant fault his coarse at all. Having shot air from the age of 10, personally I did not find it a challenge to put 2 holes on a 4" target with a flat shooting rifle. But J0e is right, that just comes down to practice and range time. Maybe something which people might not think they need to do if they have passed the DSC1?!?!

And the answer to that is range time, using the rifle and getting competent on paper.
Dsc teaches sweet fa about how to use a rifle it is a pass / fail for the shooting segment.
 
What are everyones views on the training coarses shooters are having to take in order to cull badgers?

Do you think its a good thing or a bad thing for shooting in general?

Do you think the DSC should be manditory for deer stalking? If so then where should it end (i.e. foxes? Rabbits?)??

The badger cull is an industrial operation, being that a company(s) are being paid to carry out the work contracted to DEFRA I would assume. I would also assume that DEFRA will require said company to demonstrate they have a competent workforce. Those on SD who have worked in the N.Sea oil & gas industry will know that back in the mid 90's operating companies were required by legislation to demonstrate they had a competent work force, hence at the age of 47 I found myself completing an electrical NVQ!
I've not seen the training for the badger cull but I will bet it will allow the company to demonstrate they have a "competent" work force. I have already seen a letter in our local press regarding the cull which I quote " it will only be a matter of time before members of the public are being shot".
I would also imagine the insurance for such an operation would require a level of competency/training.

Should this demonstration of competency be applied to the recreational sportsman is a matter for further discussion, I personnaly do not have an issue with it, I completed my DSC1 to support my variation for a deer calibre rifle, which was successful. I plan to continue to DSC2 for my personal development & satisfaction. However I find it amazing that by joining an organisation such as BASC, CA, NGO etc we get 10million liability cover wether we walk the countryside day and night with rifles/shotguns regardless of what experience we have or we just ferret & beat.

One of the posts on this thread is right there will always be an expense to the non professional shooter/stalker. But thats a way of life these days there is a cost to everything. Just wish it was into my pocket and not out of it.:)
 
Lets not get these two things confused,stalking is carried out as both a profession and a sport/past time.....the badger cull is purely a professional cull contracted by the government so in my opinion shouldnt be debated in the same context.There maybe stalkers involved in the cull as there maybe individuals with little or no interest in shooting other than in a professional manner...........
 
Does not mean that you are bad at it either.
A piece of paper means you passed an exam not that you are good at something.
I would be very unhappy if dsc were made compulsory.


Agreed,but at least the piece of paper illustrates that you have been trained and tested in the correct way...........
 
Agreed,but at least the piece of paper illustrates that you have been trained and tested in the correct way...........

Unfortunately not always the case. I personally know of someone who took and passed DSC1. Without any doubt he was the most dangerous shot I ever came across, if training and testing guaranteed safety etc: it would be fine. In my experience it doesn't always do this.
 
I hear what you say about the badger cull being a contracted professional cull and that differs from non-profesional wildlife managment. My only concern is that I can hear crys coming from the anti's saying that if shooters need to be trained to cull badgers then the same should apply to all quarry and especially foxes even in a non-prefessional context.

With regards to the fact that non-profesisonal shooters are insured via basc and other organisations without having to proove competancy, in my eyes just goes to show how safe the huge majority of us are who shoot. If the insurace people were paying out left right and centre for claims because shooters were reckless then we simply would not be able to obtain this kind of insurace at the rates we do!

Lets not get these two things confused,stalking is carried out as both a profession and a sport/past time.....the badger cull is purely a professional cull contracted by the government so in my opinion shouldnt be debated in the same context.There maybe stalkers involved in the cull as there maybe individuals with little or no interest in shooting other than in a professional manner...........
 
Agreed,but at least the piece of paper illustrates that you have been trained and tested in the correct way...........

its always a question I ask myself regarding all this so call training "whos trained the instructors" Iam sure there are people with no paper who can show them a thing or two.
also its not DEFFRA thats dealing with the cull its Natural England.
another question "what is the correct way" surely dead is dead as long as it humane.
also its like passing your driving test with regards to level 1 and 2 once you have done it you dont drive at 30 MPH and hold the steering wheel at 10 to 2.Iam sure 99.9% of stalkers forget what they have done to pass level 2
 
Last edited:
Back
Top