DSC - If no DSC what is your legal position

Status
Not open for further replies.

billh

Well-Known Member
Following on from my question about who has and who has not a DSC 1/2.

If it should happen that a stalker without DSC 1/2 puts a bad carcass into the food chain by any route or have an accident that becomes a Health and Safety issue. Who thinks not possessing the qualification would put them at a disadvantage if a case is taken to court?

As I see it without DSC 1/2 and being 'not trained', regardless of the experience they may have, they could be risking serious penalties.
 
Following on from my question about who has and who has not a DSC 1/2.

If it should happen that a stalker without DSC 1/2 puts a bad carcass into the food chain by any route or have an accident that becomes a Health and Safety issue. Who thinks not possessing the qualification would put them at a disadvantage if a case is taken to court?

As I see it without DSC 1/2 and being 'not trained', regardless of the experience they may have, they could be risking serious penalties.

Personally I'd think someone with DSC 1/2 would be more at risk, on the simple basis that they should have known better. There have been photos posted in the past of carcases allegedly put into the food chain by holders of DSC2 that, if the photos were correct, should have been buried.

IMHO this is exactly the type of problem that a system like DSC 1/2 can potentially cause, in that some holders could mistakenly see their certification as some kind of get out of jail free card - "I've been trained so I can now put any carcase into the food chain". With robust management by game dealers this needn't be the case, of course.

willie_gunn
 
Nobody without the large game handling part of the DSC 1 should be putting anything into the food chain. It would be the person accepting such carcasses from a 'non-trained hunter' that would be liable.
MS
 
I think that HACCP applies to everyone who has been involved in handling the carcase, so all would be jointly and individually liable regardless of the dsc1 trained hunter qualification.

atb Tim
 
Nobody without the large game handling part of the DSC 1 should be putting anything into the food chain. It would be the person accepting such carcasses from a 'non-trained hunter' that would be liable.
MS
That would be my view. And if you buy venison from anywhere other than a trained hunter, you take the risks.........
 
I think that HACCP applies to everyone who has been involved in handling the carcase, so all would be jointly and individually liable regardless of the dsc1 trained hunter qualification.

atb Tim

Tim, I don't believe that's what HACCP is designed to do. The control point should prevent a poor carcass entering the chain for sure, but it doesn't apportion blame. As has been said, if a person buys from a non-trained hunter, then caveat emptor. A GHE would assume the role and liability of the Trained Hunter. Remember a TH can 'sign off' anothers carcass.
 
Nobody without the large game handling part of the DSC 1 should be putting anything into the food chain. It would be the person accepting such carcasses from a 'non-trained hunter' that would be liable.
MS

+1

It's all about tracability these days, without DSC you should really only be using venison for own consumption... unless you know a dodgy game dealer who will take carcasses.
 
Tim, I don't believe that's what HACCP is designed to do. The control point should prevent a poor carcass entering the chain for sure, but it doesn't apportion blame. As has been said, if a person buys from a non-trained hunter, then caveat emptor. A GHE would assume the role and liability of the Trained Hunter. Remember a TH can 'sign off' anothers carcass.
this applys to food business only as HACCP is monitered .HACCP ccp stands for critical controll point ,each part of the prosses should have a ccp there should be a ccp at the point off GOODS INWARDS if it is not taged and is comtaminated then you would follow your haccp and iam sure it would say to both faults that rejection of the product is the couse of action it should never go in to the food chain the whole piont off haccp is to pevent thing from happening in the 1st place .If it still entered the food chain the all blame would lie on the person who excepted and signed for the carcase .if he was not athouthrised to take delliver of carcase then the management would be at fault under poor staff training ,NO deer should be entering a EEC aproved plant(game dealer only) without a trained hunters decleration
 
I'm not entirely sure that if you were not a "trained hunter" but still put an obviously contaminated carcase into the food chain that this would exonerate you.There is a long established principle in law that ignorance is no defense.

For those that are taking DSC1 I would also draw your attention to Q. H84 on page 321 of the 2011 version of the BDS manual
"Who must follow the HACCP principles?" the correct answer is d "Everyone involved in handling game carcasses"

atb Tim
 
I'm not entirely sure that if you were not a "trained hunter" but still put an obviously contaminated carcase into the food chain that this would exonerate you.There is a long established principle in law that ignorance is no defense.

For those that are taking DSC1 I would also draw your attention to Q. H84 on page 321 of the 2011 version of the BDS manual
"Who must follow the HACCP principles?" the correct answer is d "Everyone involved in handling game carcasses"

atb Tim
Have they actually put anything into the food chain though? They could only legally sell a carcass to somebody as the 'final consumer'. There is no declaration to say that it is fit for human consumption or implication by them that is is good for onward sale. It would be the person receiving that then forwarded a carcass of untraceable origin that would be liable. There is no viable traceability back to the original source (who could deny anything), so no grounds for prosecution as there is no evidence that he intended the carcass to enter the food chain as such.
MS
 
Have they actually put anything into the food chain though? They could only legally sell a carcass to somebody as the 'final consumer'. There is no declaration to say that it is fit for human consumption or implication by them that is is good for onward sale. It would be the person receiving that then forwarded a carcass of untraceable origin that would be liable. There is no viable traceability back to the original source (who could deny anything), so no grounds for prosecution as there is no evidence that he intended the carcass to enter the food chain as such.
MS

Good point but we will only know the true answer when there has been a legal test case, although why might you sell a deer carcase unless it was for consumption?

atb Tim
 
I'm not entirely sure that if you were not a "trained hunter" but still put an obviously contaminated carcase into the food chain that this would exonerate you.There is a long established principle in law that ignorance is no defense.

For those that are taking DSC1 I would also draw your attention to Q. H84 on page 321 of the 2011 version of the BDS manual
"Who must follow the HACCP principles?" the correct answer is d "Everyone involved in handling game carcasses"

atb Tim
yes but you dont have to have a haccp if you are just shooting the beasts , haccp is taylored for each business it not a set pices that covers all ,it only apply if you are monitered by the council or FSA .You have to be a food business before you need a haccp otherwise we would all need to write a haccp plan to go shooting
 
To quote from Deer Law & Liabilities (Parkes & Thornley) 2nd Edition

"Everyone must exercise due diligence when involved in handling deer carcases intended for human consumption"
it then goes on to state that under the EU hunter exemption that:-
"In these circumstances they need not register as a food business but are responsible for supplying safe food under general food law"

So I agree with the OP when he says:-

"If it should happen that a stalker without DSC 1/2 puts a bad carcass into the food chain by any route or have an accident that becomes a Health and Safety issue. Who thinks not possessing the qualification would put them at a disadvantage if a case is taken to court?

As I see it without DSC 1/2 and being 'not trained', regardless of the experience they may have, they could be risking serious penalties."

atb Tim
 
Last edited:
It's all about tracability these days, without DSC you should really only be using venison for own consumption... unless you know a dodgy game dealer who will take carcasses.

Not quite correct

http://multimedia.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/wildgameguide0611.pdf


"Any hunter who is registered as a food business (a paper exercise!) with the local authority will be allowed to sell small quantities (an undefined amount) of game and game meat locally to a final consumer or a retail outlet without veterinary inspection or full HACCP."

"ALL game supplied to ANY game dealer (as opposed to a retail butcher or the final consumer) must have been inspected by a "trained hunter". A numbered declaration must be attached to each deer carcass to this effect.
One exemption does exist which allows deer carcasses only still to be sold to a GHE by unqualified hunters, but each carcass will have to be accompanied by its head (less trophy), red offal i.e. "the pluck", and perhaps feet too, for the resident vet's inspection.

The circumstances of the OP's scenario are all important
"food chain" is not indicative of the selling point
was it to:
a) friend for cash
b) retail butcher for cash
c) GHE with head and pluck
d) a certain local dealer who doesn't care?

contractually when money changes hands the legal position is created
should a reseller pass the food on for further monies they also have a contract with the buyer

if you sell venison to a butcher, your contract is with them
it would be very difficult to prove that lets say, the salmonella that was passed on did not originate in the butcher's shop rather than your garden shed
The butchers and game dealers also have a responsibility to reject and look after venison that is not fit or is fit.
I know of one large GHE that claimed a carcase was spoiled before it arrived at the depot. It actually transpires the collection van had delayed the delivery by several days in order to collect other local carcases and this resulted in the spoiling!

Your DSC does nothing to protect or exonerate you from prosecution for being the source of food that causes ill health.
Neither does a lack of one mean you will get bent over further should things outside of the legal sale process go wrong
 
Not quite correct

http://multimedia.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/wildgameguide0611.pdf


"Any hunter who is registered as a food business (a paper exercise!) with the local authority will be allowed to sell small quantities (an undefined amount) of game and game meat locally to a final consumer or a retail outlet without veterinary inspection or full HACCP."

"ALL game supplied to ANY game dealer (as opposed to a retail butcher or the final consumer) must have been inspected by a "trained hunter". A numbered declaration must be attached to each deer carcass to this effect.
One exemption does exist which allows deer carcasses only still to be sold to a GHE by unqualified hunters, but each carcass will have to be accompanied by its head (less trophy), red offal i.e. "the pluck", and perhaps feet too, for the resident vet's inspection.

The circumstances of the OP's scenario are all important
"food chain" is not indicative of the selling point
was it to:
a) friend for cash
b) retail butcher for cash
c) GHE with head and pluck
d) a certain local dealer who doesn't care?

contractually when money changes hands the legal position is created
should a reseller pass the food on for further monies they also have a contract with the buyer

if you sell venison to a butcher, your contract is with them
it would be very difficult to prove that lets say, the salmonella that was passed on did not originate in the butcher's shop rather than your garden shed
The butchers and game dealers also have a responsibility to reject and look after venison that is not fit or is fit.
I know of one large GHE that claimed a carcase was spoiled before it arrived at the depot. It actually transpires the collection van had delayed the delivery by several days in order to collect other local carcases and this resulted in the spoiling!

Your DSC does nothing to protect or exonerate you from prosecution for being the source of food that causes ill health.
Neither does a lack of one mean you will get bent over further should things outside of the legal sale process go wrong
well put :thumb: am not sure why you get a train hunters certifacate at level one you dont even open up a carcase how can you be train
 
To quote from Deer Law & Liabilities (Parkes & Thornley) 2nd Edition

"Everyone must exercise due diligence when involved in handling deer carcases intended for human consumption"
it then goes on to state that under the EU hunter exemption that:-
"In these circumstances they need not register as a food business but are responsible for supplying safe food under general food law"

So I agree with the OP when he says:-

"If it should happen that a stalker without DSC 1/2 puts a bad carcass into the food chain by any route or have an accident that becomes a Health and Safety issue. Who thinks not possessing the qualification would put them at a disadvantage if a case is taken to court?

As I see it without DSC 1/2 and being 'not trained', regardless of the experience they may have, they could be risking serious penalties."

atb Tim
a bad carcase is a bad carcase level 1/2 or not if you make someone ill you will have to answer for it like bewsher says you must have a trained hunters liecence to sell to the game dealer as the norm if you want to sell anywere eles you will need to be registered as a small food business either way there are systems in places and if followed should stop the sale of bad or contaminated venison into the food chain . at the end of the day the stalker knows when he has brust the rumen or just made a right mess off things so he is trying it no if he trys to sell it on
 
to sell anywere eles you will need to be registered as a small food business either way there are systems in places n

to be fair this is the cost of a stamp and there are ZERO questions involved
Fred West could have registered as a food business!
 
If we exclude the food hygiene issue for a minute and look at the wider part of the original question,

"have an accident that becomes a Health and Safety issue. Who thinks not possessing the qualification would put them at a disadvantage if a case is taken to court?"

then no, it wouldn't put them at a disadvantage in court if they could demonstrate due diligence, either as an individual involved in the case or as a landowner who had selected a stalker - DSC or any other certification is far from the only form of demonstrating experience, if you're happy that the person involved can demonstrate experience or knowledge in another way, then that is enough to fulfil the due diligence clause.

There has been a fairly big court case on this recently, against the national trust, regarding an arborist who fell and was badly injured - the court case discussed NPTC competence certificates and their role quite extensivley

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/222.html

Of note here would be the comments:

"It is important to remember that the certificates in question are not licences, possession of which is a necessary condition to undertaking the work in question. They are, as the experts agreed, certificates of competency. But that competency can be demonstrated in other ways."

"Similarly, Mr Heels's evidence that, if he had known Mr Jackman did not have CS 33 (felling large trees), CS 40 (pruning) or CS 41 (sectional felling), he would not have engaged him to carry out these tasks on NT property, is also not determinative. In my judgment the very large number of contracts which Joe Jackman had previously performed for the NT satisfactorily, did allow Mr Heels to regard him as a competent and safe contractor. He had worked on a number of trees at least as tall as the horse chestnut and he had sectionally felled several trees. I accept that Mr Heels had nothing like the skills or experience of an assessor for the NPTC certificates, such as Mr Lane, but even if there is a duty on an occupier towards the employees of the contractor to choose only a competent contractor (which is the assumption I am making for these purposes) it would, in my judgment be far too onerous to expect the occupier to bring to bear that level of skill in deciding whether the contractor is competent and safe. Mr Heels could, of course, have limited his selection to contractors who were members of the Arboricultural Association but, as both experts accepted, there are many perfectly competent tree surgeons who are not members of that body or any other professional association. "


Essentially - all DSC is, is what certificates always become, a nice easy tick box exercise so that the landowner can say "yes he's proven that he is competent" - but its not the only or exclusive way - alternative proof or experience is just as good legally.
 
Purchase of anything = 2 words.

Approved Supplier

It works up and down the purchasing chain and every day, without thinking, we do this.
We approve a supplier.

Food from a supermarket? You choose one based on your criteria
Haircut? From a hairdresser you choose based on your criteria
And so it goes on.

You set out what is acceptable to you, based on knowledge and experience.
You justify/support your criteria with hard evidence* - certification/premises/politics/staff attitude/legal requirement and so on

Generally, the more you know the "better/safer your decision.

*But sometimes instinct overrides all the certificates and qualifications and you still get the right result:)
 
to be fair this is the cost of a stamp and there are ZERO questions involved
Fred West could have registered as a food business!
well when i registered they came around check my haccp to make i had procedures in place were i would be skinning ,waste disposal was in place and a cosh record . i got 5 stars and that means alot to me as when selling its quite clear who is clean and who is not by who manny stars you have(score on the door) so a bit more involed then just a stamp thank you and a lot more than questions ,but it maybe diffrent up in edinburgh maybe there not to bothered , but in the south they a pretty hot on things .so fred west may have registered by would have been trun down on there vist
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top