BASC welcomes police intent to remove unnecessary FAC conditions

I'd like to start by commending BASC on obtaining this agreement on conditions. They make no contribution -conditions not BASC!- to public safety and cause all kinds of unnecessary delays and other inconveniences to FAC holders and make extra work for already over-burdened Licensing Depts.

Mentoring is evidently a hot topic, however, as it raises the spectre of compulsory shooter training, along with the questions of who sets the syllabus, the standards to be achieved, and the fees. I'm very much in the "if it's not broke" camp, and don't feel that compulsory training would bring compensatory benefits.

That doesn't mean I'm against shooter education and training, though. In fact, I'd like to see a basic level of training made universally available.

A few months ago I tried out an on-line safety course created for hunters in a US state -memory fails me as to which one- but the point is that it was free, you could take it as often as you liked, and each question and answer was explained simply and with the support of clear illustrations.

It made me think that it would be no bad thing if BASC, with its existing corpus of materials on safe and ethical shooting practices, etc. were to produce a series of such informative, interactive, online quizzes covering the principal activities of their members, so as to get a lot of useful information to a lot of shooters in an accessible format. This could be a phone app as well as a web-based resource.

Fuller information -such as BASC already provides, could be linked to, compete or in chunks- but the idea would be to present the essentials, plus a selection of interest points -the US quiz I tried randomised a proportion of the questions so they weren't all the same each time, a strong encouragement to keep doing the quiz until you'd answered all the questions, thereby reinforcing much of the information through repetition- in a format with wide appeal and that provides almost instant feedback.

It would also give BASC feedback on what shooters are most interested in and what those taking the test do or don't know, enabling the information provided to be developed accordingly.

I'm not suggesting that such online materials would be a substitute for practical training courses, but rather that they could be a way of engaging people who wouldn't normally consider taking instruction, and even people who felt they already knew all they needed to and just wanted to demonstrate to themselves or their mates that this was so by taking "that damn quiz".

Sorry if this is a bit off topic - perhaps I should switch to decaf for a bit!
 
I'd like to start by commending BASC on obtaining this agreement on conditions. They make no contribution -conditions not BASC!- to public safety and cause all kinds of unnecessary delays and other inconveniences to FAC holders and make extra work for already over-burdened Licensing Depts.

Mentoring is evidently a hot topic, however, as it raises the spectre of compulsory shooter training, along with the questions of who sets the syllabus, the standards to be achieved, and the fees. I'm very much in the "if it's not broke" camp, and don't feel that compulsory training would bring compensatory benefits.

That doesn't mean I'm against shooter education and training, though. In fact, I'd like to see a basic level of training made universally available.

A few months ago I tried out an on-line safety course created for hunters in a US state -memory fails me as to which one- but the point is that it was free, you could take it as often as you liked, and each question and answer was explained simply and with the support of clear illustrations.

It made me think that it would be no bad thing if BASC, with its existing corpus of materials on safe and ethical shooting practices, etc. were to produce a series of such informative, interactive, online quizzes covering the principal activities of their members, so as to get a lot of useful information to a lot of shooters in an accessible format. This could be a phone app as well as a web-based resource.

Fuller information -such as BASC already provides, could be linked to, compete or in chunks- but the idea would be to present the essentials, plus a selection of interest points -the US quiz I tried randomised a proportion of the questions so they weren't all the same each time, a strong encouragement to keep doing the quiz until you'd answered all the questions, thereby reinforcing much of the information through repetition- in a format with wide appeal and that provides almost instant feedback.

It would also give BASC feedback on what shooters are most interested in and what those taking the test do or don't know, enabling the information provided to be developed accordingly.

I'm not suggesting that such online materials would be a substitute for practical training courses, but rather that they could be a way of engaging people who wouldn't normally consider taking instruction, and even people who felt they already knew all they needed to and just wanted to demonstrate to themselves or their mates that this was so by taking "that damn quiz".

Sorry if this is a bit off topic - perhaps I should switch to decaf for a bit!

I look forward to such an on-line quiz , if it is entirely dissociated with any attempt to impose mentoring conditions by the back door .Sorry if I come off as suspicious but I've been shooting now for 50 years and have seen and experienced the efforts of firearms legislation at first hand .Trust no politician is my first thought , my second would be distrust of large shooting organisations ,they've let us down badly in the past .I think that a simple yes / no answer to the question - are BASC inconsultation with any licensing authority suggesting that "qualification" should be a prerequisite for application / grant of a stalking oriented FAC ?

:old:
 
Last edited:
Seems a little strange to me that people are so against mandatory DSC training. Many countries in the Western world insist on formal qualification before you can hunt. Would it really be such a bad move? You never know, they may even decide that shooting on public land may be in the best interest of wildlife management. When I go to Canada I can shoot over half the country because I qualified in Hunters Education, ditto for Germany as well due to taking the Jagdschein (spelling may be a little off there).

It would be interesting as to the experience of those apposed to DSC, is it the lifelong stalkers who 'never needed it' just against change?

Personally I believe that some change must be made, not just in shooting; it should be embraced not opposed.

Of course this does not mean that private companies or the shooting associations should be making a profit from us, if it is mandated then it must be affordable to all and not the financially elite.

Look over this forum and you'll see many threads regarding land checks and supervisory conditions, if formal qualification and shooting on public land was available these conditions would be redundant; can anyone present a good argument against this?

​Hunting is a privilege for those who make the conscience decision to follow this amazing sport, it is not a business opportunity for the Police, associations or the privateer.

Just my thoughts.

Pete

I agree with the above 100% very wise words that I have thinking for years , and David instead of pussy footing around getting the odd police force in changing the odd condition on fac why not try the 1 thing in this country that would help the whole population of shooters in this country and that is 1 firearms law for every force and not how they wish to interrupt to suit them.
 
One of the bits in this release I don't get is the pushing for AOLQ for everyone, to my mind that includes deer if the caliber is suitable so is that removing the ability to grant a .22cfr for vermin and foxes and meaning you can go out and shoot small deer as well with no training? or that you won't get the grant at all till you have done training even if you don't want to shoot deer.

At the moment round here you can get a deer condition based on experience already gained, or you can get an accompanied one till you get a letter sent in to say you are safe etc or you can get it lifted when you have done training. Seems to make sense and work
 
Cwmman

Sorry if I missed your point, if a person cannot demonstrate some level of experience, then I see no reasons why someone should not go on a course or be asked to get experience before they are granted. As I see it this is exactly what ACPO are proposing, and we welcome this move.

What we vehemently oppose is someone who is clearly an experienced live quarry shooter being forced to take DSC1 or to be mentored for an undefinable length of time, but an undefined mentor just because they want deer on their licence!


David
 
The point is are you in favour of MANDATORY corses/experience for those wo cannot demonstrate any?
Cwmman

Sorry if I missed your point, if a person cannot demonstrate some level of experience, then I see no reasons why someone should not go on a course or be asked to get experience before they are granted. As I see it this is exactly what ACPO are proposing, and we welcome this move.

What we vehemently oppose is someone who is clearly an experienced live quarry shooter being forced to take DSC1 or to be mentored for an undefinable length of time, but an undefined mentor just because they want deer on their licence!


David
 
The point is are you in favour of MANDATORY corses/experience for those wo cannot demonstrate any?

Seems to me you're either deliberately pushing for an answer that's already been given to you several times or you don't have a full grasp of written English. Would it help if someone translated this into Welsh for you?
 
Ok point taken!
second part then would it not be better for BASC & shooting to be promoting, pushing this so as to be proactive towards this mandatory requirement for new FAC holders with no experience so as to be seen as responsible. I know they do but I haven't heard anything directly or in public about this specifically.
Seems to me you're either deliberately pushing for an answer that's already been given to you several times or you don't have a full grasp of written English. Would it help if someone translated this into Welsh for you?
 
Mandatory being another word for compulsory – so we would agree with ACPO that if someone is applying for FAC and cannot show any experience, and as a consequence the only option would be to refuse to grant then yes we would agree that training in this case would be the best bet. Would you agree?
 
What we ,and others, have been working against is mentoring or training conditions being placed on experienced shooters just because they want their existing certificate varied to include deer for example.


David

That sounds horribly familiar, I don't quite recall the precise number of times that I had to contact Hampshire Police and the Home Office, but then with only 40 odd years of shooting experience I suppose that I was still a novice to them. atb Tim
 
What doesn't seem to be realised is that by moving towards an AOLQ condition the police are backing off from the animal welfare issue that is non of their remit anyway. Now that can only be a good thing and they can concentrate on what IS their remit which is applicant suitability and need. If some form if training is the trade off for novice shooters that haven't any other means of instruction then sobeit. I can live with that.

Now all we have to get across to some people is that a deer isn't some form of mythical animal to be worshiped and revered. So why do people try to single it out for special treatment? You can't do this or that or doing this would be unsporting and unethical.

I remember Lorraine's answer when I put a newly shot roe in front of her and asked her how she was going to do the honors. Her reply was "Treat it like a bloody big rabbit" and it's worked for her ever since. Add to that is there any difference between shooting deer and shooting rabbit or fox. All shot with respect for quarry, all either headshot of heart & lung so can someone answer this for me, it's a genuine question.
 
My point is for the city boy with absolutely no idea, to prevent the possibility of an incident which could become public & harm our sport, but I agree most animals are very similar in anatomy & all quarry should be treated with respect
 
My particular issue with lack of training is the lack of any management plan that goes or should go with deer stalking.
Everybody keeps saying that the deer population is going up and up. Well I can tell you that in my part of Dorset it is definitely going down!!
We are not dealing with rabbits or flocks of birds, we are dealing with animals that generally live in well defined areas. That area may well cross several boundaries and should it also encompass several stalkers then the deer have little chance. It is very much a case of he's paid for the stalking so he'll take what he wants and if he doesn't shoot it then the neighbour will, etc etc etc.
Deer stalkers are not being trained enough to manage what they have. At least when there was a mentor condition imposed it gave someone with a little more experience the opportunity to impart some of their years earned wisdom to that person.
 
My particular issue with lack of training is the lack of any management plan that goes or should go with deer stalking.

But that's not the issue here. Basic shooting safety training is what's being advocated from what I've read. I realise that this is predominantly a deer stalking forum but this particular topic isn't about stalking.
 
But that's not the issue here. Basic shooting safety training is what's being advocated from what I've read. I realise that this is predominantly a deer stalking forum but this particular topic isn't about stalking.
But it is linked.
The mentor condition has gone some way to ensuring that some further training has been going on. Even if it's by the back door, so to speak.
 
Teyhan, in your part of the world, the problem may be that money talks, short term lease and people selling stalking by the day, so having to produce the goods, best conversation I had in a pub in puddle town, with a so called deer manager was how they decided which buck to keep for breeding to which they replied " that depends on how deep the clients pockets are " and they had all the dsc crap, member of the bds, etc
where as I with non of the above and no wish for them, turned down 1 k for a red stag, but take new stalkers out for free.
​but we transgress the only thing the police are interested in is safety and rightly so.
 
YES Thanks David that's exactly what I wanted to know, now will BASC be forwad thinking and roll out some proposals for this training in collaboration with the ACPO and be proactive in protectin our sport from a forward position in stead of fighting in retreat. (bolt the door before the horse bolts this time), thanks David.
Mandatory being another word for compulsory – so we would agree with ACPO that if someone is applying for FAC and cannot show any experience, and as a consequence the only option would be to refuse to grant then yes we would agree that training in this case would be the best bet. Would you agree?
 
Trust me, with our new CEO at the helm he will be making sure BASC drives forward and fights on the front foot!
David
 
Back
Top