dsc level 1/2 - why take?

[sikamalc]

300wsm, thanks for the info. I have to say that the so called assessor I had was not that professional, he turned out to be a 28 year old FC worker who phoned once, on the evening that my father passed away, and never phoned back. I agree that he had no idea of my positon at the time, even though I told him, he insisted on questioning me, but there was very little apology for contacting me at 10pm at night.

Perhaps I and my two other friends were unlucky, but the whole affair was a complete joke through BASC. I ask about being a witness for level 2 because I have had a number of folk ask me to be a witness, and I have refused because I do not want anymore paperwork in my life. But I have no problem on the odd occassion helping somone out, as long as I do not have reams of paper work to fill or am involved with BASC.

Thanks again for the answer.

 

[stone]

good luck mark you may need it
monterey pine you hav expensive tastes

 

[mullbiker]

How about looking at the subject from the viewpoint of the poor sod who processes the application for grant of a firearms certificate .
The burden on said person is huge :-
Can the applicant be permitted to possess a firearm without danger to public safety ?------------Fancy putting YOUR name to the answer to this ?
Is the applicant of sound mind and temperate habits ? how do you check this ?
Experience and attitude to firearms ? again how is this established ?
I have found that the majority of people who oppose the DSC 1 use the line "I have been shooting for years ,why should I take the test "
Do these people have something to fear?
How does the firearms officer know how long you have been shooting and whither or not you have been doing so safely.
At the end of the day in MY opinion if the DSC 1 course improves your knowledge only slightly it is well worth the time /effort and cost.

 

[stone]

mullbiker
not that i want to be drawn into a long scale debate
but people who hav been stalking for a long time probaly feel that this certification is an insult to their intelligence and experiance,not that they have anything to fear, but all legislation will affect different people in different ways, to be told that you know nothing just because you do not hav the qualifications sucks big time and then punished for it is not fair but on the other hand we all hav to show a united front if DSC1 helps towards this then fine as i hav mine but was forced to get it , this was not right,
i ask only one question what experience does your FLO hav?

 

[JH83]

The fact is we have some of the most prohibitive firearms legislation in Europe, if not the World. We currently have to wait 3 Months (ish) for a FAC to be granted, have a FLO come to your house and inspect your storage and land which has to be signed for by the owner of the land, and that it is suited to your specific calibre, then usually have to be mentored by a pro-stalker, who then has to give you the thumbs up.

I can understand all this-it is comon sense and I certainly wouldnt want any Tom, Dick or Harry brandishing a 308, or taking pot shots at the neibours cat! I definatly feel that what we have in place works and that making people take expensive courses is OTT and prices many would be stalkers out of getting a FAC. This is a example, as someone has said already. of some jobsworth in a licensing department justifing their own existance by coming up with a 'great idea'.


We should take couses because we want to not because our arms have been twisted, but we are all such a good natured lot we tend to follow suit.

Rant over (for now).

James.

 

[paul k]

Interesting analogy Paul. Would you get in a car driven by some-one who refused to do a driving test.
If I have to allow a stalker onto my land to manage the roe and have to make a choice between someone has 15 years of stalking under their belt and another with a DSC level 1 and 15 years of experience I would choose the one with the DSC. Then if there is an accident I did my best to see the stalker was appropriatly trained when the legal **** hits the fan.

Fair points Mark. I agree that I would not get in a car where the driver had no licence but all I was trying to say that having the training and the licence does not make them a good driver or safe driver and in fact the courts have a constant stream of evidence to the contrary ranging from using mobiles to causing death by dangerous driving. I suggested that there is an analogy with DSC 1 but having a driving licence is a legal requirement whereas having DSC is not and this might alter the insurance position. Having DSC is no proof of competance any more than not having it is an indication of incompetance, what it does do as you point out, is give the landowner a "get out" clause in the event of an accident.

I completely understand your position, in this litigious world we have to cover our backsides - sad but true although BASC membership gives some comfort here with the inbuilt insurance.

I still point out that it is just deer stalkers who can have any sort of proof of training get out as rifle owners shooting just foxes, rabbits, goats and boar, as well as shotgun users, have no such certification and presumably the leaseholder cannot fall back on the training argument in the event of an accident related to the use of firearms rather than as a result of the actual deer stalking.

 

[ssgpiv]

Fabulous looking piece of ground markh. Am trying to acquire some myself but the inheritance tax wheeze and high lumber prices have driven values up to a point where I am not sure that woodland represents good value any longer.

 

[duggers]

hello all,
i started this thread for a reason to find peoples views on the said dsc1/2 and i am glad i did as it is good to hear other peoples 'mixed' thoughts on this matter.
from reading other peoples views it does seem that many people on here have taken the course for 'personal preference' and not because they feel they have 'had to' or 'needed to'!!
thankyou to all who have posted up to date, and look forward to reading more views in the future!!

regards

duggers

 

[SWR]

Hi Duggers,
I took the course about ten years ago. I'd just left the Forces and wanted to get into Environmental work, 'Rangering' or something. A friend of mine at the BDS was running a course and suggested that it would be a good move as I had very much enjoyed my time working with the Rangers on the deer at the estate he was manager of. I enjoyed the course and there was some very 'Old and bold' stalkers on it i must say. I knew nothing of deer and had to work hard at it. We all passed with high scores and my interest in deer grew into the rabid interest I have now. It helped me understand deer but not as much as this site and its members have.
I want to do my DSC2 but have mixed feelings about it as I think it is expensive and I'm not sure that it proves anything, I know stalkers with the DSC2 that can't stalk for toffee!. A good reference from a land owner would be just as good. I think we need 'best practice' and health and safety but I would prefer this to be in the form of a Deer Management NVQ.

Just my humble opinion Ladies and Gents!

There is a discussion on this very issue that is going on at the moment over on www.Deertalking.com in regard to it being a fair and even qualification along with it being a money making scheme by some individuals worth a look its under General Board

 

[MarkH]

Here's a little story about a DSC Level II stalker(Bob)
I have hunted with Bob for several years now and he has shot a lot of fallow with me and I have shot roe and reds with him. As he works in forestry he has the DSC Level II. Last weekend we went up to my cabin to see if we could reduce the roe deer population, Bod had been helping cull sika hinds in Ullapool so already had 7 sika/roe in the chiller that week.
The stalking on my land is hard so I said if you can shoot two, take two.
Half way through my stalk I heard a shot from the block Bob was in. Great. Then another shot. Great. Then another. Hum I dont think he can carry three roe back by himself. Then one final shot - this is management not a massacre!!!!!. Anyway I went over to were he was and asked how many he had shot, the answer-'one'. Shooting off sticks he missed the roe, the second hit it in the windpipe, the third shot through the saddle and 4th a finishing shot. Lots of cursing about ballistic tips being crap as this was the first batch he had hunted with.
I know Bob can shoot extremly well and his rifle was grouping MOA before we went out. I therefore suggested we check the zero on my 80m range. 3 shots prone right on the button - therefore not the bullets. I asked him to try a shot using the stick and that was 5" to the left and 2" high. Watching him shoot he was not supporting the fore-end with his hand but resting the fore-end on the stick. I suggested he hold the rifle like a normal offhand shot and use the stick to support the hand, this should steady the rifle better.
The conclusion is that being expert in shooting woodland roe and fallow does not translate into Scottish hillside stalking where if you use a bipod you will disappear into the heather. The other tip is to practice all field shooting positions to verify point of impact and alteration in group size. If Bob had known that to shoot off the sticks at that distance was going to produce a 5"-10" group he would have passed the shot or got a lot closer.
We mostly learn from our mistakes not our successes.

Mark

 

[Beowulf]

I can relate to that Mark! Highland stalking really did throw me a bit shooting off sticks and continuously buck fevered up!