STRIKING THE BALANCE: A HUMANE APPROACH TO DEER POPULATION MANAGEMENT

[Klenchblaize]

Why would you even put something that’s puta representative on the spot or would take a long time or consultation within the society on an open forum.

I read 308Tikka’s post as a well-intentioned but frankly unhelpful comment by someone at the top of their deerstalking & marksmanship game, but seemingly without appreciation of the wider implications for those who wish to hunt deer with a rifle but may not be given of such good fortune, skill sets and opportunity.

At a time when the UK deer population is to all intent and purpose landowner enemy #1 and viewed as no more than out of control vermin to be shot on sight day and often into the night, I find it ironic there are SD members banging on about competency tests for shooting deer beyond 100 yards in the name of welfare. Where has this concern been for other four-legged critters who also bleed and limp when shot in the arse or jaw?

If the current DSC L1 ensures a candidate has demonstrated a full understanding of in-the-field weapons firearm safety that is good enough for me.

K

 

[DaveNeal]

as a relative newbie to centrefire - but I guess very similar to any shooting/skill acquisition - you only learn by doing. once you get a car license you can jump into a ferrari - is that right ? people will only improve the wind allowance, their quartering shot placement, etc by doing it, and against a live animal isnt the right way of doing it imo.

having done my dsc1 I'm not adverse to making that maybe a precondition before moving on from maybe a rimfire to a centrefire - those already on a full ticket would be grandfathered in, those looking to upgrade/put in for a centrefire maybe have to have a dsc of some form to at least have some knowledge of where they're supposed to be putting the bullet.

tricky subject.

 

[tarponhead]

as a relative newbie to centrefire - but I guess very similar to any shooting/skill acquisition - you only learn by doing. once you get a car license you can jump into a ferrari - is that right ? people will only improve the wind allowance, their quartering shot placement, etc by doing it, and against a live animal isnt the right way of doing it imo.

having done my dsc1 I'm not adverse to making that maybe a precondition before moving on from maybe a rimfire to a centrefire - those already on a full ticket would be grandfathered in, those looking to upgrade/put in for a centrefire maybe have to have a dsc of some form to at least have some knowledge of where they're supposed to be putting the bullet.

tricky subject.

Re-test at each FAC renewal at a HO approved club - easier than getting a medical report!

 

[Sabian223]

Media or a timed corporate reply to recent debate within this forum given the date the report was written ….

I'll just leave this here.....Concerns raised about Ashdown Forest deer numbers - BBC News

 

[Ronin]

I'll just leave this here.....Concerns raised about Ashdown Forest deer numbers - BBC News

Wonder who managers the deer on Ashdown Forest

 

[precision_stalker]

We also have to remember that lvl 1 / 2 courses are not mandatory. Be interesting to see how many out there have not completed these courses. I’m not saying they are the be all and end all but they give the foundation.

 

[Bavarianbrit]

We also have to remember that lvl 1 / 2 courses are not mandatory. Be interesting to see how many out there have not completed these courses. I’m not saying they are the be all and end all but they give the foundation.

Not mandatory but without them you shrink the places where you can stalk.

 

[Dickie]

In reply to post #11

I don’t think anyone has raised this in this thread

The level one test standard has been significantly lowered in recent years

BDS is a provider of level one training and testing (along with other organisations ) however these others are not soley engaged with interest in deer or deer welfare

By adopting the reduced standards or seemingly not objecting or refusing to adopt the lower standard, the folk in charge of BDS appear to be going against the very ethos of the society - deer welfare, training etc

The lower standards include coaching candidates ,,,,, through the test

They now release this article yesterday (11th jan) which includes data from a collection carried out in 2005, which is neither current or relevant to deer management in 2024

Standards should be made higher not lower

there was talk of Pre DSC training being released by BDS two years ago - it never happened

There is no perceived need for development of shooting skills As there have been many attempts from my own branch to have extended range days so folk can deal with wounded and mobile animals that require follow up

I could go on but this is being discussed in at least two other threads within this forum

In essence BDS are by their very nature the go to place for Deer Management and deer welfare matters yet the current leadership are failing in their duties to provide the very basic levels of service towards that by adopting a training module that is far below what was in place before

They could have objected and refused to adopt - yet did not

Would BDS support a mandatory annual marksmanship test? Conditions to reflect on FAC ?
From post #2

 

[DaveNeal]

Would BDS support a mandatory annual marksmanship test? Conditions to reflect on FAC ?
From post #2

someone else said it above - maybe at renewal, yearly seems excessive. rims should probably be exempt, just centres.

 

[Dickie]

someone else said it above - maybe at renewal, yearly seems excessive. rims should probably be exempt, just centres.

I was putting it from post#2 as Ronin suggested no one had mentioned it as per my post #11

 

[Ronin]

I was putting it from post#2 as Ronin suggested no one had mentioned it as per my post #11

Apologies, I had inadvertently missed that.

Mandatory testing - thorny subject, but in my head and from what I’ve seen taking clients out over a number of years, plus witnessed range days with local BDS branch which I used to help with there is MOST DEFINITELY a need - at least on initial grant and on renewal

Should there be mandatory hunting training (vermin, deer, winged game)

Again -I personally think there should be from my comment in the second paragraph above

Should additional training and help be given by the likes of BDS to assist personal development of rifle skills (Whixh is something that needs regular and frequent practice to maintain base level)

Yes I believe so

This is something my branch and others have been trying to put forward to HQ for literally years - to develop skills so stalkers are in a position to deal with calm, controlled dispatch of wounded animal that is mobile

With that comes an element of distance familiarisation

 

[Dickie]

Apologies, I had inadvertently missed that.

Mandatory testing - thorny subject, but in my head and from what I’ve seen taking clients out over a number of years, plus witnessed range days with local BDS branch which I used to help with there is MOST DEFINITELY a need - at least on initial grant and on renewal

Should there be mandatory hunting training (vermin, deer, winged game)

Again -I personally think there should be from my comment in the second paragraph above

Should additional training and help be given by the likes of BDS to assist personal development of rifle skills (Whixh is something that needs regular and frequent practice to maintain base level)

Yes I believe so

This is something my branch and others have been trying to put forward to HQ for literally years - to develop skills so stalkers are in a position to deal with calm, controlled dispatch of wounded animal that is mobile

With that comes an element of distance familiarisation

Whilst I agree with your point about practice and personal development with regards to positional and ranges, it can be done with BDS members and local regions but ranges are far and few, what about the non members and those who don’t belong to any organisation and would poke 2 fingers up at the mention of it.

 

[Selous]

“the British Deer Society emphasises that continuous training, increased practice, and developing experience can contribute to reducing the potential for deer being inadvertently wounded during culling operations.”

But does not provide access to a pathway for continued skills training or practice. The interval of monthly practice being used elsewhere in the documentation.


“The high miss rate of basic-level stalkers suggests that training should include additional firing practice under realistic shooting conditions.”

Despite its own findings, the BDS supports a shooting assessment of only 6 rounds across the whole of the industry standard setting qualification process.

At first reading of the precis, it has a few points that stand out. Firstly, the use of the phrase “distant deer”, hopefully the full report will attach some concrete data to that vague phrase. Secondly, that the culling of female deer was considered a cause of reduced accuracy. Last time I checked meaningful population control is achieved through the control of breeding females. If this is the case, I wonder about the 100 or so stalkers that were the source of the data.

Hopefully reading the whole report will answer the questions and concerns this has raised for me.

Dave, in reality it is worse than you report… if you discount the two humane dispatch shots from the test the candidates fire only 4 shots to prove competency whilst stalking!

 

[25 Sharps]

as a relative newbie to centrefire - but I guess very similar to any shooting/skill acquisition - you only learn by doing. once you get a car license you can jump into a ferrari - is that right ? people will only improve the wind allowance, their quartering shot placement, etc by doing it, and against a live animal isnt the right way of doing it imo.

having done my dsc1 I'm not adverse to making that maybe a precondition before moving on from maybe a rimfire to a centrefire - those already on a full ticket would be grandfathered in, those looking to upgrade/put in for a centrefire maybe have to have a dsc of some form to at least have some knowledge of where they're supposed to be putting the bullet.

tricky subject.

You can’t take a quartering shot on a piece of paper though.

Plenty of people learn through the informal mentoring route, I’ve mentored 4 people not their first deer in the last couple of years, who wouldn’t have had the cash to do DSC1.

One of them has now shot 4 deer with me including a couple at 200 yards plus off sticks, with perfect shot placement, as he’s a natural shot.

Why should these people have the rug pulled from under them?

 

[RJD]

This is just a way to sell more courses to profit the businesscharity

 

[Jagdmatch]

I know you all mean well and to a certain point I do not disagree with assessment, however this is one of the tasks I have for a day job and it not that simple. How do you split up the shoot disciplines?
If you fail one do you get another go that day?
How soon before you try again? What is the cost? ( I am on about £230 per day as an assessor)
Note the NRA SCC assessment, which can be do on a yearly basis and contains no actual shooting.
What about the keen people who like me practice at club events . Does this count?
Reality is that both BDS training Dept and DMQ need a review. How many are accredited trainers and assessors? Is there a National development plan based around both shooting and practical skills with learning outcomes and standards?
The BDS do a great job on a very narrow band width. I will alway be a member unless they throw me out but in reality we need to be shooting more deer in a professional manner and spending less time talking about it!

 

[308tikka]

My comments/question was explicitly reinforced at the end-questions,not proposals.

The real points are:

Is the standard good enough?
If not should it be improved?
If it is, should it be tested on a regular basis to ensure the quickest outcome for deer?

If so, frequency should be debated.

Skills fade. Eyesight and hold reduces with age or injury. Testing/retesting happens in many industries and occupations. No need to be afraid of it. We retest on EFAW+F.

When starting out like many I paid for guided stalks. On each occasion the stalker tested the clients shooting ability. If not capable, no shooting of deer-but could follow stalker around and learn other aspects. I didnt have a problem, but was assured others did.

Even good shots have off days. But its disappointing there is so much antagonism towards advocating minimum standards to kill deer humanely and to responsibly use firearms - which in my personal opinion means regularly using them for familiarity including rangework, even if thats informal.

The ‘buck test’ isnt even remotely difficult but some people struggle and dont want to put the effort in to be better.

Some people can do rangework and not on animals but I find it difficult to believe there are people who are excellent on deer but cant hit a stationary paper target.

Perhaps people dont know how to improve. This is where organisations and clubs might assist.

Perhaps this is why there are people who take shots beyond their capability and leave jaws hanging off, for a slow, inhumane death.

There is only going to be more scrutiny in the years to come. It might be wise to get ahead of that curve.

 

[JMH123]

I have to say that talk of a mandatory annual competence test, whilst doubtless well intentioned in spirit, is misguided, naive, and unnecessary.

Likewise in principle (FAC) renewal or application ‘tests’. That is not what the FAC (or SGC) is for.

Standards need to be self enforced. Some people may be irresponsible or unsporting in their approach in the field ( I don’t mean unsafe here) but you won’t change that with a ‘test’, however frequent.

It may be that stalkers entering the world through the DSC regime start their journey with a testing mindset, or perhaps assume that everyone has a certificate to show their merit as a stalker, but there is a large body of stalkers who don’t. I’m not knocking the DSC at all here, just the view that ongoing testing and certification (and more of it) is a cure all.

I certainly encourage a responsible approach, and am appalled by some of the stalking posts I see on Facebook, but I’m afraid you can’t expect to take that away by third party testing. What you can expect is an admin nightmare and another hurdle to jump. What an unnecessary and ineffectual hassle.

Death by a thousand cuts- be careful what you wish for…….

 

[finnbear270]

I'll just leave this here.....Concerns raised about Ashdown Forest deer numbers - BBC News

Blatant statement from an anti gun in there.
"We will never achieve ecological harmony through the barrel of a gun,"

 

[308tikka]

Blatant statement from an anti gun in there.
"We will never achieve ecological harmony through the barrel of a gun,"

It gets worse. Plenty of foxhunters use the fact there are small numbers of wounded animals as some sort of justification for current trail hunts and reversion to legal fox hunting with hounds. Never going to happen but they will drag us into their argument. Saw it over Boxing Day.

Some of the stuff on social media is horrific. Its what will turn opinion against among the undecided.

I take the points on administration, and compulsion - but at least then consider a standard deemed ethical and sufficient to demonstrate those achieving it are both safe, and proficient. Does it have to be shooting 5 shots into a 2” circle in 60 secs - absolutely not.

If we have a standard for people to pass/train to - by themselves or among friends/colleagues - they will get better. Fewer incidents of wounded deer.

Isnt that something we should aspire to agree on ?