WA Hunter Ed Legislation 4/15 Update

[bigtex]

House Bill 1199 was introduced today relating hunter safety (education). The bill was written at the request of WDFW and is sponored by Reps Blake, Chandler, Takko, Buys, Kirby, Orcutt, Lytton, Van De Wege, Nealey, Hudgins, Stanford, Wilcox, and Warnick

What the bill changes/does:

-Minimum age of 8 to take a class
-Military members are exempt from firearms skills portion
-WDFW may charge a registration fee of not more then $20 for the class. The fee will go towards hunter ed
-WDFW may charge a fee of not more then $10 for a duplicate hunter ed certificate
-Hunters under the age of 14 must be accompanied by a WA licensed hunter that is 18 or older
-Hunters under 14 is not required to be accompanied if they are the immediate family member of a private property owner or lessee and is hunting on that property.

Like I said, this bill is requested by WDFW. Typically agency requested bills get more “pull” in the legislature, however that is not always the case.

http://dlr.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/default.aspx?Bill=1199&year=2013

[lokidog]

Some of these, I agree with but I would like to hear what their reasoning is for this, especially the $20 fee.  Another question is what is the definition of "accompanied by?"  And, it should NOT have to be a "licensed" hunter, any adult should be acceptable.

[HUNTINCOUPLE]

Looks like good up grades to the program!

[bigtex]

Some of these, I agree with but I would like to hear what their reasoning is for this, especially the $20 fee.

The reasoning for the fee is there has been a problem of people signing up for multiple classes and not showing up, thus taking someone's spot. The reasoning is if someone pays they are more likely to show up. Also, the hunter ed program is getting more expensive to maintain, do you want additional funds coming out of WDFW Enforcement field staffing (less officers) or from those attending classes?

[bigtex]

Looks like good up grades to the program!

 
I agree

[cmiller85]

Aren't military personnel already exempt from taking the firearms skills portion?

They should expand that to include law inforcement.

[lokidog]

Some of these, I agree with but I would like to hear what their reasoning is for this, especially the $20 fee.

The reasoning for the fee is there has been a problem of people signing up for multiple classes and not showing up, thus taking someone's spot. The reasoning is if someone pays they are more likely to show up. Also, the hunter ed program is getting more expensive to maintain, do you want additional funds coming out of WDFW Enforcement field staffing (less officers) or from those attending classes?

OK, understand the double booking thing.  A refundable, or partly deposit would work to cover that.  I'd like to see what the actual budget is for HS versus the monies provided by the Feds.  Twenty bucks seems like a lot, especially for families with multiple kids going into the program.  The investment by the state into the HS program is an investment in WDFW's financial future since they are essentially recruiting new members.

I would also ADAMANTLY OPPOSE this based on the "licensed hunter" requirement for someone accompanying a shooter less than 14.  If it said accompanied by someone over 18 that had passed a HS class, I might go with it. 

I think the 14 yo age requirement is a good one, unless the person with them has to be sitting right next to them.  Within voice/visual contact being the requirement, then maybe.  Under age 10 or 12, then possibly OK with them being under direct control.

[JJD]

Considering they want “up to $20”, one would hope that a $10 registration fee would be enough for now.  But, considering we are dealing with a state bureaucracy, unlikely.

[danderson]

 Its all a big money grab, started last year when the department changed the hunter education program introducing non working firearms into the class room, also requiring all firearms used in the now  (not required) live fire portion of the class, most owned by instructors to register there firearms with the department.  They think there's money to be made by charging a upfront registration fee of 20.00 thus eliminating the instructors role in the process. I been instructing for 10 years and have never had an issue with double booking, that's just an excuse and a week one at best.

[Bob33]

"Up to" $20 covers future inflation for years to come. That is a small fee for a 15 to 20 hour class.

[danderson]

  Bob, Pittman Robertson money collected from the sale of sporting goods from across the nation amounts to millions of dollars back  each state for among other items education, we get a fraction of the money collected back to education, its mismanagement from our lawmakers to expect sportsmen and woman to cough up another user fee when we have already paid our FAIR share. Politicians need to do there job and stop creating new fees every time they need to fund a program that has been successful in its operation since its inception.
  I understand how the system works, the way we do things in the future depends on being able to adopt to new challenges, funding state programs like hunter education is and should always be a priority to anyone that has a steak in the future of hunting. With all the shootings that have taken place in the last few months public education should be at the front lines of our argument for more safe gun handling classes, and I'm afraid the 20.00 fee for registering will have a negative effect on enrollment, poor families wont enroll there kids and thus history repeats itself.

[bigtex]

"Up to" $20 covers future inflation for years to come. That is a small fee for a 15 to 20 hour class.

 
And a class that once you take it you are now set for life

[Bob33]

I'm not a fan of more government fees either but I don't think this is at all unreasonable.

As far as I know, most of the classes statewide are usually full. The problem is not a lack of students; it is a lack of instructors and facilities to teach at.

Since fees are mandated by law, the fee can never be more than $20 until a new law is passed. The program could easily have to live with an "up to $20" fee for ten years or more.  There is no guarantee what Pittman Robertson funds the state will receive.

Finally, if someone cannot afford an "up to" $20 fee for a class that is once in a lifetime, how will this person ever afford to hunt?

[bigtex]

Finally, if someone cannot afford an "up to" $20 fee for a class that is once in a lifetime, how will this person ever afford to hunt?

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[danderson]

That's the problem with the current mentality of our leadership in in the department, they don't get it,
it's not about hunting, IT'S ABOUT SAFTY