Bill to restrict young hunters misses deadline

[Diehard0123]

By Jerry Cornfield
Herald Writer

OLYMPIA -- Lawmakers will not be stopping the state's youngest hunters from going out alone.

Legislation requiring adults accompany hunters under the age of 14 did not pass the state Senate by Friday's deadline to act on bills that are not necessary to implement the budget.

"I just think they ran out of floor time," said the bill's author, Rep. Brian Blake, D-Aberdeen.

Blake sought to restore rules that were in effect in Washington until 1994. That year, the Legislature erased any restrictions on young hunters other than to require them to have a license.

The legislation that cleared the House in March applied to hunting on public lands only. It required the supervising adults to be licensed hunters and keep the young hunter within earshot or eyesight at all times.

Blake also wrote a bill requiring those hiking, biking or recreating in some manner on public lands where hunting is allowed to wear fluorescent orange clothing. It did not come up for a vote in committee.

Those bills emerged following the tragic shooting death of an Oso woman in August 2008. She was allegedly killed by a 14-year-old Concrete boy who was hunting bear with his 16-year-old brother. She was shot in the head when she bent over to put a jacket into a backpack.

State officials said she was the only nonhunter to die in 515 gun-related incidents involving hunters dating back to 1980.

Though disappointed by the outcome this session, Blake said he hoped the dialogue spurred by the bills would "make the outdoors a little safer."

State Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, said she would have voted for the bill had it come up.

"It was one of those things that should have happened," she said. "It is a good bill now. It'll be a better bill next year."

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20090421/NEWS01/704219855#Bill.to.restrict.young.hunters.misses.deadline

[Kain]

I actually thought this was a good bill.  They had exceptions for hunting private land which was one of my problems with age restrictions on hunting alone.  Thats makes sense to me.  A landowner can let a younger hunter on his property alone if he think he is responsible enough. 

The bill that required non hunters to wear safety orange was not good though.  It just created animosity between hunters and other outdoor recreation groups.  I wish there was an easy way to let the general public know when its hunting season but giving someone a ticket for not wearing orange while hiking would have been a hunter PR nightmare.

[Curly]

I didn't like the bill.  I don't see anything wrong with requiring a minimum age of 14 or even 16 for hunting without adult supervision but the part about requiring non hunters to wear blaze orange was b.s. 

Also, this part is wrong: "State officials said she was the only nonhunter to die in 515 gun-related incidents involving hunters dating back to 1980."  The brush picker that was shot by an elk hunter last year must not count since he was an illegal.

[Curly]

p.s. - why can't they just make a simple bill instead of adding all kinds of crap to it?  Just make a bill that simply says a person has to be x years old to hunt unsupervised and keep it at that? 

[oneezreiter]

I'm with Curly on this one.  Laws/rules should be simple and easy to follow.  Making non hunters wear orange is just going to piss them off. The money the state would spend on enforcement would be better invested in educating all outdoorsmen on the hazards and potential dangers associated with partaking in outdoor recreation.

[Kain]

I thought the bill that required non-hunters to wear orange was a separate bill.  

"Blake also wrote a bill requiring those hiking, biking or recreating in some manner on public lands where hunting is allowed to wear fluorescent orange clothing. It did not come up for a vote in committee."

[oneezreiter]

Either way I don't like it. 

[Curly]

I thought the bill that required non-hunters to wear orange was a separate bill.  

"Blake also wrote a bill requiring those hiking, biking or recreating in some manner on public lands where hunting is allowed to wear fluorescent orange clothing. It did not come up for a vote in committee."

My bad.......I read too quickly and didn't comprehend very well   Serves me right for trying to quickly catch up on some issues in between working on more boring issues at my job.

Now that I've read a little slower, I wonder what bill senator Haugen was referring to when she said "she would have voted for the bill had it come up.  It is a good bill now. It'll be a better bill next year."      I hope she wasn't talking about the orange requirement.  The other bill I can live with.

[rasbo]

non hunters having to wear orange is another reason to hate us hunters..But I dont have a problem with it for me or them..If we could trust everyone to identify before they shoot we wouldnt have any of these problems..Just another example of fews actions dictating what happenes to the masses

[Machias]

The "requirement" would be silly!

That said there is nothing wrong with educating outdoor enthusiast about hunting seasons and encouraging them to be "seen".  We do it all the time for motorcycle and bicycle riders on the roadways and they don't end up hating car drivers.  I always remind members of my mule club to put some blaze orange on their animals and their tack when they ride in the spring and fall. 

[Ray]

I could live with the bill (other than the everybody has to wear orange part) but I am also glad it did not make it. Plenty of good kids are capable of carrying themselves safely in the outdoors.

[granola/hippyslayer]

yes the hunter orange was too much. I have always and will always believe it boils down to bad parenting.