WA Hunter Ed Legislation 4/15 Update

[bigtex]

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

Then why is it called "Hunter Education"? http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/huntered/ As it is in most states

[ghosthunter]

I have been a instructor for 17 years. People booking and not sowing up is a problem in some Areas. Skagit is one. Some instructors have been charging the fee for years to hold your seat. Than it is refunded after you attend.
I never wanted to mess with money collection. If the state wanted fee collected I have always said they should do it themselves.

My class starting Feb. filled with 20 people in less than a week. And there are at least 12 on a waiting list.

Also instructors have wanted a age limit for years. Many students are not ready for what is evolved At even 9 or 10. Under 8 has a low chane of passing they just don't have the reading skills yet. I know some do but most don't .

I think this is important t because in my option the state weakend the program with the new policies last July especially on range day. So people in my opinion will get through that should not. Because they are no longer required to shoot a youth model firearm.

In all I support the new law.

[PolarBear]

It sounds  reasonable to me.  I do, however thing that the minimum age should be 10.  I attended my daughter's classes and you would be surprised the number of really young kids that their parents are forcing them to take the class because they just want another set of tags.  I watched 2 kids in my daughter's class that were both under age 9  where the parents sat next to them and did all the work for them.  At least those kids miserably failed the shooting and written tests when the parents had to leave them alone.  Those kids were a waste of space in the class when others were waiting to get in.  A friend of mine is an instructor and he said that it is very common to have really young kids being pushed through the class who have zero business being there.

[Branden]

It sounds  reasonable to me.  I do, however thing that the minimum age should be 10.  I attended my daughter's classes and you would be surprised the number of really young kids that their parents are forcing them to take the class because they just want another set of tags.  I watched 2 kids in my daughter's class that were both under age 9  where the parents sat next to them and did all the work for them.  At least those kids miserably failed the shooting and written tests when the parents had to leave them alone.  Those kids were a waste of space in the class when others were waiting to get in.  A friend of mine is an instructor and he said that it is very common to have really young kids being pushed through the class who have zero business being there.

I disagree about the age thing. I passed when I was 7, my brother 8, and my niece just passed at the age of 9. My brother and I both killed our first doe at age 9.

[brew]

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

They should expand that to include law inforcement.

military personnel are exempt from the firearms skills portion-they just have to file the correct paperwork with the state

[PolarBear]

It sounds  reasonable to me.  I do, however thing that the minimum age should be 10.  I attended my daughter's classes and you would be surprised the number of really young kids that their parents are forcing them to take the class because they just want another set of tags.  I watched 2 kids in my daughter's class that were both under age 9  where the parents sat next to them and did all the work for them.  At least those kids miserably failed the shooting and written tests when the parents had to leave them alone.  Those kids were a waste of space in the class when others were waiting to get in.  A friend of mine is an instructor and he said that it is very common to have really young kids being pushed through the class who have zero business being there.

I disagree about the age thing. I passed when I was 7, my brother 8, and my niece just passed at the age of 9. My brother and I both killed our first doe at age 9.

There are exceptions but I think the majority of kids under 10 are not mature enough to grasp the whole safety thing.  Hell, most of my kid's friends who are 9-13, I don't want to be in the same county as them with a gun in their hand!  By the way, I was hunting alone at age 6 and shot my first buck but I also had to prove myself over and over again before I was even allowed to touch a gun.

[Bluemoon]

"military personnel are exempt from the firearms skills portion-they just have to file the correct paperwork with the state"

IMO they should not be exempt.  I train for many from Ft. Lewis.  From E-8 & E-9's
to many O-5's and up.  These people might be good with their M-4's,  But the majority I see out here  have no clue to handling their shotguns and sporting rifles in a safe manner.
No offense to any of them, but I see this on a daily basis.  I do not hesitate to tell them so either when I see it.   
Just my .02

[jrebel]

I like it.....  I am not sure there should be an age limit to take the class.  If you can pass it and handle firearms in a safe manner then have at it.  If you are not you fail.  Parents should know when there kids are ready.   My daughter will be ready at 7.  My some.....probably not til 8 or 9????only time will tell.   

I like the fee.  For those who appose the fee; how are you gonna get this youth a tag  and license?  That is far more expensive.

Jrebel

[SevenD]

"military personnel are exempt from the firearms skills portion-they just have to file the correct paperwork with the state"

IMO they should not be exempt.  I train for many from Ft. Lewis.  From E-8 & E-9's
to many O-5's and up.  These people might be good with their M-4's,  But the majority I see out here are have no clue to handling their shotguns and sporting rifles in a safe manner.
No offense to any of them, but I see this on a daily basis.  I do not hesitate to tell them so either when I see it.   
Just my .02

I would agree that, but many military move often and are gone so much that the individuals that want to hunt may only be available for a portion of a season, so waiting around for a class to start would most likely ruin the season for him/her.

The issue of knowing how to operate your weapon and hunting safely is the responsibility of the individual. Otherwise we wouldn't have the "good for life hunter education." 

[danderson]

  I think there's some really good points made about the minimum age being set to a specific number, I don't disagree with that, however if you dissect the contents of the class its about education and not hunting, I'm surprised that even our Token Representative from the agency doesn't understand that. There's very little required content that has anything to do with actual  hunting, that is a misconception. Its called Hunter Education for a reason, we need to educate our youth about the inherent dangers associated with handling firearms, Period.

[Hunterman]

Some of the changes look good.. The only thing I would change is the age from 8 to at lease 10, and then to totally exempt ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY from hunters ed.

Hunterman(Tony)

[lokidog]

Some of the changes look good.. The only thing I would change is the age from 8 to at lease 10, and then to totally exempt ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY from hunters ed.

Hunterman(Tony)

I still think the active duty guys should still have to know WA game laws and such.  Maybe they could do a test on-line or something.  I have no problems with them not having to do the range portion.

[bigtex]

Some of the changes look good.. The only thing I would change is the age from 8 to at lease 10, and then to totally exempt ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY from hunters ed.

Hunterman(Tony)

I still think the active duty guys should still have to know WA game laws and such.  Maybe they could do a test on-line or something.  I have no problems with them not having to do the range portion.

That is what is being proposed...

[ghosthunter]

It sounds  reasonable to me.  I do, however thing that the minimum age should be 10.  I attended my daughter's classes and you would be surprised the number of really young kids that their parents are forcing them to take the class because they just want another set of tags.  I watched 2 kids in my daughter's class that were both under age 9  where the parents sat next to them and did all the work for them.  At least those kids miserably failed the shooting and written tests when the parents had to leave them alone.  Those kids were a waste of space in the class when others were waiting to get in.  A friend of mine is an instructor and he said that it is very common to have really young kids being pushed through the class who have zero business being there.

I agree with this. I think the state had to choose an age. It is easier to get people on boardodor 8 years old limit. 10 would be a battle and maybe nix any age limit for sometime. It's a step.

[JLS]

Some of the changes look good.. The only thing I would change is the age from 8 to at lease 10, and then to totally exempt ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY from hunters ed.

Hunterman(Tony)

No disrespect to the military, but I think this would be a bad move.  Talk to any of the game wardens around a military installment, and they'll tell you that military personnel can keep them very busy.