WDFW Requested Legislation: Hunter Education Introduced 1/31 BIG CHANGE

[jason stevens]

I say leave it the way it is and add youth till they turn 18. After all were responsable for them until there 18. Let parents decide when the kids are responsable enough.imo kids shouldn't hunt until there twelve.

[lokidog]

This change is a start, but I am still agreeing with Bobcat.  And, JS, I know several 10 year olds that are a hell of a lot more responsible than many 18+ year olds I have known. 

[Curly]

Here is how the law should be written:  Hunter's between the age of 8 and 14 MUST be accompanied by an adult.

Just keep it simple.  It should just simply go back to basically how the law was prior to 1994.  What was wrong with the way it was? 

[Dhoey07]

Here is how it should be written.  Hunters between the ages of 8-14 should be accompanied by an adult, but if not, their parent/guardian will be held liable for any damages done by said 8-14 year old

[pianoman9701]

Here is how it should be written.  Hunters between the ages of 8-14 should be accompanied by an adult, but if not, their parent/guardian will be held liable for any damages done by said 8-14 year old

Parents are already responsible for damages done by their minor children unless the child has committed a criminal act for which he's tried as an adult.

[jason stevens]

This change is a start, but I am still agreeing with Bobcat.  And, JS, I know several 10 year olds that are a hell of a lot more responsible than many 18+ year olds I have known.

I agree some kids at 9 or 10 are very capable problem is some parents don't teach them right and the coment I made about youth til 18 was more for oppurtunity. Same with most states youth til 18 not 16 or 15 on fishing.as for charging for hunter ed I strongly disagree we pay enough and the instructors sign up for it and get special drawings when should the line be drawn enough is enough.

[Dhoey07]

Here is how it should be written.  Hunters between the ages of 8-14 should be accompanied by an adult, but if not, their parent/guardian will be held liable for any damages done by said 8-14 year old

Parents are already responsible for damages done by their minor children unless the child has committed a criminal act for which he's tried as an adult.

Then maybe it doesn't need to be written at all!

[bobcat]

Here is how the law should be written:  Hunter's between the age of 8 and 14 MUST be accompanied by an adult.

Just keep it simple.  It should just simply go back to basically how the law was prior to 1994.  What was wrong with the way it was? 

That's too restrictive and would solve a problem that doesn't exist.

[Curly]

Here is how the law should be written:  Hunter's between the age of 8 and 14 MUST be accompanied by an adult.

Just keep it simple.  It should just simply go back to basically how the law was prior to 1994.  What was wrong with the way it was? 

That's too restrictive and would solve a problem that doesn't exist.

It is not much different than what you suggested. 

How about a law that wouldn't restrict our freedom as much? Like simply a minimum age of 12 for hunting big game alone?

When we were growing up, the state had a law that said we couldn't hunt alone until we were 14.  That law never seemed to be a problem back then. 

I was just pointing out that if they are bent on proposing age restrictions between 8 and 14, then I wouldn't have a problem with them restricting a kid from hunting until he/she can pass hunters ed at 8 and then not letting them hunt alone until age 14.  It seems ok to me. 

Min age of 8 seems ok.  And Min age of 14 seems appropriate.........just like it seemed appropriate prior to the law being changed in 1994.

There are always going to be exceptions where some kids maybe could hunt safely at 6 or 7 and safely hunt alone at 9 or 10, but almost all Laws are like that...........they are set to encompass generalities. 

[BIGINNER]

how about just leave it the way it is? is there a current epidemic with 10 year olds running around the woods shooting people?


at the rate my son is growing a learning with his shooting, he will be ready to be shooting with me in the duck or dove blind with a single shot before he is 8 years old.

[BIGINNER]

Here is how the law should be written:  Hunter's between the age of 8 and 14 MUST be accompanied by an adult.

Just keep it simple.  It should just simply go back to basically how the law was prior to 1994.  What was wrong with the way it was? 

That's too restrictive and would solve a problem that doesn't exist.

It is not much different than what you suggested. 

How about a law that wouldn't restrict our freedom as much? Like simply a minimum age of 12 for hunting big game alone?

When we were growing up, the state had a law that said we couldn't hunt alone until we were 14.  That law never seemed to be a problem back then. 

I was just pointing out that if they are bent on proposing age restrictions between 8 and 14, then I wouldn't have a problem with them restricting a kid from hunting until he/she can pass hunters ed at 8 and then not letting them hunt alone until age 14.  It seems ok to me. 

Min age of 8 seems ok.  And Min age of 14 seems appropriate.........just like it seemed appropriate prior to the law being changed in 1994.

There are always going to be exceptions where some kids maybe could hunt safely at 6 or 7 and safely hunt alone at 9 or 10, but almost all Laws are like that...........they are set to encompass generalities.

I don't get the purpose for the min age.  if the child/adult/person is able to pass the hunters safety course on their own,.. they should be able to hunt...  isn't that the whole point of the class? to not give hunting licenses to people who aren't able to pass the class...

[bobcat]

I look at this from a dad's point of view. I don't want the state to tell me that I can't take my 12 year old daughter deer hunting unless I stay by her side the entire time. Why can't I put her on a stand while I go to another stand 300 yards away? Or whatever the situation may be. What if we are walking into a logged area behind a locked gate. I want her to walk to the end of one spur road while I walk down the other. With this new proposed law, we couldn't hunt that way. It wouldn't meet the definition of "accompany."

[bigtex]

how about just leave it the way it is?

Or how about we change it back to the way it was prior to 1994?

I am not arguing or disagreeing with you. The law was essentially inadvertently changed in 1994 and the supervision requirement was removed. Now some will say if the law was incorrectly changed then why didn't they change it in 1995? Well how much confusion will that have caused? Up until 1994 you cant hunt alone, then in the fall of 1994 you can hunt alone, but law changes in 1995 and now you can't hunt alone?

[BIGINNER]

I look at this from a dad's point of view. I don't want the state to tell me that I can't take my 12 year old daughter deer hunting unless I stay by her side the entire time. Why can't put her on a stand while I go to another stand 300 yards away? Or whatever the situation may be. What if we are walking into a logged area behind a locked gate. I want her to walk to the end of one spur road while I walk down the other. With this new proposed law, we couldn't hunt that way. It wouldn't meet he definition of "accompany."

[Elkaholic daWg]

 Only Change big enough for me  is to let it die and spend their time and our money on better things.