Hunter Education changes

[huntnphool]

Well it is official. I got a letter from Director Anderson and he fully supports the move to remove all working Firearms from Hunter Education Classes.

 I guess I am confused then.

 

[Bob33]

Use of non-functioning firearms for classroom instruction (not live fire) is being considered.

[huntnphool]

Use of non-functioning firearms for classroom instruction (not live fire) is being considered.

 I got that much of it, now back to my original question. What is the rational behind it?

[Bob33]

Let me ask you the question: if you ran a business, wouldn't you evaluate ways to improve the consistency of your product or service, to reduce your liability, and to attract more customers?

Why do they have to have a rationale for that?  Why wouldn't they?

[huntnphool]

Let me ask you the question: if you ran a business, wouldn't you evaluate ways to improve the consistency of your product or service, to reduce your liability, and to attract more customers?

Why do they have to have a rationale for that?  Why wouldn't they?

 Down Kujo, I simply asked a question that I did not see explained earlier in the thread and was wondering. A simple "liability" would have sufficed and kept your blood pressure down.

[pianoman9701]

Well it is official. I got a letter from Director Anderson and he fully supports the move to remove all working Firearms from Hunter Education Classes.
I expect them to tell everyone at IST in Yakima and have a completion date of July 2013. After that you will never touch a working firearm in Hunter Ed Class. They also want to do away with any live fire days.
They are spending thousands on firearms with no firing pin.
I am told only on set of five per class.

So that is it for me, when the final word comes that I am not allowed to use working firearms in my classes than I am done,

Stay in it for the kids. You don't do this for the WDFW. You do it for the future of hunting. I'm not sure all of this information is accurate, anyway. The kids need you to continue teaching them about our sport. Don't quit.

[huntnphool]

Well it is official. I got a letter from Director Anderson and he fully supports the move to remove all working Firearms from Hunter Education Classes.
I expect them to tell everyone at IST in Yakima and have a completion date of July 2013. After that you will never touch a working firearm in Hunter Ed Class. They also want to do away with any live fire days.
They are spending thousands on firearms with no firing pin.
I am told only on set of five per class.

So that is it for me, when the final word comes that I am not allowed to use working firearms in my classes than I am done,

Stay in it for the kids. You don't do this for the WDFW. You do it for the future of hunting. I'm not sure all of this information is accurate, anyway. The kids need you to continue teaching them about our sport. Don't quit.

+1

[Bob33]

Let me ask you the question: if you ran a business, wouldn't you evaluate ways to improve the consistency of your product or service, to reduce your liability, and to attract more customers?

Why do they have to have a rationale for that?  Why wouldn't they?

 Down Kujo, I simply asked a question that I did not see explained earlier in the thread and was wondering. A simple "liability" would have sufficed and kept your blood pressure down.

I did post earlier that "First off, no changes have been made.  The state is evaluating many issues: consistency of instruction, finding ways to reach more potential hunters, liability risks, and so forth."

I am quite certain some changes will be made, and I'm pretty sure I won't agree with all of them.  I'm positive some instructors won't agree with all of them.  There are some instructors who don't want any changes, period. 

I'm going to wait and see what the changes are.  Rather than throw my toys down and go home, I'll try to find a way to work around anything I find distasteful and still teach students about hunting and firearm safety.  If the state mandates that all firearms must be inert, I suspect I could still teach firearm safety using a gun without a firing pin for classroom purposes.

It really is unfortunate that any change will result in the loss of some good instructors, because in the end we all suffer if more hunters are not joining our ranks in the future.

So...

[Special T]

Bob, what are some of the things that they are "considering" to attract potential hunters? I would really like to know.

This pic is an example of what every business man already knows.

Another business 101 that the WDFW fails at is that it is less costly to keep a customer than to go out and find a new one.  the rule of thumb is it costs about 7-8times as much to find and sell a new customer than keep an existing customer happy and purchasing from you.

The WDFW is so disconnected from reality i do not think they even have a clear path/goal to work tward... I get the feeling they run around like chicken little crying the sky is falling, trying to do anything to keep hunter's $$$ coming in...

[steen]

I won't quit cause then there would be non hunters teaching the classes.  That would be the start of no hunting.

[Cascade_fisher]

Just FYI - Live fire is optional and not required now to complete the course.

[ghosthunter]

Let me ask you the question: if you ran a business, wouldn't you evaluate ways to improve the consistency of your product or service, to reduce your liability, and to attract more customers?

Why do they have to have a rationale for that?  Why wouldn't they?

 Down Kujo, I simply asked a question that I did not see explained earlier in the thread and was wondering. A simple "liability" would have sufficed and kept your blood pressure down.

I did post earlier that "First off, no changes have been made.  The state is evaluating many issues: consistency of instruction, finding ways to reach more potential hunters, liability risks, and so forth."

I am quite certain some changes will be made, and I'm pretty sure I won't agree with all of them.  I'm positive some instructors won't agree with all of them.  There are some instructors who don't want any changes, period. 

I'm going to wait and see what the changes are.  Rather than throw my toys down and go home, I'll try to find a way to work around anything I find distasteful and still teach students about hunting and firearm safety.  If the state mandates that all firearms must be inert, I suspect I could still teach firearm safety using a gun without a firing pin for classroom purposes.

It really is unfortunate that any change will result in the loss of some good instructors, because in the end we all suffer if more hunters are not joining our ranks in the future.

So...

I am sorry but I disagree. The decision has been made it is a done deal. The Dept. has already decided to ban all working firearms from Hunter ed classes and any one who says no change has been made is not being truthful. The change has been made in the mind of the department and it will be done. They just have not announced it yet. How do I know? I have a letter in my hand from the Director. One of my teaching team received a call from Sgt. Kline because he wrote the director about the change, That instructor, a very good one has already quit the program. I have already told Dan Boes that I will not teach classes under this requirement and when they tell me I can no longer bring working firearms into classes I will be done after 17 years.  My teaching team consits of 12 instructors who will all make their own decision.
As I understand it some instructor some where transported a loaded handgun to a class and opened up to expose a live round. Excuse me but isn't it the instructors primary purpose to insure that do sent happen. Instead of dealing with that instructor every instructor must live under this requirement or leave the program.
Trauma center around the country were having problems with leaving items in patients, They did not stop operating. They came up with simple required check list to insure those things never happen. The same could have been done here.

Even more irritating to me is there are instructors out there who just buckle down and do whatever is asked. Never mind the effect it may have on preventing accidents down the road. I bring in 20 or more firearms of assorted shapes and sizes the first two classes to let students handle a selection of rifles and shotguns. The 2nd week we have only shotguns mostly state issue as the students will do skills and range with a shotgun. because we teach at a shotgun range. This is for 25 students.
Now the dept is going to limit us to a set of five non working firearms of different actions for 25 students. heck we have 12 students on a skill coarse at one time.
Students enjoy the different arms and look foreward to handling them. Many accidents are because people do not check firearms to see if they are loaded or dint know how. In my mind different arms by different makers goes a long way to solving that.
This is not about if you can teach a class with five fake guns. It is about Should we teach a class with five fake guns. Sorry I say no way.

The law says that they have to go through 10 hrs of certified training. It do sent say it has to be a state run program. Maybe it is time to become NRA certified and  put on classes. That way we would not have to put up with these dumb requirements.

 yes dumb because Hunter Ed Instructors have a excellent safety record over many years. There no reason for these anti gun tactics.

[ghosthunter]

If you cant tell I am a little upset at this. I have made copies of the directors letter and passing it out to everyone I know. Tomorrow I am going to start writing my state Reps.

If you are concerned direct your letters to the Director. It wont do any good but it is better than rolling over like a whipped puppy.

[Special T]

GH, you passion is great and important. I agree with much of what you have said. Obviously the state is trying to eliminate as much liability as possible at the expense of good hands on experience. If you can find an alternative way to train kids I think a little completion is good.  You would have your work cut out for yourself, and others, in order to have an alternative class accepted.

It always takes less effort to influence change from the inside of an organization than to start all over on the outside.. Just remember that is how the Anti Gun/hunting crowd has co-opted our WDFW, from the inside... 

[ICEMAN]

Great perspective Ghosthunter, thanks.