Are you for or against a mandatory Bow Hunter's Course and Why?

[Elkaholic daWg]

It was one day and it was anything but a waste of a day. I had fun and learned a lot. And im not a new guy to archery either. I know more about archery than most and the course was great.  The way I see it the only way to get rid of the people we always complain about is to implement this course. Resources are thin, we need to weed out the umdesirables and strengthen the bowhunting herd.

Who is going to be the judge and jury on this? Seems rather discriminatory to me and I think it could end up being to subjective.

 THE Nanny State elected by those of pugetropolis transplanted from kookifornia and other liberal states over the last 40 years.
 Careful what Y'all wish for!

 If you want to relieve bowhunters of the lazy ones, Just have DFW do away with resource allocation. When it was implemented 30 years ago the archery crowd got a BUNCH of inexperienced  newbies due to the favorable seasons and ability to plug cows at the time.   

[Fishhunt223]

I had to take one to hunt is South Dakota, it was one day and not to bad.  met some nice people, learned a little bit about bow hunting, and had a good time.  I think that it gets rid of the lazy hunters that just bow hunt because there are less people.  If you won't get off your ass to get the right shot then you won't get out of the house to do the class either.  I am all for it.

Obviously most of them got off their asses to do the regular hunter Ed so I'm sure they would jump through this hoop as well. All that will happen is all of the people who don't want to be there will ruin the class for everybody who is actually there to learn.   

[724wd]

NOT in favor.  too many regulations as is.  everyone seems to be worried about the guy that doesn't hunt very hard and takes shots too far.  how long will this guy stick to bow hunting when year after year he doesn't connect?  bowhunters tend to be a little more 'hardcore' than the bullet crowd.  there are exceptions to everything, of course, and no amount of classes will change that.

instead of a mandatory class, why not work with local clubs to get more kids involved?  NASP, anyone?  you can't teach ethics to an old dog, but kids are sponges that would respond better to instruction.

 I passed hunter safety and see no reason to be forced to pass more classes.

[colockumelk]

It was one day and it was anything but a waste of a day. I had fun and learned a lot. And im not a new guy to archery either. I know more about archery than most and the course was great.  The way I see it the only way to get rid of the people we always complain about is to implement this course. Resources are thin, we need to weed out the umdesirables and strengthen the bowhunting herd.

Who is going to be the judge and jury on this? Seems rather discriminatory to me and I think it could end up being to subjective.

orca what i meant by it would weed out the lazy ones who have no business being in the woods with a bow I didn't mean because of a failure rate in the class. The test is common sense stuff and if you pay attention you will pass. I meant that like oneezreiter said the ones who are too lazy to take the time to be safe and responsible with their bow are not going to take the time to take the class. Hence they will self eliminate by choosing not to take the class.

Lazy hunters take hunters ed because they have to in order to hunt period. The lazy ones will not take this course because if they are too lazy to take the time to practise etc they won't take tje time to take the course.  Instead they will say screw it im hunting with a gun.

[colockumelk]

When we say lazy we don't mean guys who don't get far from the truck. We mean the thus who don't shoot most of the year. The ones who don't take the time to tune their equipment. The ones who start shooting a few days before opening day.  And I know a lot of people who don't connect but continue to bowhunt. 

There is A LOT of people who have no business being in the woods with a bow. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. This class would be a way to police our own.

[pianoman9701]

I tend to agree that this would weed out lazy hunters who are just looking for an early season to bag a bull. I don't agree with the argument that even though they're lazy they'd take this course just like they did hunter's ed, because you could hunt without this course, just not with a bow. I certainly understand the people who say asking the WDFW to add more regulations is idiotic. But, not only do I feel that the lazies would shy away from another course, I also feel this would shed a good light on WA bow hunters pushing for this. It would show the general, mostly non-hunting public that we're concerned to be ethical and have respect for the animals we pursue. Just my 

It does seem that the room is quite evenly split on this issue. Until that changes, I don't see us (either Hunt-WA or WFW) approaching WDFW to add this requirement to bow hunting here. It does make for a good, lively discussion, however!

[Snapshot]

I am all for mandatory bowhunter education conducted similarly to the way it is set up in other western states. Like Basic Hunter Education, it may be set up so as to only be required for people born after a specific year who cannot prove they have archery hunted in another state that requires bowhunter education.
 
I would be against a proficiency test being part of the criteria for pass/fail. It was said here that Basic Hunter Education only requires a demonstration in being able to safely handle the weapon. Bowhunter education should require the same. The reason for this is that the different weapons have different capabilities. If a longbow man who won't shoot at an animal beyond 25 yards were required to shoot from 35 yards, then a compound man should have to lay flat on his back, draw and hit a target that is five yards away, or at the very least be on his knees with the compound held flat to the ground and only pull it to three-quarter draw and be able to hit the vitals from ten yards away. Different capabilities can't be put into a one-size-fits-all shooting test.
 
When my daughter took a bowhunter education class I accompanied her. It was interesting and I had archery hunted for decades. The time commitment was big; but the courses offered in some of other states can be taken almost entirely on line, with only one day required in a class setting outdoors.
 
And I agree that those who won't commit to the time it takes to learn, or prove they already know, the basics of hunting with a bow and arrow aren't the type of people who should be representing bowhunting.

[Goldeneye]

Not to stir things up or anything but I just got done talking to a friend that's a long time resident of Winthrop who has property over there.  He told me this morning that so far this week the city has had to destroy 3 deer that were wandering around town with arrows hanging out of them.  I believe an education course could not of hurt for the individuals who shot these arrows.  Not to mention the damage it does to the public image of hunters.

[pianoman9701]

Not to stir things up or anything but I just got done talking to a friend that's a long time resident of Winthrop who has property over there.  He told me this morning that so far this week the city has had to destroy 3 deer that were wandering around town with arrows hanging out of them.  I believe an education course could not of hurt for the individuals who shot these arrows.  Not to mention the damage it does to the public image of hunters.

That sounds like a very large number in one place at one time. I'm not questioning you, Goldeneye, but I don't believe this number is true.

[Goldeneye]

Believe what you like.  It was not 3 at one time.  It's a total of 3 this week in the town of Winthrop.  I'm just passing on what I was told by him.

[woodswalker]

Given that I know Goldeneye's source, I'd say that the numbers are likely accurate. Person is not prone to exageration nor are they anti-hunting.

[ORCA_SIX]

It was one day and it was anything but a waste of a day. I had fun and learned a lot. And im not a new guy to archery either. I know more about archery than most and the course was great.  The way I see it the only way to get rid of the people we always complain about is to implement this course. Resources are thin, we need to weed out the umdesirables and strengthen the bowhunting herd.

Who is going to be the judge and jury on this? Seems rather discriminatory to me and I think it could end up being to subjective.

orca what i meant by it would weed out the lazy ones who have no business being in the woods with a bow I didn't mean because of a failure rate in the class. The test is common sense stuff and if you pay attention you will pass. I meant that like oneezreiter said the ones who are too lazy to take the time to be safe and responsible with their bow are not going to take the time to take the class. Hence they will self eliminate by choosing not to take the class.

Lazy hunters take hunters ed because they have to in order to hunt period. The lazy ones will not take this course because if they are too lazy to take the time to practise etc they won't take tje time to take the course. Instead they will say screw it im hunting with a gun.

Great. Now instead we will have more lazy hunters with the capability to reload faster and shoot farther.      We need to make a new smiley with a guy running for the hills. 

But I understand what you are saying and the dilemma, especially if the guy up in Winthrop dispatched three deer with arrows in them. Not quite sure what the solution is, but throwing around ideas does not hurt (YET).

[Special T]

Silver Arrow Bowmen in Mount Vernon Will be offering a course that satisfies the BH education requirements for other states... I don't like thed idea of a requirement but it could be a great tool for archery clubs to promote themselves. 

[pianoman9701]

Silver Arrow Bowmen in Mount Vernon Will be offering a course that satisfies the BH education requirements for other states... I don't like thed idea of a requirement but it could be a great tool for archery clubs to promote themselves. 

I think this would be excellent for more clubs to do. Proactive hunters improving their image is a real good thing.

[pianoman9701]

Given that I know Goldeneye's source, I'd say that the numbers are likely accurate. Person is not prone to exageration nor are they anti-hunting.

That's too bad. The papers will get hold of this one. The debate we're having here may well be a moot point with more incidents like this.