Hunter Education Discussion

[bearpaw]

I have had several people asking for a good discussion on Hunter Education so I volunteered to start another topic from a nuetral perspective. No doubt, this is an important issue regarding the future of hunting in Washington and there are a lot of issues and expectations involved. 

-  How would you rate your experience with Hunter Education.
-  Do you support online hunter education?
-  What are your thoughts about training days at the range?
-  How important is it for real firearms, bows, and muzzleloaders to be used in the classroom?
-  Apparently WDFW is trying to reduce the risk factor in training, do you have any suggestions or comments about that?
-  What is the best direction for Hunter Education?

I think it's important for this discussion to have comments from the public, from HE instructors, and from the WDFW. Please offer your most constructive comments and possible solutions.
THANKS

[leed]

I'll go first!  I've read the other HE Discussion entries and I see there are definitely various views.  What I found interesting was that it seems most everyone is locked in on one thing. Firearms handling and safety. Now, handling firearms safely is the VERY first step. But, how much do WE need to teach them? Some come already proficient in those skills. Some come to get the introduction to them and then parents I hope will continually reinforce the 10 commandments. But, back to my first point. Are we Firearms safety instructors or Hunter Education Instructors? You see by now where I am going with this. I can teach the 10 commandments, actions, and the basic operation of various firearms in one class evening. I agree, the more the better but there is so much more to teaching a new hunter than just firearms. Something to think about. As far as non-functional firearms in the class, it's like teaching a kid to fish with a broom handle. Not only that but what is the State saying about all of us as instructors? Obviously they don't trust us.
I'm not sure what I'll do but I'm not at all happy with the situation.

[Special T]

If i were the state i would go to a nearly all online study course with testing. Then i would have a feild day that would spot check importantsaftly info and hands on training. I think there are much better ways to get the basic info out there than classes. I think the hands on portion of a feild day, or weekend would be pretty important.  I think feild walks with dummy guns to simulate hunting could be good. I dislike the idea of the state taking away ALL the real firearms. A little hands on with several different types of rifles/shotguns is good. I don't know if the classes help or hurt recruitment, but i know that some time with a mentor to show a kid the ropes is pretty important.  I would think it is VERY hard to get a kid into hunting unless a direct realative is into it. 

I personally the WDFW is trying to reduce THIER risk, however i could see with out some kind of good hands on training they might increase the risk for everyone else.

[leed]

I would think it is VERY hard to get a kid into hunting unless a direct realative is into it.

You just hit the nail on the head and exposed the million dollar question. How do we do that? "get a kid into hunting without a relative?" A mentoring program in cooperation with private landowners?

[ghosthunter]

Just following along i said my bit on the other thread.

[ghosthunter]

Keep in mind that we're not just talking about "kids" here.  There are many types of people that take hunter ed.

• Young kids being introduced to hunting where some family member is introducing that youngster to hunting.
  Young kids with a friend that has a family that hunts and has been invited to go along.
  20 and 30-somethings who decide one day to get into hunting.
  Military members, those with and without hunting experience.
  Experienced hunters needing a card to hunt Montana - this is a big one, brings in a lot of 40+ hunters.

There are two other groups that I have encountered:

• Non-hunters whose parents want to be trained in firearm safety.
  Anti-hunters wanting to see what us heathens are up to. (Yes, I have actually met one of these, she complimented us on our enforcement of safety, ethics, and stressing that the woods are shared with non-hunters.)

Of these, the only group that really has the "mentors" that people are talking about are the very first.  Then the question becomes: are the mentors really teaching what we want taught to this largest group of students.  If that were so, then my wife would still be using derogatory terms for various ethnic groups.  Her dad was one of those old-school types, but our schools now teach tolerance and diversity and thankfully she loathed that trait.  I personally distinctly remember once seeing my step-dad trying to figure out if the hunter on the far ridge was his friend by holding his rifle to his shoulder and using his scope.  He never carried a pair of binoculars.

What about the other groups that involve inexperienced hunters without direct access to mentors?  Where are their role models?  Television?  I’ve seen people on hunting programs do things that I would advise against, like walking around with a nocked arrow.  That’s a bullet point in chapter 7, without explanation as to why that is a bad idea and how to nock and fire an arrow without being seen so you don’t have to walk around with a nocked arrow.

I’ve had experienced hunters approach me and say that they learned from the class and realized that they were doing ____ wrong.  If we can accomplish that with 20+ years experienced hunters, imagine the quantity and diversity of knowledge that we impart on a younger person.

So when we talk about Hunter Education and the future of these classes, please keep in mind all groups and phases of hunting.

The proof that we have students of all ages in Hunter ed who want direction is on this forum. Check out how many people that are asking for partners or where to start hunting. There is a huge information hole which spans all age groups for a 1000 reasons. So are they learning it at home? Some but far from all. Mentoring someone in the outdoors can be a life long event.

[Special T]

So then what is the "REAL" Goal of Hunters Ed? I took it as a kid and learned good stuff. That said my father taught me a lot since i duck hunted with him. I learned a BUNCH about bow hunting from my friends at the archery club.   I think HE is the low threshold  that the state requires, and like many other things, it is up to to the INDIVIDUAL to learn more and take it to the next level.

I most people learn more from work and the "real world" than when they were in school K-12. Why would we think that HE is any different?

[ghosthunter]

I have had several people asking for a good discussion on Hunter Education so I volunteered to start another topic from a nuetral perspective. No doubt, this is an important issue regarding the future of hunting in Washington and there are a lot of issues and expectations involved. 

-  How would you rate your experience with Hunter Education.
-  Do you support online hunter education?
-  What are your thoughts about training days at the range?
-  How important is it for real firearms, bows, and muzzleloaders to be used in the classroom?
-  Apparently WDFW is trying to reduce the risk factor in training, do you have any suggestions or comments about that?
-  What is the best direction for Hunter Education?

I think it's important for this discussion to have comments from the public, from HE instructors, and from the WDFW. Please offer your most constructive comments and possible solutions.
THANKS

I am instructor. 17 years. Heres how would answer your questions.

1. Excellent
2. I do not support on line education. But if you have it there needs to be a age limit. Too young of folks try it.
3. I think a reasonable time is 1 hour per chapter + testing time + range.  If you had to do away with something I would do away with the range day or make optional for students and instructors. Half of all class students would opt out of range days if allowed too.
4. I think the real firearms are the most valuable part. Many accidents are mishandling or carelessness. Sure there are bow and muzzle accidents but the modern firearms get all the media hype.
5. Expand on the already good safety record. Do not rewrite the program by banning working guns and the vast free resource of teaching aids instructors bring in for students to handle. Look at other states, Many use a waiver to protect them. Hold instructors accountable, outside evaluators of classes, chuck and Dan are over loaded. Instructors who cannot keep safety top # 1 priority through there own actions should not be instructors. In 17 years one segment of my class has been observed by staff. That is not enough accountability for Instructors. There has to better Evaluations of classes, like mystery students.

6. There has to be a age limit. 7 years old is too young for a  class. Yes parents can train younger but they do not do well in a mixed age class.
Bag the on line classes make them a learning resource. Instead start a mentoring program where a student 10 years or older can hunt with a experienced mentor for some determined amount of time and receive their card after taking a 1 day evaluation. This is a alternative to a tradition class which is the programs bread and butter.

[Bob33]

I can remember when I was a youth (many years ago) the program was called “Firearm Safety”.  That’s obviously a major emphasis of the current program, but not the only one as the program now also covers topics such as first aid, survival, conservation, archery, and sportsmanship.

Studies have shown that only about 60 percent of the graduates actually hunt in Washington the year after graduation, and participation declines after that.  That’s a pretty clear indication that some students are probably taking it for reasons other than to hunt.

Hunter Education graduation is a requirement to hunt in Washington for anyone born after 1/1/1972 which equates to about a 40 year old.  Other states have different age limits for requiring hunter education.  For example, in Colorado anyone born after 1/1/1949 must have passed a hunter education course.   There is currently no age limit in Washington to hunt, which is very unusual.  There is consideration of setting a minimum age of eight.

The program is designed to provide graduates with a solid understand of how to handle firearms safely, and in addition to provide some exposure to basic hunting skills: “Hunting 101”. 

[Brownarola]

Education is a life long learning experience. You must continue to practice what you learned or you will forget it. Personally I think there should be an introductory course to firearm safety, but I also feel there should be refresher courses to reintroduce people to firearms. Instead of shrinking firearm safety, I think there should be an expansion to cover more in depth topics like long range shooting, shotgun proficiency, handguns and muzzle-loading. Point in case, when I began muzzle-loading I got in touch with a friend who told me everything I needed including the loads. I then went online and researched what I needed. It wasn't until I went out and fired my first shot down range did everything sink in. I think the same is true with anything. Learning is by doing and in my honest opinion there needs to be less classroom preaching, and more range teaching. Classroom materials can be taught via the web but the live firearm training needs to be in an environment where students can shoot. Anyway just my thoughts and there are others who may disagree and I respect the opinions of others.

[Bob33]

Hunter Education is a misnomer.  We don’t really teach people to hunt. I once saw an official title for the class and I don’t remember where or what the official title was, Hunter Ed is simply what the public knows it as.  The official title was something like Firearm Safety and Basic Hunter Education. 

It is officially "Hunter Education Training".  Many years ago I recall it was referred to as Firearm Safety.  Your points are very good.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.32.155

[buckfvr]

If the state is so worried about liability, I think maybe a group of present and past instructors should come together as a contractor that can be funded by the state and feds.....I personally would yield my thoughts to those of you who have been involved in the system for years.....Your first hand experiences with the program should prove to be of infinite value in the decision making process.

So long as the classes stay the course and do not stray to personal agendas and opinions, as in a recent class in western wa. that refused to even mention black guns, and passed on information regarding predators that is not true.....i.e. coyotes have no effect on deer herds.  Two adult friends of mine attended that class and left with very negative views of the instructors.

[Special T]

So do you think that if we changed the HE system to the German system of becoming a Jager meister is what is required? I Remember Addicted (currently in germany) wrote extensively about what it took for him, a service member, to get his Lic... It was a hell of a lot harder than here.  Isn't there something to be said about learning as you go? Or do we need a boot camp before we start out?

Since it would seem that HE is going to have a more on line presence, maybe a list of recommended books should complement the training? ALL good hunters have read some articles on hunting or books. Maybe the current crop of instructors should complie a list of books that are "Highly" recommended?

I guess i think my oppion on this is a cross of where the WDFW is currently going and what the instructors want.  I think a more intense home study course is important, AND some real hands on handling and live fire of weapons...
To get your archery certification, to hunt other states, you have to have a shooting proficiency test! Why do the WDFW want to do away with the test for a much more potent weapon and yet test for a short range one?    Is is more important not to waste game, or kill people? (kinda of a rhetorical question)

[ghosthunter]

All good points.

If you called it Conservation class, how many would show up?
Or Sportsmanship class?

Face it whatever you call it ,the primary purpose is gun safety. And that's how the public wants it. People are taking it for gun safety not only to hunt. Look at the numbers of homes with firearms, firearm purchases.

It is a free gun safety class.
So does it make sense to restrict the firearms instructors introduce?
I think all testing should be uniform. But instruction on different makes and models with working firearms should be up to the instructor. Limited to legal hunting arms.

[ghosthunter]

If i were the state i would go to a nearly all online study course with testing. Then i would have a feild day that would spot check importantsaftly info and hands on training. I think there are much better ways to get the basic info out there than classes. I think the hands on portion of a feild day, or weekend would be pretty important.  I think feild walks with dummy guns to simulate hunting could be good. I dislike the idea of the state taking away ALL the real firearms. A little hands on with several different types of rifles/shotguns is good. I don't know if the classes help or hurt recruitment, but i know that some time with a mentor to show a kid the ropes is pretty important.  I would think it is VERY hard to get a kid into hunting unless a direct realative is into it. 

I personally the WDFW is trying to reduce THIER risk, however i could see with out some kind of good hands on training they might increase the risk for everyone else.

On line has been around for sometime and anyone on staff will tell you it has not worked as it should.  They would also tell you that the Traditional hunter ed class with all its faults is still the most popular with the public. Why? I think is because they want the interaction with the instructors at least in some areas. I do not support on line classes. But I do inform people of the on line option. Many tell me they want their student in a classroom with the instructor even if that means more time commitments.