Hunting Washington Forum
Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: bearpaw on February 20, 2012, 03:04:04 PM
-
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'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.
-
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. :twocents:
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.
-
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?
-
Just following along i said my bit on the other thread.
-
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.
:yeah:
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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”.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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? :o Is is more important not to waste game, or kill people? (kinda of a rhetorical question)
-
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.
-
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. :twocents:
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.
-
On a somewhat different note - What do you guys think about not requiring this class for Archery hunters?
I am an archery hunter and went thru this class with my son after he had already spent 3-4 years in the woods with me. BASICALLY, the whole week was about rifles, calibers, bullets, etc...We had 10 minutes about archery. He was bored the whole time and it was a struggle to keep him going back each day. Fortunately he wanted to hunt bad enough that he stuck with it, but it was a real challenge and I know when he talks to his friends about it he laughs and sarcastically says "Have fun."
For me - it was a very frustrating week as well. I had no desire to learn about rifles and I HATED the last class when everyone brought their rifles in. 30% + had to be reminded several times about watching where they were pointing their gun. I took my kid to the back of the room.
I taught my son what he needs to know about archery hunting, and am very confident in his abilities to be safe and make good decisions. I also understand that not everyone has a Dad or mentor to teach them, so I am not opposed to the HE, but for those that only hunt Archery, the class needs to be changed up, or they need to allow a waiver - IMO :twocents:
I'm curious what you all think. :hello:
-
On a somewhat different note - What do you guys think about not requiring this class for Archery hunters?
I am an archery hunter and went thru this class with my son after he had already spent 3-4 years in the woods with me. BASICALLY, the whole week was about rifles, calibers, bullets, etc...We had 10 minutes about archery. He was bored the whole time and it was a struggle to keep him going back each day. Fortunately he wanted to hunt bad enough that he stuck with it, but it was a real challenge and I know when he talks to his friends about it he laughs and sarcastically says "Have fun."
For me - it was a very frustrating week as well. I had no desire to learn about rifles and I HATED the last class when everyone brought their rifles in. 30% + had to be reminded several times about watching where they were pointing their gun. I took my kid to the back of the room.
I taught my son what he needs to know about archery hunting, and am very confident in his abilities to be safe and make good decisions. I also understand that not everyone has a Dad or mentor to teach them, so I am not opposed to the HE, but for those that only hunt Archery, the class needs to be changed up, or they need to allow a waiver - IMO :twocents:
I'm curious what you all think. :hello:
Here is the trouble.
As it is right now , when he gets a card he can hunt any season he wants. Now its bow but down the line 10 years from now he wants to hunt modern and can if he has a card.
So I don't think this is a bad idea. But it would take a change. I see no problem with folks being able to hunt bow without a safety coarse. But that person should not be allowed to 10 years from now hunt with a rifle until they go through a certified class of some kind.
So if the state would mark his ticket some how to allow only hunting with a bow, I see no problem.
But they wont because they want him subjected to the other issues like ethic,sportsmanship etc.
It's not a bad idea because it would lessen the burdon on Basic Hunter Education. One day bow class, and you are good for hunting bow only.
-
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?
Switching to the German system would be gladly accepted those who want MORE restrictions on firearms. Trust me, you do not want it. Speaking as an ex service member who lived in Germany for 3 1/2 years and whose kids and wife and family members are German citizens, I can tell you that hunting in Germany is done completely different than it is here. While I was there I actually got to meet a few of them(jager meisters) and to hunt you must become jager meister which is a senior forester / gamekeeper / "Master Hunter." Only MH's are allowed to harvest animals in Germany but this is like a state appointed job and it is not to be taken lightly. You are a member of a hunting club and hunts are done very strategically. Based on the game managers report you must harvest x number of wild bore, x number of pheasant, x number of deer, etc. Once the quota is met the hunt is over. I'm using the term hunt lightly. Typically they will setup the shooters in a line and then you have drivers that drive the game to the shooters. At least that's how they were doing it in 1990 when I was there and my friend was a jager meister. Also note that the game is the property of the land owner and if you want it, then you will pay the landowner for it. Jager meisters also respond to reports of injured or problem animals and they will cull them from the woods.
Anyway to compare hunting here with hunting in Europe is like comparing apples to oranges. Yes they are both fruits but they are not the same. Hunting is strictly controlled in Europe and kids do not hunt so there is no need for firearm safety courses. If you want to learn how to shoot in Europe you join a shooting club. Also firearms in Europe are also tightly restricted. When I was there the government will allow you to posses firearms but they want to know how many guns you have and the number of bullets you possess. At least that's how it was in the early 90's. Maybe things have changed but I would have to talk to my wife's friend Udo who is a jager meister and he could clarify things further but I don't think things have changed that much.
-
I was trying to make a point by using the term Jager meister... What we have and what Germans have are completely different.
So do you think that if we changed the HE system to the German system of becoming a Jager meister is what is required?
No, that would become a barrier to entry that would simply reduce the number of hunters even further. WDFW is looking at online expansion as a way to reduce the barriers and enhance the consistency of the training.
HF made my point for me. How much and what kind of training is just enough to recruit people... Addicted (member) has written a lot about his hunting in germany, and not a lot of people hunt over there by comparison...
-
Addicted (member) has written a lot about his hunting in germany, and not a lot of people hunt over there by comparison...
You hit the nail on the head and another fact is the number of hunters in Washington State as opposed to the population is around 4% to 6%. If the citizens decide they have had enough with hunting, they will pass laws and there is nothing we can do about it. Then you will probably see the implementation of a form of Jager Meirster's here. Luckily most citizens are ok with hunting as long as the hunter uses the meat.
-
The WDFW could do a market survey to find out what kind of recruitment tool would work best for those that would like to try hunting but have no direct family member to take them... I'm skeptical if they would list tho.
In college I Payed to do one for the university, along with my fellow Marketing Seniors, a recruitment market survey for the university. Our professor had owned his own Marketing business. there were 12 of us, we got an A, and if farmed out it would have cost the school about 40-50K... They didn't like what we had to say so they hired a "marketing pro" to give them the answers they wanted... to the tune of about 150k a year for a few years! :bash:
I helped another MGR at said university with a market survey that he wanted to hire me to do... After a lunch together i told him I'd do it and come to the same conclusion half of the other university's in the nation had come to... but he'd be wasting $$$. I guess that didn't go over so well, because he hired a firm to do it. Afterwards i asked him why he hired the work done... His answer, needed it to justify common sense! :bash: He still is a good guy...
-
How would you rate your experience with Hunter Education.
-
Do you support online hunter education? To a point. I agree it is less time consuming for the student, but are they getting the required basics from the computer?
-
What are your thoughts about training days at the range? The most important part of the class is gun handling. Range/field day allows the instructor to assist students that require some coaching.
-
How important is it for real firearms, bows, and muzzleloaders to be used in the classroom? Very. When you start putting “fake” guns in the classroom they will be treated as fake guns It’s like teaching a pilot to fly with plywood wings mounted to a milk carton and a broom stick for a control stick. Then tell him to jump in the real thing and go fly.
-
Apparently WDFW is trying to reduce the risk factor in training, do you have any suggestions or comments about that? . If the state is so hung up on liability, they can remove the firing pins from all of the guns and take the primers out of all of the shells. I’m sure more people have been hurt/died while driving to class than have been hurt in class. If we knew that the students were going to be mentored correctly after graduation, than a reduction in live firearms might be OK. We all know that a lot of the kids will have their best opportunity to learn safe gun handling in the short class. Would the WDFW rather have a safe gun handling situation in class, where it can be addressed immediately, or have the situation in the field that may cause death.
-
What is the best direction for Hunter Education? Update materials; a lot of the videos are ancient. Get some of the nice to know sections out of the class. More time on safe gun/bow handling. Incorporate more realistic scenarios (duck hunting, flushing pheasants, running deer) and how the students need to be very aware of other people in these situations. More focus on ethics and how to read/understand/obey the regulations.
I have taught numerous HE classes. And for the most part students are excited to learn the material. But the class is only the beginning. I’d like to see a better mentorship program.
-
Just finished H.E. this last weekend with my 9yr old. I wouldnt change a thing!It was a great week for his Mom & I watching him learn. He did great and loved going each and every night and was so excited to be able to shoot the .22, bow and shotgun during the field evaluation day, first time he had ever touched a firearm. It was our rule we had that until he took H.E. and passed, he didnt touch a firearm at anytime. We made him come to us and say when he was ready to take the course so he could hunt with us rather then just tag along. When he did that 3 weeks later he was in class. He studied every night (yes being 9 we had to tell him to put the gameboy away & study ) We read it to him and had him answer all the questions in the back of the book, when he complained we would tell him that if he wanted to hunt he had to suck it up and do it or he couldnt hunt. He is so excited to get his card and go buy his first license! I feel the hands on with real firearms is a critical part of the program and should remain intact. Thanks to all the instructors that voluntier so much of thier time "passing it on" to the next generation. :IBCOOL: 1 Proud papa :twocents:
-
That's awesome Muzbuster! Congratulations to your son. I hope you have many happy years of hunting together.
-
My IST shirts .
-
Cant quite read it... :o
-
more
-
try this
-
Red shirt says
Teach Real Gun safety
Not Fake Gun Safety
-
Well give em a trial run when Boes comes up this weekend.
-
I just did boaters ed online last summer learned a lot. I always joked about the red-green light as x-mas lights until now. But back to the subject, my Dad did hunters ed and was always annoyed by how hunting was looked at as brain surgery and the world will be destroyed if you even sneeze. Students treated as if they didn't have a clue. Firearm safety comes down to the family and friends the person hangs around and that involves with every thing in life. Hunters ed should stress hunting is a privilege and one whoops that gets a person into law trouble that's it. DWI, forget hunting in Canada. No one can take your b-day away but hunting another story. Have a fun hunt and don't loose it.
There is just so much that could go into hunters ed but keeping it simple and like the boaters online course is about the best way. Reason is people need to get a taste to go and educate themselves. When I took hunters ed I was propped up to think I know every thing there is to know about the hunting after I got my card. And reading hunter ed posts it seems most want the class to teach almost everything possible.
-
The three basic things that every graduate must know: (1) which end of the gun is the muzzle, and that is must never be pointed at something that should not be shot; (2) every firearm is loaded; (3) positive identification of a target and what is beyond it are minimum requirements before putting a finger on the trigger.
Learning first-aid, survival, and how to field-dress a dead animal are nice to haves but not essential, in my opinion. Those are disciplines that can be learned in more depth via other methods.
-
The three basic things that every graduate must know: (1) which end of the gun is the muzzle, and that is must never be pointed at something that should not be shot; (2) every firearm is loaded; (3) positive identification of a target and what is beyond it are minimum requirements before putting a finger on the trigger.
Learning first-aid, survival, and how to field-dress a dead animal are nice to haves but not essential, in my opinion. Those are disciplines that can be learned in more depth via other methods.
I don't disagree with that.
-
I just did boaters ed online last summer learned a lot. I always joked about the red-green light as x-mas lights until now. But back to the subject, my Dad did hunters ed and was always annoyed by how hunting was looked at as brain surgery and the world will be destroyed if you even sneeze. Students treated as if they didn't have a clue. Firearm safety comes down to the family and friends the person hangs around and that involves with every thing in life. Hunters ed should stress hunting is a privilege and one whoops that gets a person into law trouble that's it. DWI, forget hunting in Canada. No one can take your b-day away but hunting another story. Have a fun hunt and don't loose it.
There is just so much that could go into hunters ed but keeping it simple and like the boaters online course is about the best way. Reason is people need to get a taste to go and educate themselves. When I took hunters ed I was propped up to think I know every thing there is to know about the hunting after I got my card. And reading hunter ed posts it seems most want the class to teach almost everything possible.
As a instructor for a while now. I got in to this for one reason. To teach safe gun handling with real working firearms. I don't think that first aid, conservation really make any impact. After I taught for many years I added ethics to my list of important topics.
I think there are alot of good parents out there who teach their kids gun safety better than I ever could. But there are alot who do not have a clue. It is not my job as an instructor to sort them out. My job is to teach a program. The program says I will teach this ,this and this and that's what I do. But I teach safe gun handling that is my intrest. And any student who passes my class can safely handle a variety of long guns. Any student who does not pass just isn't ready.
How can I say that. By the time the student gets to the skills handling he or she has had 5-6 hours of hands on skin to stock instruction. If that student cannot go through a short 20 minute skill test without pointing the firearm at an instructor or someone else. Than that student is not ready.
My class will have range day sunday. Tonight they had skill testing, they had already passed the written exam. We were running them through the short skills coarse. Select a pump shotgun,select the ammo (dummies) cross a fence,demonstrate zone of fire, 2 different carries, put it in a truck ,back in the rack. 3 students per group.
Eight year old boy walks up to the ammo, and levels his shot gun at another group of students 50 ft, away while reading the gauge from the barrel of his gun. He finshed the coarse and I failed him. Now he knew what he had done, other instructors observed him through a window. But he was upset. He worked hard,he studied,his brother 2 years older made it. I wish he had passed. All he had to do was keep the muzzle up and he would have been home free.
Am I lacking because he didn't. I don't think so. I gave that little guy all the instruction and time he needed to succeed. He leveled that gun for one reason.
He was not ready. He was not able to do what he needed to do to keep the gun in a safe direction.
Now here is the parent part.
His dad calls me tonight after I got home from class, says he is heart broken. Wants to know if the son could go through a internet skills coarse after our range day with another instructor who teaches internet reviews. Really??
I gave him the instructors number and said I know little about internet classes but you can call him.
This is my point all indications are this little guy needs another year or two. Why push it?
Its a competive world succeed at any cost. Not sure that is the best thing for hunting.
I have had 3rd generations through my classes. I have had fathers and grandfather's come to me and tell me that their kids still as adults when hunting practice working the action three times every time they pick up a long gun.
The point is you can only do so much in the time allotted and the student either gets it or they don't.
I would be perfectly happy if a class was gun handling, range ,and ethic it pertains to hunting only. With real Firearms.
-
Lot of good points ghost, agree about the 8yr old, still has time. One thing I have learned and never talked is to also watch the other muzzles around you. I can't count how many time I stared down a barrel during non-shooting times. I have learned to move out of the way and announce my self. Felt bad when I lost track or thought my barrel was safe. Out hunting watch out for your partner even when out of site. A hunter has to be careful when joining back up with a group. When VP Cheney shot is friend, that hunter put no thought into what Cheney's line of fire and did nothing to announce himself when he was joining back. Like walking in the wally world parking lot, watch out for the other guy. May not be at fault but your dead or hurt and believe people can never be defensive enough. Can never practice enough gun safety, but be ready to learn from real life failure because it will happen. Just a believer never give someone who fails later an out to say they passed and know what we are doing. No easy answer but making class longer and harder just turns people away. I know with my job hunters ed would be totally out of the question if I had to do it today in class room sessions.
-
GH - if a kid muzzles someone in the classroom during hands on instruction use that as a teaching moment. Stop the class and ask the other students what did he do wrong? You should get the correct response. By putting the student in the lime light typically this will cure the issue and hopefully they will no longer repeat this behavior. After that use the student to demonstrate the correct method of securing a firearm which then gives the student experience. One method you may wish to try is to have the student turn their classmates when loading or unloading a firearm. If you think about it, a person would not naturally shoulder a firearm to load or unload it and with their back to the other students, the chance of muzzling has dramatically decreased. You also need to remember you have had many years of firearm handling experience and you are aware of muzzle control. A student of eight does not possess the same amount of knowledge and the only way this will occur is for the student to construct that knowledge through hands on training. Older students will not require as much hands on training as younger students so you may need to increase the amount of hands on training for younger students. If this occurred during the actual hands on skills evaluation after the test, I also agree with your decision because during the evaluation phase of the class, we are assuming he knows how to handle the firearm safely. One more thing to also realize is that kids don't think as we do and when you asked him to verify the shell length and gauge his and his mind was focused on that one task and he forgot about the muzzle which is better caught in the classroom then in the field. Like you mentioned he just needs more firearm handling time.
-
The debate over firearms in classroom has presented only one side of the argument. Instructors feel there must be live firearms in the classroom because it's different when students handle the real deal. Let's look at this in a different perspective. What if you were someone who simply wanted to teach firearm safety but you did not possess any firearms. You do not have the funds to go out and purchase firearms but as many instructors have pointed out you learn by doing. What would be your advise? Go out and spend your hard earned money on firearms just so you may teach hunter education or let the state provide you with a set of inert firearms? Don't say the state will lend you some or borrow some from a friend. That never works. Is it fair that this person cannot teach because they do not have live firearms? Would it be fair to the instructor that they are forced to borrow firearms from someone or the state and then something happens where the instructor must replace the missing firearm?
Now suppose you wish to teach at the local schools. What people fail to realize is that schools have the right to restrict the bringing of live firearms on to their property even if it is for a hunter education course. It just takes a vote by the school board to nix firearms. However they have no issues with inert firearms. If the instructor cannot line up a fire department or other public meeting place and the public schools are the only option and they do not allow working firearms, the only choice for an instructor in this scenario is to not use firearms or use inert ones and inert ones are better than no firearms at all.
Here is something else I want you to think about. How many students do you personally know. Do you know their background? Do you know them? If you watch the news something is starting to appear more often; home invasion robberies and daylight burglaries. What makes you think something like this would not occur to you? Think about this. When you are bring live firearms into your classroom you are telling students, "Hey, I have these guns in my house." What happens when one of your students happens to be a gang member? You are probably scoffing at me. "I don't have gang members in my class." I'm going to tell you that you are gravely mistaken. Gangs typically recruit members from middle school students. i.e. 9 - 14 year old kids, and in order to become full members they have to perform some task which just might be a home invasion robbery. Don't be tricked into judging a book by it's cover. You can sugar coat poison but the fact remains that under that sweet outer shell is something that can kill you.
Your next thought may be "they do not know where I live and if they break in, I'll shoot them" or "my guns are in a safe; good luck." First if you think students cannot follow you home or look you up your address online you are 100% mistaken. If collection agencies can find you, so can students. Next if you think a burglar cannot break into your safe, you are also mistaken. There are a number of YouTube videos that show exactly how they do it. You may also think you are going to have enough time to go for a gun when someone breaks into your home. News flash; these guys are breaking in armed with shoguns and pistols during broad daylight and they have no problems killing you. Why? Because our kids have become insensitive to violence and they think nothing about pulling the trigger. They see this online, in games, and on TV.
Ladies and Gentlemen we live in a very interesting times and you should be asking yourself do I wish to continue showing my firearms in class? Forget about the liability to the state. Think of this as an issue of your personal safety. Also you need to check your firearm insurance policies. Many policies will give you x amount of dollars and then you are just out of luck unless you talk to your insurance agent and get the extra coverage. I have to ask you, is bringing a live firearm into the classroom worth risking your safety over? For the most part nothing may never happen but that's what we said about terrorist attacks before 911 so to rule out this possibility would not be prudent.
-
Let's throw another scenario out there. What if you are a teacher who wants to introduce a firearm safety course into your school curriculum. The school will not allow you to bring live firearms into the classroom. What can you use? Sticks or inert firearms? I would actually suggest using Laser Shots and inert firearms instead of sticks.
As far as teaching with real firearms. Imagine a world where you learned completely online and with non-functional equipment for the following:
Drivers Ed
Pilot's License
SCUBA
USCG Captains License (Hey, let's steer the cruise ship to the right so people on shore can wave to those on board)
However I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. In my opinion you are trying to compare apples to oranges. Yes they fruit but they are totally different. Driver's Ed, Flight Schools, ship piloting do use simulators. Why? Because you want the person to be placed in a non life threatening situation without the risk. However they also want the persons to be prepared in the event of emergency and the only way that is done is with hours of practice. With a plane this can get rather expensive and dangerous. That's why Boeing invested millions in flight simulators so they could put crew members in various situations and that's why the military does the same thing. Unless you tell someone that these firearms are inert, they will think they are real. In essence you are putting the student in a live situation without the danger. Also one major difference between what the things you listed above and firearm safety, the later is meant as an introduction which is why the number number of hands on hours is greatly reduced when compared to driving a car, or flying a plane where one mistake can kill hundreds or thousands if you make a mistake. Worried about the orange stocks. Paint them with Krylon plastic paint or swap out the stocks with synthetic ones. If you do not tell students the firearms are fake, they will never know. Treat them the same as a live firearm and your instruction will be just as effective.
-
So if these are state certified "non guns" then we should be able to hold hunters ed in any school or public building that is traditionally gun free. Before some you quit teaching HE i would push the state on this issue. :twocents:
I would agree with HF that if you couldn't find a place to train with real guns you aren't looking very hard. :twocents:
-
Special T -- that is exactly what means. If a school district has a policy of no guns, they should now be fair game. In regards to the comment of not looking hard enough to find a place to teach with real guns, it's quick to assume that all instructors have access to ranges and sporting clubs when they actually do not. Granted there may be a vast majority of instructors who do have places to practice but on the same token, there are instructors who do not have access to these facilities due to no fault of their own. For example, say I want to hold a course in a building in down town Seattle. There are no available ranges and students are from the downtown district. This would be an example of an instructor not being able to teach where real guns are permitted.
-
GH - if a kid muzzles someone in the classroom during hands on instruction use that as a teaching moment. Stop the class and ask the other students what did he do wrong? You should get the correct response. By putting the student in the lime light typically this will cure the issue and hopefully they will no longer repeat this behavior. After that use the student to demonstrate the correct method of securing a firearm which then gives the student experience. One method you may wish to try is to have the student turn their classmates when loading or unloading a firearm. If you think about it, a person would not naturally shoulder a firearm to load or unload it and with their back to the other students, the chance of muzzling has dramatically decreased. You also need to remember you have had many years of firearm handling experience and you are aware of muzzle control. A student of eight does not possess the same amount of knowledge and the only way this will occur is for the student to construct that knowledge through hands on training. Older students will not require as much hands on training as younger students so you may need to increase the amount of hands on training for younger students. If this occurred during the actual hands on skills evaluation after the test, I also agree with your decision because during the evaluation phase of the class, we are assuming he knows how to handle the firearm safely. One more thing to also realize is that kids don't think as we do and when you asked him to verify the shell length and gauge his and his mind was focused on that one task and he forgot about the muzzle which is better caught in the classroom then in the field. Like you mentioned he just needs more firearm handling time.
We extensively handle firearms in every class. Students are taught to load and unload and all that goes with it. As I posted this student had over 6 hours of hands on loading and unloading with the very gun he was tested with.
We do this so they can watch the muzzle.
He was in the skills Field coarse when he covered other students. No excuse for that. Yes different ages need more instruction. But testing is uniform for all ages . Unless the state want to have a age limit.
-
The debate over firearms in classroom has presented only one side of the argument. Instructors feel there must be live firearms in the classroom because it's different when students handle the real deal. Let's look at this in a different perspective. What if you were someone who simply wanted to teach firearm safety but you did not possess any firearms. You do not have the funds to go out and purchase firearms but as many instructors have pointed out you learn by doing. What would be your advise? Go out and spend your hard earned money on firearms just so you may teach hunter education or let the state provide you with a set of inert firearms? Don't say the state will lend you some or borrow some from a friend. That never works. Is it fair that this person cannot teach because they do not have live firearms? Would it be fair to the instructor that they are forced to borrow firearms from someone or the state and then something happens where the instructor must replace the missing firearm?
Now suppose you wish to teach at the local schools. What people fail to realize is that schools have the right to restrict the bringing of live firearms on to their property even if it is for a hunter education course. It just takes a vote by the school board to nix firearms. However they have no issues with inert firearms. If the instructor cannot line up a fire department or other public meeting place and the public schools are the only option and they do not allow working firearms, the only choice for an instructor in this scenario is to not use firearms or use inert ones and inert ones are better than no firearms at all.
Here is something else I want you to think about. How many students do you personally know. Do you know their background? Do you know them? If you watch the news something is starting to appear more often; home invasion robberies and daylight burglaries. What makes you think something like this would not occur to you? Think about this. When you are bring live firearms into your classroom you are telling students, "Hey, I have these guns in my house." What happens when one of your students happens to be a gang member? You are probably scoffing at me. "I don't have gang members in my class." I'm going to tell you that you are gravely mistaken. Gangs typically recruit members from middle school students. i.e. 9 - 14 year old kids, and in order to become full members they have to perform some task which just might be a home invasion robbery. Don't be tricked into judging a book by it's cover. You can sugar coat poison but the fact remains that under that sweet outer shell is something that can kill you.
Your next thought may be "they do not know where I live and if they break in, I'll shoot them" or "my guns are in a safe; good luck." First if you think students cannot follow you home or look you up your address online you are 100% mistaken. If collection agencies can find you, so can students. Next if you think a burglar cannot break into your safe, you are also mistaken. There are a number of YouTube videos that show exactly how they do it. You may also think you are going to have enough time to go for a gun when someone breaks into your home. News flash; these guys are breaking in armed with shoguns and pistols during broad daylight and they have no problems killing you. Why? Because our kids have become insensitive to violence and they think nothing about pulling the trigger. They see this online, in games, and on TV.
Ladies and Gentlemen we live in a very interesting times and you should be asking yourself do I wish to continue showing my firearms in class? Forget about the liability to the state. Think of this as an issue of your personal safety. Also you need to check your firearm insurance policies. Many policies will give you x amount of dollars and then you are just out of luck unless you talk to your insurance agent and get the extra coverage. I have to ask you, is bringing a live firearm into the classroom worth risking your safety over? For the most part nothing may never happen but that's what we said about terrorist attacks before 911 so to rule out this possibility would not be prudent.
I really like this post. I like it so much I am going to print it out and take to a meeting with Boes this weekend.
I have one question ; How does banning working guns from the classroom change any of the possibilities you listed?
The truth is it changes nothing.
The fact you are posting on this forum could make you a target. You think BG cannot track you down through your posts here ?
The state having student information on line makes every student and instructor state wide a target. If you are in a Hunter ed class or on a Hunting forum one could conclude you have guns.
If the state keeps live fire. BG could come to range observe live fire follow instructor home and rob guns. Heck they could bump the instructors car when he got out ,steal his car and guns.
I have several 20 ga. shotguns that are state owned ,the state comes around every year to inventory them.
However no one from the state knows how I store those firearms or where. And no seems to care. If those arms are stolen you think the state wont be liable if something happen???
No one asks how I maintain the firearms either. What if one blows up on range day when a kid is shooting?
The same instructors the state does not trust to have working firearms in class are the same instructors doing live fires and storing and caring for state owned guns.
The same instructor who could not open and check a firearm before his class is still conducting live fire and still I presume storing state guns.
If the state is so afraid they need to pull the plug. NO live fire, No state owned guns.
-
So if these are state certified "non guns" then we should be able to hold hunters ed in any school or public building that is traditionally gun free. Before some you quit teaching HE i would push the state on this issue. :twocents:
I would agree with HF that if you couldn't find a place to train with real guns you aren't looking very hard. :twocents:
School have a no tolerance policy on firearms. If you kid takes one of these orange guns to school he will be kicked out.
if some one gets beat with the orange gun you are still liable.
-
Special T -- that is exactly what means. If a school district has a policy of no guns, they should now be fair game. In regards to the comment of not looking hard enough to find a place to teach with real guns, it's quick to assume that all instructors have access to ranges and sporting clubs when they actually do not. Granted there may be a vast majority of instructors who do have places to practice but on the same token, there are instructors who do not have access to these facilities due to no fault of their own. For example, say I want to hold a course in a building in down town Seattle. There are no available ranges and students are from the downtown district. This would be an example of an instructor not being able to teach where real guns are permitted.
Really schools is off track. i could teach im my local schools with working guns, they all have FFA Shooting teams and I have done it. But I dont like schools because kids are comfortable there. You are on their turf. I find that they behave better at other locations.
If brown is saying we need these orange guns so we can teach in schools because there is no where else? I doubt that , but if so let the instructors who teach in schools use the orange guns. I dont teach in schools and I am not using them.
The truth is this was huge waste of PItman Robinson Funds.
-
Brown: If someone wants to teach with orange guns let them. The poor instructor who doesn't own guns can use the orange guns.
But orange guns should not be forced on the rest of us.
-
There is no rule that I know of that prevents the use of firearms for teaching HE in public schools. I have helped teach classes in public schools.
-
I actually set you guys up to see what you would say. :chuckle: My wife is a teacher, and i know ALL about the 0 tolorance policy. There is no way on Gods gree earth that they would let ANYTING even resembling a gun into the school. I know of kids that have had yellow nerf guns taken from them and have been kicked out of school for a week for bringing in that kind of stuff.
If you are gona fight that fight, good luck, but I personaly wouldn't bet on it.
-
Weird, my nephew is taking the course at adna school right now and they've had the guns there for 3 days now! Some orange non firing guns, and some working weapons as well.
-
:yike: I'm surprised and impressed...
-
I actually set you guys up to see what you would say. :chuckle: My wife is a teacher, and i know ALL about the 0 tolorance policy. There is no way on Gods gree earth that they would let ANYTING even resembling a gun into the school. I know of kids that have had yellow nerf guns taken from them and have been kicked out of school for a week for bringing in that kind of stuff.
If you are gona fight that fight, good luck, but I personaly wouldn't bet on it.
Yep I could teach in most schools in Skagit County. I have taught in Bayveiw school before. And in Concrete they taught at the High School because my daughter took the class.
Never the less this is getting off topic. The state did not buy Orange guns so we could teach in schools. That is just one posters angle.
-
Orange guns are just an overall safety meausre. No firing pin equals no bang! Loaded or not.
-
Sometimes hunter ed. is about the parent. We have alot of parents (including mothers) who take the course so that they know how to safely handle a firearm also and can help their kids along. Many of them won't hunt but want to be able to "check" the kids. These may or may not be single mothers. It is important to continue the skill after the class with an adult that hunts and can help them out. They don't necessarily have to be the parents. We have helped alot of kids on their first hunts some with no hunting parents and many with hunting parents. Some parents (male included) are single without the time to take them. Personally I don't think the state should have a say. The parents should. They should have a choice whether or not to send their kids to hunter ed. or not. Some parents can do as good a job or better. I bet alot would still send them.
-
Sometimes hunter ed. is about the parent. We have alot of parents (including mothers) who take the course so that they know how to safely handle a firearm also and can help their kids along. Many of them won't hunt but want to be able to "check" the kids. These may or may not be single mothers. It is important to continue the skill after the class with an adult that hunts and can help them out. They don't necessarily have to be the parents. We have helped alot of kids on their first hunts some with no hunting parents and many with hunting parents. Some parents (male included) are single without the time to take them. Personally I don't think the state should have a say. The parents should. They should have a choice whether or not to send their kids to hunter ed. or not. Some parents can do as good a job or better. I bet alot would still send them.
:)
-
OK, I'll put in my two cents.
As for teaching HE at schools: *They are not 0 tolerance- police can carry on the grounds at any given time. *If there is no other activity going on at the school, you can have HE classes, trap, etc. But even if there a few people working out in the weight room it's supposed to be a no go. And there are some other rules that apply to additional situations for safety reasons. *There is a special extra curricular application provided by the schools across the state that is to be used for this.
Fake Guns: I am in total agreement that this would be a tragic mistake, and WILL be a tragic mistake. But, I'm not quitting because our youth (the highest percentage of my classes) need us more than ever and I'm not comfortable knowing that some of these people with no actual hands on experience will be able to be out there in the field with my kids. I received a call today from a game biologist in a neighboring county about my upcoming classes because their instructor has already quit over this issue, even after people were already signed up for his classes. It is sad to see good instructors leave.
Kalkomey:We know that this is where the world is going to go, but I don't like it either. I know it is less paperwork for Jan but I'm willing to guess that there are just as may hassles. There several people that don't have internet here so that means I spend more time signing them up myself. I can live with it though.
On-Line classes: We did an on-line class a couple of years ago. 70% of the class drove all the way from the coast to take it. At that time they had to pass a 10 question test in order to continue with the class. Half of the class failed that simple 10 question,common sense quiz, and had to turn around and drive all the way back over the mountains. I told Chuck that I was not going to waste my time with a ridiculous class like that. Well, rules changed a little and about a month ago we tried it again. A month before class 30 seats were filled and there was a waiting list. Again, there were 70% from the West side, several that traveled about 70 miles, and only 1 local. We followed Chuck's 4 hr. classroom format and then out on the range we went. Keep in mind that with this class they are generally older, from 16 to 40. 5 of these people were proficient and very capable. The others knew less than the 10 year olds in any given Traditional class I have ever had. We happened to have a traditional class going on at the same time (in between class schedules) so the On-line class got a touch of everything we do and what they could learn so, in turn, several of these On-line people realized what they were missing out on and are already registered for a Traditional class. On another note- We put all of our hours in on a Friday night and all day Saturday. Sunday is test day.
My Biggest Beef right now: Someone sort of touched on this earlier with the archery. Illegal Aliens and Felons....
-
Horse Power said:color=orange]Fake Guns:[/color] I am in total agreement that this would be a tragic mistake, and WILL be a tragic mistake. But, I'm not quitting because our youth (the highest percentage of my classes) need us more than ever and I'm not comfortable knowing that some of these people with no actual hands on experience will be able to be out there in the field with my kids. I received a call today from a game biologist in a neighboring county about my upcoming classes because their instructor has already quit over this issue, even after people were already signed up for his classes. It is sad to see good instructors leave.
:tup:
It, is sorry to see instructors leave. Each has to make their own decision. For me I cannot use fake orange guns or non working. If I cannot bring in the firearms I want for a quality class than I am not doing classes. It did not have to come to this.
I too do not do internet classes for the same reason. The students cannot absorb the gun handling in 4 hrs. When I teach a class I am trying to create a habit with my students. Muzzle in a safe direction,finger off the trigger,work the action three times, every time they receive or pick up a gun. It works I know it works.
My friend who helps in my classes does the internet classes too. I have told him I will do anything for him he is a friend and a hunting buddy,but I will not help in internet reviews.
Welcome HorsePower to this forum.
-
Today I met and talked for several hours with Carl Kline & Dan Boes along with my teaching team.
I have said many times here the issues for me where 1. I am not teaching with Orange guns.
2. I am not teaching with guns which are not operational.
The issues for me were resolved in the following way by Carl & Dan. 1. We will not be required to use the orange guns. Provided the guns we do use in the classroom and for skills cannot be fired. The solution for me is a trigger lock on all firearms in the classroom. This way the student can train and handle the exact gun used for live fire and skills testing. We never let the students put their finger on the trigger any ways. This way they will not be able too.
This solves both my complaints. I will continue to use the same guns I have always used with trigger locks in place that I can take off when needed.
I still need to come up with a so loution for lever action firearms.
They brought a set of orange guns to the meeting and we all inspected them. Here's my observations.
The guns are butt ugly orange.
All of the guns are heavier than the state owned 20 GA. youth models.
Non of the firearms are Youth Models, they are all full size.
As expected all the actions are very stiff.
Another topic of discussion was Live Fire Range Days. They assured me those would not go away. But Range days are optional for the instructor and the student. :yikes: What? The student may op out of live fire. So in my class we do skills one night and live fire on the weekend. If the student is allowed to op out of live fire than why should I have live fire? Why should I get up at o dark 30 if only half my class shows up for live fire.
So for me I intend not to have live fire range as long as students are allowed to op out of Live fire. This is not how I interput ed live fire over the years. I saw live fire as optional for the instructor. If I had a range everyone was required to attend and shoot. That according to Dan & Carl in not policy. If a student does not want to shoot you cannot require it. So why have a range day?
Other changes are in the works, set max hours, age limit?, I did not discuss these changes with them because I am not concerned with them.
So that is what I know right now. More will be fleshedout at IST.
-
I too do not do internet classes for the same reason. The students cannot absorb the gun handling in 4 hrs. When I teach a class I am trying to create a habit with my students. Muzzle in a safe direction,finger off the trigger,work the action three times, every time they receive or pick up a gun. It works I know it works.
My friend who helps in my classes does the internet classes too. I have told him I will do anything for him he is a friend and a hunting buddy,but I will not help in internet reviews
I would have to disagree. Through trial and error the entire issue was the lack of information; if you give online students a vague outline of what to expect, they will come unprepared. When my son went for his driver's license the state gave a clear, concise outline of everything they need to demonstrate to obtain his license. The same should apply to online students. if you write a very detailed set of instructions(I'm not talking about a book) telling the students what skills they must perform as well as what dictates a failure, students will come prepared. I gave them places to view firearm actions on the web and I also made it very clear that when they showed up, this was going to be an evaluation. The Online Event Manager makes it very easy to communicate with students and you simply have to copy and paste your instructions in a mass email, and send it down the line.
Here is the last revision of the email I used to send to students at least two weeks prior to the range day evaluation. You have to give them time to prepare. Of course I would update it to include what the state mandates as well as dates, times, and location of your events. The general comments received from students who who attended my online certification field days was the email woke them up and made them realize they needed to do a lot of practicing before the range day.
BTW - On the range day I simply collected the paperwork, outlined where they be at when not shooting and the range layout. Gave them a safety brief and then called my first student and did nothing more than ask them to perform tasks. I.e. please secure a firearm from the vehicle or from the gun rack. They either opened the action and discovered the hidden snap inside or they failed. My advice to all of you thinking about online students, TEST THEM.. Do NOT teach. If they prepared for the course they will pass. If not they didn't, they will take a traditional course.
--------------------------------------------
copy of range notification email
----------------------------------------------
Dear "Student name",
The field evaluation will be held on {Date and time} on {Location} and it is a Field Skills Evaluation where you will be evaluated on your ability to safely handle a firearm. If you fail this evaluation, you will be required to attend a traditional hunter education course.
Note: The only persons who may waive the field skills evaluation are active or inactive military personnel. To waive the field course, the student must provide {instructor name} with a copy of their DD 214 and photo id such as a driver's license.
Here is a copy of the information contained in the course outline.
WARNING: If you are a person who cannot legally possess a firearm, I cannot certify you but you may still become certified with archery equipment to hunt in Washington State.
Please bring the following documents {Date and Time} to {Location}.
1. The Signed Exam Certificate. A parent must sign if the student is under 18.
2. The Range Evaluation Form.
3. A signed Parental Consent form if the student is under 18 years of age.
The Range Evaluation and Regulation Quiz are found http://my.hunter-ed.com/welcome/how_it_works?default_course=201050 at the bottom of the page.
Here are directions to the shooting area.
To get to {Location}
{Give driving location or GPS coordinates}
Here are somethings you will be evaluated on.
1. The six field carries
2. Unloading / loading firearm. This may be any action.
3. Selecting proper ammunition
4. Crossing an obstacles.
5. Difference between gauges and calibers.
Additional Information
You may bring your own firearms if you wish. They must be a caliber .243 or higher and between .20 gauge and .12gauge and I will need to inspect them prior to use. If you are not using a .270 or .243 ammunition, you will then need to provide your own ammunition. If you do not have a firearm, you will be able to qualify with mine. I will also provide shooting glasses and hearing protection.
Here is a rough outline of my grading criteria.
If any THREE following guidelines are broken you will fail the field course.
• Parents interfering in the testing process by trying to help their child
• Trying to hand a firearm to another person with the action closed
• Inability to identify the term zone of fire
• Not using safeties between each shot
• Keeping finger out of trigger guard before ready to shoot.
• Inability to identify a caliber or gauge on firearm
• Inability to identify proper length shot shell length for firearm
• Not changing carries to avoid muzzling instructor or other students on field walk.
• Inability to name and or perform four of the six field carries
• Failing to open the action before removing the firearm from a vehicle.
If you do one of the following listed things you will fail the evaluation.
• Trying to cross an obstacle with a loaded firearm
• Unintentional launch of a shell down range (not keeping finger out of the trigger guard)
• Muzzling of crowd with loaded firearm
• Loading of a firearm any place other than the firing line.
• Identify target with a scope instead of binoculars
• Inability to select proper ammunition
• Inability to operate any firearm actions.
• Failure to close the action and attempting to fire the weapon.
• Failure to wait 1 minute in the event a cartridge fails to discharge before opening the action
• The performance of any unsafe act which includes shooting at anything other than designated targets.
Again - this is an evaluation and not a teaching session. If the student fails, they will be required to attend a traditional hunter education course.
Please - before you attend this evaluation, make sure you know how to properly handle a firearms. The evaluation criteria may seem harsh, but I take firearm safety very seriously and I do not wish to get a call telling me that a student I passed had a firearm accident. Firearms may kill from over 5 miles away and it is very important that you understand this fact prior to going into the field for the first time.
If you are not very familiar with firearm actions a good place to look is YouTube or visit a local gun shop where they will show how actions operate. You will not be evaluated on pistols or muzzle-loaders and YouTube contains a lot of videos that explain exactly how to operate the various firearm actions however a video is not the same as the real-thing so try and get hands on practice with real firearms prior to the evaluation.
Hopefully that answers all of your questions and I'll see you at the range.
Makes me wonder if this topic should evolve into a different thread where instructors could go to share thoughts and ideas about setting up a successful online field evaluation. Those of you from the military; do you remember basic training. When it came time to field skills evaluations were you told, "Don't put your finger in the trigger guard?" , "Watch the muzzle", "click this button to open the action", "Remember to use your safety." NOT!!!.. You were either a go or no go. If you failed you went back and got further training and tried it again at a later date. If you failed again, you were recycled to another class. The same should apply to your field days. Don't know if you are teaching on range days. Ask yourself the question. Am I reminding the student to do something they should already know how to do? If you are reminding them, you are teaching. If you stick to the state standards you should be ok.
-
Suggestions to the state on the inert firearms:
There’s only five so you can’t have two groups of three out doing the field course with these things at the same time. We could really use even numbers.
There’s no single shot break action, so the most common firearm used on live shoots for the smaller kids is missing and they can’t practice loading/unloading unless we use the live guns.
The 12 gauge pump should be 20 gauge if that is an option. It will be lighter and also match our range day firearms, but still have the 12 gauge semi-auto for the larger gun.
I suggest they buy $1500.00 in trigger locks then we use the guns we want. How much money would that save?
-
If you want to see the guns the state is buying, here they are: http://www.guns.com/mossberg-and-the-ihea-team-up-to-make-training-shotguns.html.
Mine came in the rolling case. The case includes the five firearms in soft-sided cases which are cheap. One of the zippers pulled apart the first time it was closed and the case is now useless.
Interesting if you read to the bottom of your link you will find this statement.
Guess i am not alone.
"OK, we get it, we understand the argument of having guns that are good for training and that can't hurt anyone unless you club them with them, but you can do all that with real guns sans bullets. There is always the risk of things turning all Brandon Lee but honestly, if you're training with guns you know can't hurt people, aren't you just going to train in mistakes along the way?" :bash:
-
Someone said they are not fakes. but on the link we have this.
: the Mossberg 500 pump-action shotgun, MosMossberg's making five different tastyfakessberg 930 semiautomatic shotgun, Maverick Hunter Over-and-Under break-action shotgun, the Mossberg 464 lever-action rifle, and the Mossberg International 802 Plinkster bolt-action rimfire rifle. They all have functioning safeties, which just makes our brains hurt
-
50 sets of five fake orange guns equals $75000.00
You could buy 6824 trigger locks .
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=combination+trigger+locks+&view=detail&id=5A9FB0254FF9AE6A1D1A027D5897577040DB1597&first=0&qpvt=combination+trigger+locks+&FORM=IDFRIR
-
There’s been a lot of discussion on this forum about potential changes to the Hunter Education Program and how they may impact students and volunteers. I thought it was about time to weigh in.
We all understand the importance of Hunter Education, right? As hunters, we want to be sure there are safe, ethical, and responsible hunters out there sharing the woods with us. And we want to make sure there are future generations of hunters to carry on the tradition that is so important to all of us. I hope that at least we can agree that those are the ultimate goals. And, if so, we should also be able to agree on the same common results that we want achieve through Hunter Education. It’s the “how” that has everyone spinning. And honestly, we are all going to have different opinions about how to achieve the results we’re after, based on our own history, perception, and role in the effort.
A critical component of the program is the volunteer instructor. We have around 900 across the state – that’s a lot of volunteers! They are vital to our ability to teach the number of students we do each year. These instructors are willing to unselfishly commit their personal time toward this effort because they are passionate about hunting and firearm safety. Some of them have many, many years invested. Some have probably invested their own money as well. We recognize this investment, we really do.
That being said, the Hunter Education Program is here first and foremost to serve the students. And to best serve our students, we must constantly re-evaluate the program to ensure we meet the goals we talked about earlier: creating safe, ethical and responsible hunters and continuing the hunting heritage. But this is where things get a bit sideways. Hunter Education is not, and should not, be perceived as the finishing school for hunters and hunting. We provide a very focused training and learning environment to teach students the basics of firearms safety and hunter education in a short period of time, but the majority of learning usually comes from mentoring and additional field experience long after the class has ended and the student has their certificate in hand.
RCW 77.32.155 states “The director may establish a program for training persons in the safe handling of firearms, conservation, and sportsmanship.” This is not something we have to do, but our Department decided long ago that we would make this a self-imposed mandate. Given the authority to create such a training program, it then becomes our responsibility to manage and cultivate it. This is a great responsibility! As if managing the development of a training curriculum and policies, coordinating volunteer instructors, and ensuring students learn what is necessary to become safe and ethical hunters aren’t enough, we also have to manage the liability that comes with a training environment that includes firearms, volunteers, Department staff, and the public co-mingling in public locations.
So let’s focus on the liability piece for a minute. Once WDFW is given statutory authority to implement a program, we are then ultimately held accountable for all aspects of that program. With Hunter Education, this includes the responsibility to protect our students and volunteer instructors, and ensure a safe environment in which to learn (and teach). And if there was an incident in a classroom – whether an accidental discharge with no injuries, or an accidental discharge that resulted in serious injury or death – it would ultimately be our fault for not preventing such a tragedy. If any of you have been involved in litigation before, you know it can take many, many years, and many, many dollars before there is any resolution. Unfortunately if an incident occurred in a Hunter Education class, the students and volunteer instructors would most likely be dragged into the legal system right along with the Department. None of us want to see that happen. And if that wasn’t enough, there would undoubtedly be a media storm with certain groups calling for an end to Hunter Education altogether. But, it’s not about covering our own butts or protecting our volunteer instructors and students from years of litigation. And it’s not about the controversy that would ensue. Personally, I don’t want to be the one to have to visit a child’s parent or loved one and explain what went wrong, or have to apologize for a horrible tragedy that might have been prevented. The largest concern here is keeping our students and volunteers safe from harm in the first place. And if that means using inert firearms in the classroom to provide the proper level of human and program protection, then by comparison, it is a small price to pay.
Since the use of inert firearms seems to be a hot issue for folks, I’ll address that now. It’s true that we have purchased and begun using inert firearms in some Hunter Education classes. While they lack a firing pin, they represent the five actions types and are otherwise fully functional: you can load/unload them and work the action and safety. Yes, they are a bit stiff at first, but so is any new firearm. After a couple class’s worth of students handle them, they’ll be broken in. And I agree that they may be ugly, but handling pretty firearms is not the priority. Safe handling of ANY firearm is the priority. So far our instructors who have used them have provided positive feedback, and don’t think the fact that they are bright orange or without a firing pin diminishes their value in the classroom at all.
That being said, we also realize the value of using different types of firearms to highlight specific points, so we’re working on protocols to continue to allow the use of various firearms and archery equipment in the classroom and during field course activities. These could include firearms issued by the Department, those that have been donated or purchased with donated funds or grant monies, firearms that have been loaned to instructors, or privately owned firearms. In all instances, the firearms would have to be approved by the Department and permanently or temporarily disabled. Other requirements may be necessary dependent on the firearm and how it was obtained. There does need to be some uniformity here……. we have seen some interesting things through the years (I will leave it at that).
Let me be clear: We have no intention of doing away with optional live-fire exercises. However, to limit liability, we are currently discussing the use of only WDFW issued/inventoried firearms during live-fire exercises. We are also considering limiting the firearms that are used for live-fire exercises, regardless of ownership, to the following: .22 rifle, .223 rifle, .243 rifle, 20-gauge shotgun, .177 air rifle, or bow.
Many folks are also concerned about some of the policy changes they’ve heard about, which may or may not be true. Here’s what’s happening: It’s been many years since we conducted a thorough review of our Hunter Education policies. And while our program is successful and has an excellent safety record, we also recognize areas we could improve upon. If you don’t anticipate problems, you will likely be faced with them. And yes, some of the policy changes we’re considering are a result of the actions of a few, but that’s not our only motivation. We’ve thoroughly reviewed Hunter Ed policies from 22 other states and two provinces, and in doing so, we’ve found some very valuable information that could help us improve our Hunter Education program. We’ve also brought together a group of instructors (the Instructor Advisory Committee or IAC) to discuss potential changes, their effect on instructors and students, and how we can make the program better. Let me assure you we’re not just unilaterally making decisions, but seeking input from those who bring years of experience to the table. The policies we plan to review and update first are those that deal with the general use of firearms, accountability and liability issues, instructor conduct and corrective action, and donations and fees. If you have ideas or suggestions, please feel free to contact Sgt. Klein, our new Hunter Education Manager. He is more than willing to listen and eager to hear what folks have to say. He can be reached at Carl.Klein@dfw.wa.gov or 360.902.2426. And yes, he will return your call. Our goal is to post the updated policy manual on the Instructor website in the next couple of weeks. Once posted, we hope that you’ll review it and let us know what you think. If you have comments, concerns, or suggestions, please don’t hesitate to contact us.
With regard to our online Hunter Education classes…. another hot issue: The online course was developed to address changes in society and make it easier for folks to complete Hunter Education with limited time. Let’s face it – folks are busy! We have single parents trying to work two jobs, go to school, and take care of the kids. And we have kids who are involved in school, sports, and other extracurricular activities. But we still want them to succeed at Hunter Education so that they can get out there and hunt with the rest of us. And let’s not forget the people who take Hunter Education with no intentions of hunting – they just want to learn how to handle a firearm safely! We want to be sure EVERYONE with an interest has the ability to complete Hunter Education, despite their busy schedules. So we developed the online curriculum. Now, this new course was not without its problems in the beginning. We saw a failure rate of nearly 90% and received several complaints from instructors. To address this we looked at our processes to see what we were doing wrong and how we might fix it. Since then, we have made significant changes to the online curriculum and have received lots of positive feedback from instructors. The new Online Skills Evaluation Class is not the preferred delivery method for all students, and we still recommend the traditional course for a more enriching and interactive learning experience, but at least it’s an option for folks that just can’t make it to a traditional class. Let me be clear about this: We have no intention to only offer online hunter education classes. There will always be a need for traditional classes.
One of the other issues we’ve struggled with is ensuring consistency in our classes across the state. When we looked at Hunter Education courses offered throughout the state, we noticed that some instructors’ classes lasted thirty hours or more, while the requirement is ten hours of instruction on safe handling, safety, conservation, and sportsmanship. Some students were even being told they should take a class from a different instructor because they would not pass a particular instructor’s class. While we feel instructors should have the flexibility to structure the course in a way that works best for them, we also need to remain somewhat consistent. We understand that it’s impossible to teach a student all there is to know about hunting in ten or even twenty hours. But Hunter Education is meant to be a basic course, designed to introduce the student to firearm safety and hunting with the understanding that there is always more to be learned about both. With this in mind, and with strong support from numerous instructors and the IAC, we are looking to limit Hunter Education course length to twenty hours.
So there you have it. This is not an “Us vs. Them” issue. We all are working toward the same goals here. But as the managers of this program, we have to consider the students, first and foremost, and ensure their safety and their success in learning the basics of Hunter Education and firearm safety. We have to consider our volunteer instructors, and ensure their safety while teaching, protect them from involvement in legal actions, and also allow them some flexibility in how they teach their classes. We have to consider the Department as a whole, maintain the integrity and success of the Hunter Education program, and consider the liabilities that come with managing a program that involves the handling of firearms by students and instructors. And we also have to consider the public, and those who may encounter our former students while recreating. Our top priority will ALWAYS be safety and trying to prevent the potential for tragedy.
If you ever have concerns about something you hear about the Hunter Education program or WDFW Enforcement as a whole, I would ask that you talk to us directly, get the facts and hear our perspective. One more thing – we truly honor and respect those who volunteer to teach others about Washington’s rich hunting heritage and firearms safety. And we thank you for your service to the Hunter Education Program.
-
Thank you
-
Thanks for the clarification
-
Thanks OG. That is a helpful clarification.
I see that your comments have been linked from the WDFW website which is good so others can see them as well (just in case there is even one hunter or instructor left in Washington that doesn't browse this forum :chuckle:)
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/huntered/instructors/files/WDFW_response_to_huntwashcom_blog.pdf
-
I received a post card today announcing that Lt. Anderson has been replaced by Carl Klein as the Hunter Education Manager.
-
Thanks to Outdoor Guardian for the clarifications.
Thanks to Bobby for informing me of this.
And thanks to Ghosthunter for the welcome!
-
I recently passed Hunters Ed (Ghost Hunter's class) and thought it'd be worth chiming in with an adult student's experience. I'm 28 and have never been exposed to hunting my entire life. It's always been something that I was interested in but took three years of putting it off before I finally took the plunge and signed up for class.
My experience with hunter's ed was exceptional. I'm not just saying this because GhostHunter can read it. The hands on experience for me at least was an absolute must. I learned things about my fire-arms that I hadn't learned 'playing' with them or taking them to the range. I was taught habits that I don't think any hunter, modern or primitive can do without. I felt that the amount of time the instructors volunteered to the class and gave up from their weekly schedule was a great testament to the amount of responsibility they personally feel toward the future safety of their students and other hunters.
I have no experience with online hunter education beside my earlier consideration to take it. After taking the live-class I see that there are MANY things I might have missed from an online course. For one, many people ask many diverse questions. Being in a class-room environment creates the opportunity for more questions to get asked that might be considered 'off topic' but very important. I also feel that the 'rules' can be memorized and spit out pretty easily by anyone who's ever been a good test taker. Hands on experience forces a student to develop good handling habits and a broader understanding of hunter safety, humane and ethical hunting as well as respect for habitat and private property. An online course also costs money which I believe may be wasted for the student. If you're not properly equipped for the range evaluation you're very likely to fail. I don't believe anyone can be adequately familiarized with safe gun handling over the internet. I fear that many students will show up to their range evaluation under prepared and may never choose to follow up and take the test again. One of the last things I want to do is discourage future hunters from joining us out in the field as responsible stewards.
On the topic of real firearms. I think they're absolutely essential. If a student takes only one thing away from the class it should be a deep respect for their firearm. I believe that delaying handling of real firearms until the student has passed the class and is in the field is a mistake. Ultimately I believe it's the state pushing the dangers of real firearms off onto the student in the field rather than a very controlled and tightly monitored environment with very experienced instructors. I remember range day pretty well (last week) and can recall that I was never unsupervised with a shotgun in my hand. GhostHunter handed me individual shells for each round of targets and gave me explicit instructions on how to handle the firearm regardless of my age.
Ultimately it's fair to say that incidents do happen. But the point behind hunter's ed is to minimize the occurrence of incidents in the field and I feel that pushing a live fire evaluation out of the program is not a decision that will help that cause. Whether it is or isn't an issue of liability for the state, I'd argue that the real risk is pushed onto the future of hunting in WA. When a student passes a dumbed down version of hunters ed, get's into the field with a license and tag and injures or kills someone it will reflect badly on ALL of us, not just the state of WA.
As far as direction for hunters ed, I'll defer to Ghosthunter. I've never hunted and have only recently passed his class. I'm excited to progress into the field with the full confidence that I have handled each type of firearm (and action) and am very familiar with them. I feel capable, equipped and in Ghosthunter and the other instructor's debt for the wisdom they have passed on to me.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
James
-
I do like the omega locks for hand guns.
I am not sure about them for Long gun practice because they would not allow loading and unloading.
I think the trigger locks are better because we can still cycle the the action.
True it could be dropped. But to get one to go off would have to be a complete melt down of protocol.
A student would have to bring a shell.
They would have to get it in the correct gun without the instructor seeing them.
And than the gun would have to be dropped.
None of the above has ever happen once in my classes in 17 years. Let alone all three.
-
Is anyone else having problems logging into the instructor website, the Draft Policy Manual for upcoming changes is posted there, but apparently its not working.
-
None here. I can access the instructor web page and the draft policy.
-
pm sent
-
At IST in Yakima. We are in trouble now . Agenda lists
Ground rules
And How to Cope with Change. :yike: :bash:
-
Maybe they were just testing us with that fire drill..... Or maybe we are really that rowdy!
-
Was the class on "Coping with change" before or after the fire-alarm?
-
After
-
I had a meeting last week with my hunter education instructors about the new changes in the program, bottom line is that we will conduct this years classes the way that we have in the past, however starting next year we will take advantage of the programs inert firearms for classroom instruction, and use there firearms for the range day and skills portion, we are also going to require ammunition supplied by the WDFW, 22s, and 243s, we are going to need eye and ear protection, and targets, we have never had to use any of there supplies in the past other than the tests and students workbooks, I hope theres enough supplies to go around.
-
Just got home from IST. I thought the event was overall good. There were a couple things I did not like.
1. The session on Harassment was a total waste of time. I discussed it with several other instructor and not one I talked to liked it. The speaker was 15-20 minutes late. The power point equipment was not set up until the speaker got there.
The speaker I doubt had ever been inside a Hunter Ed class room. Although I would agree Harassment is a important topic. The speaker had no idea who her audience was or what they did. Her whole session was geared to working in a DFW office not in a Hunter Ed classroom.
I would. Have thought that they would have had her attend a class and Come with a lesson plan focus on in class situations.
2. I would have liked a longer session on new policies . I also
Have some personal observations. But I will email those to Sgt. Cline.
3. I liked the session on reporting on line. And was glad to here some glitches had been fixed.
I would make this observation, Staff should practice what they preach.
In one session a gentle man indicated that he could not hear the speaker. The staff member than asked the class if anyone else was having trouble. No
The instructor who could not hear got up and left.
The speaker should had put on a mic if he was going to walk around the room while talking. There was a mike available.
Had that been a Hunter Ed class we would have made every effort to make sure every person could hear. The man who couldn't hear was put on the spot.
Something that would not be allowed in a Hunter Ed class.
Also if you are a staff member talking to men and women twice your age about issues that effect them. You should in the very least stand up and face them during your session instead of sitting slumped down in a chair behind a monitor. In my option that is disrespectful of your audience.
All in all I think these types of IST are very useful. And I thought for the most part well done. We had access to staff which helps us a lot. I know staff worked hard on it and I appreciate it.
As for me I will continue teaching as I have until the new policies are finalized.
I intend stop doing Range Days. As those are optional for the student. So why do them if the student is not required to shoot.
I do not do a field coarse and range on the same day.
These are my comments and mine alone. Just how I see it.
Bobby A. BEDDOME
Skagit County
-
I have now read the entire Draft Policies.
I have only two things I do not like.
1. The requirement to provide the serial numbers of my personal firearms used in class.
There is no reason the state DFW should need that information.
2. Allowing students to op out of shooting.
If the student cannot be required to shoot,than there is no reason to have a range day.
-
...
I have only two things I do not like.
1. The requirement to provide the serial numbers of my personal firearms used in class.
There is no reason the state DFW should need that information.
...
It's overboard they can't stay on top of the reqirements they have now.
There nothing that says I have to show a rifle in class. So I will just go with book and the only guns in class will be the state shotguns.
There is no need for serial numbers of private eqipment
It's not just firearms. If you look at the financial report, you also have to list any other personal equipment and their serial numbers that you use in class. So the way I read it, if you use a laptop and projector, you have to list them. It's not that I am concerned that someone has my serial for my laptop, it's just a big pain in the butt.
-
I :salute: you guys for trying to help herd these WDFW cats in the right direction. Don't have the time for that kind of ignorance, and THEY are the professionals! :bash:
-
I appreciated seeing the concerns and suggestions. This program is very important to us and we will continue to make improvements - a continuous process.
-
I also understand that they are looking for comments/corrections/feedback before they enact this document in May???
Having just spent over a year re-working our CC&Rs for our HOA, this doc looks half-baked. There's a LOT of ambiguity in this doc. The one thing that really made me twitch was the following:
“At no time will hunting arrows, broadheads or crossbow bolts be handled in the classroom by students.”
What’s the definition of a Hunting Arrow??? My fluflu with a judo point has killed grouse, but you would have to try hard to hurt yourself with one of these. My target arrows that I use in 3Ds are also my hunting arrows. Unscrew the tips and screw on a broadhead and voila, hunting arrow.
I could understand if the verbiage was
“At no time will broadheads, broadhead-tipped hunting arrows, or broadhead-tipped crossbow bolts be handled in the classroom by students.”
But if the intent was the original verbiage, then we might as well take away their pencils too. We all know that short barrels are harder to control than long barrels. The same would be true with sharp pokey things.
I think Kit’s looking to gather comments, concerns and corrections from our team and consolidate them into one document so that the state doesn’t get 900 responses to this thing. I am going to do my absolute best to be at the IAC meeting in April, so I could consolidate that further with Bobby’s team and take that as one response.
Thoughts?
I believe this is a perfect example of something that WDFW would appreciate feedback on.
-
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?
There are mentoring programs out there, big brother and big sister one of them, a friend of mine that is a very into hunting is a big brother and he as gotten his kid into hunting, they go all the time together, yes it took parental approval of course. There are also friends that take other friends kids hunting too, These are the kids that could use that hands on in hunter ed, they may not get the time with the hunting partner to show thme everything.
-
I just received my five year pin and certificate in the mail the other day. My how time flies, I didn't think it has been that long!
-
hunter ed was theeeeee most boring thing ive had to sit through in my life. i knew most of the stuff they taught me anyway. but i do see why they do it.
-
I can only speak to the online hunter education as that is what I ended up taking, but the online process could use an overhaul...
The online class itself - most people choose an online option so they can work at their own pace, but that means faster or slower... Why make me stay on a slide for 2 minutes when I've read and understood it in 30 seconds? This made absolutely no sense to me. If left to go at my own pace I could have easily completed the course and passed the final test in one evening. Instead I had to stretch it out over a week because I had a limited amount of time to work with each night.
The range evaluation - it wasn't an evaluation, it was pretty much a full on classroom day with an evaluation at the end. Again, I chose the online option to save time - I expected to go to the range evaluation take my test and go home. Instead I was there for the better part of a day going over material that was covered already online and that I was already tested on.
I'm not trying to come off as a know it all - I'm not. I did however have ingrained in me safe firearm handling skills when I was first introduced to firearms. I also don't want to take anything away from the instructors that taught at the range evaluation session - they were GREAT! A couple suggestions for hunter ed though... make the online option truly a "fast track" option and lay out EXACTLY what folks are going to be tested on during the range evaluation and how they'll be scored. On evaluation day have folks show up, sign in, and then start them on the course. Keep the full blown classroom instruction as an option for those that prefer a little more hands on training.
-
Has anyone actually read through the entire new WDFW Hunter Education instructor manual? If you have you may be wondering what's the point of the range day? If a student may now opt out of shooting portion, what is the point? In the past students had to shoot but now if they don't feel like it, they can opt out. Plus if they opt in they only have to shoot one round from a .22 caliber rifle. Remember the post that said the states does not not plan to do away with the Hunter Ed classroom. That's odd because the new policies seem to contradict this. Based on what I have read, the new policy paves the way for a 100% online program. Maybe it isn't drafted in a manner where it directly states this but if you read between the lines you can clearly see the writing on the wall. If you do away with the shooting skills portion and then you place a huge burden of red tape on your current instructors what do you think is going to happen? Instructors are going to start leaving the ranks in droves because they simply do not wish to put up with all the bs. However the need for Hunter Education is still there. What do you do? Well, since you do not have enough instructors and you do have an online program, why not simply wave the field day and turn the program into a 100% online program. You get rid the liability, the cost of books and supplies and then you can funnel the Pittman Robertson monies into other areas. Granted this may not happen for a couple years but I think once you draw down the instructor ranks enough you will have no problem getting this type of policy pushed through.
-
" If a student may now opt out of shooting portion, what is the point? In the past students had to shoot but now if they don't feel like it, they can opt out."
Live fire has always been optional. It just wasn't communicated very well.
-
" If a student may now opt out of shooting portion, what is the point? In the past students had to shoot but now if they don't feel like it, they can opt out."
Live fire has always been optional. It just wasn't communicated very well.
Thats really not true. Live fire was optional for instructors, not for students. I was told by staff when I started that if a range day was part of my class than everyone had to shoot.
And I have seen dozens of students fail a class for not shooting. Now its is optional for the student.
As I have said before why should an instructor waste a saturday or sunday on a range day that half the students may opt out of.
Not me I will never have another range day if I am still in the program after the draft period.
-
I can only speak to the online hunter education as that is what I ended up taking, but the online process could use an overhaul...
The online class itself - most people choose an online option so they can work at their own pace, but that means faster or slower... Why make me stay on a slide for 2 minutes when I've read and understood it in 30 seconds? This made absolutely no sense to me. If left to go at my own pace I could have easily completed the course and passed the final test in one evening. Instead I had to stretch it out over a week because I had a limited amount of time to work with each night.
The range evaluation - it wasn't an evaluation, it was pretty much a full on classroom day with an evaluation at the end. Again, I chose the online option to save time - I expected to go to the range evaluation take my test and go home. Instead I was there for the better part of a day going over material that was covered already online and that I was already tested on.
I'm not trying to come off as a know it all - I'm not. I did however have ingrained in me safe firearm handling skills when I was first introduced to firearms. I also don't want to take anything away from the instructors that taught at the range evaluation session - they were GREAT! A couple suggestions for hunter ed though... make the online option truly a "fast track" option and lay out EXACTLY what folks are going to be tested on during the range evaluation and how they'll be scored. On evaluation day have folks show up, sign in, and then start them on the course. Keep the full blown classroom instruction as an option for those that prefer a little more hands on training.
Here is you answer for your complaints;
The state cannot be sure if some kids parent is sitting at the computer taking the test for the kid. The times are in place to discourage parents from doing that. Most will not sit there that long. If you want this to change there has to be a age limit placed on who can take the on line coarse.
Next the evaluation day. Same reason, The state cannot be sure who passed the on line tests so they give you another test and instruction to keep people honest. The gun handling came about because the on line coarse had a high failure rate on the gun handling. Students were showing up who never had handle a firearm before and could not pass the handling.
Lets face it ,there are a lot of folks out there who really do not care about safety unless it happens to them. They want a tag and they are willing to do whatever it takes to get a student through.
Thus i dont do on line evaluations.
-
Any time a gov agency or big company has to make an unpopular change they do it in steps. IF the state wants to reduce all liability they would wan to phase out its "liabilities" but keep the program in place as much as possible. The problems can then be attributed to working out the kinks. Asking everyone to be patient and "keep working with us" allows them to make the transition easier for them, but not necessarily better. :twocents:
I think you could compare this to other big businesses making a change or gov agencies.
-
If they need to identify guns , instead of serial numbers they should generate a tag like the inventory tag for each instructors personal gun.
i just do not understand why they need a serial #. And I am not going to provide one. They have said trigger locks could be used. So if that is the case why would they need a number? Since trigger locks can be taken off after class.
I personally do not believe you will see much change from the draft. I think their minds are made up. And all this is just a exercise.