The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Hunter Competency Test PollGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Hunter Competency Test Poll | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
So this is referencing the "slob hunter" post. "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then is not an act, but a habit"--Aristotle (384BC-322BC) | ||
|
| One of Us |
Before I bought my place here where I hunt now, I used to hunt the neighbors property. I am not exaggerating when I say that 3/4 of the time when I bumped into other hunters over there they were chasing or discussing a deer one of them had wounded. One of them even told me how much fun they have because they drink all night and hunt all day. The other year a couple of my friends got together here on my place to finnish off a deer that had run over from the neighbors place. It's lower jaw had been blown off, it was starving to death. Sand Creek November 29 1864 | |||
|
| One of Us |
There is to much government intervention on all subjects, so lets not create more. | |||
|
One of Us |
+1 | |||
|
| One of Us |
+2 Plus what would a test do to kids that are just getting into hunting? They are still learning the ropes and a test could really put them off from being a future hunter. In addition the only slob hunters that I have run into were all in law enforcement and I assume they have the shooting skills to pass a test. Good Hunting,  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Don't assume that. I own a shooting range where we train combat rifle and pistol skills for civilian, police, and military. I don't have much confidence in cops shooting skills. If they can shoot it is because they are gun enthusiasts just like their civilian counterparts. The cop I talked about before would have failed a test with his muzzle loader. Sand Creek November 29 1864 | |||
|
| One of Us |
Amen. Like Will Rogers said so well, "Thank God we don't get all of the Government we pay for". I think that Hunter's Safety Classes for kids just starting out hunting might be the forum for addressing the "slob" issue. But, We just DO NOT need more Government. The mere thought of that is beyond terrifying, as with Government controlled Health Care. Just look at England for Government involvement with Health care and with guns. They have moved back to the dark ages. | |||
|
one of us |
Correct me if I am wrong, however, some states do require a certificate from a hunters safety class before purchasing a tag or out of state license. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I work with a woman from England. She married an American so they move every 10 years.10 years there, 10 years here. She absolutely hates the gun laws in England, and absolutely loves the health care system. She says that no matter what else happens if you or your family gets sick or hurt the govt will just fix you. No fees, no deductibles, no insurance, no nothing. Doesn't matter if you lost your job and don't have any money. I'm not trying to derail this but I don't have any first hand experience with their system. The only person I know who does have actual first hand experience with both systems very very much prefers theirs.
Sand Creek November 29 1864 | |||
|
| one of us |
I would strongly agree with not adding more government, as I lean Libertarian in my politics. However, I think we are assuming we are talking about a government, or some sort of official test. I know there are leases and hunting clubs that require competency tests to be a member. Where I live there are special hunt areas, parks in particular that require you to prove you can hit what you are aiming at, in order to hunt there. I don't think that is a bad thing. I hunt alone for the most part, because I simply don't trust too many people to be in the same space with me, armed. I live in Iowa where party hunting is legal, and i have witnessed first hand, too many slob hunters to feel any other way. I was taught from an early age, if you are going to do something, it's worth investing the time to do it right. I am a certified hunter ed instructor, and we do our best to give kids all the information and encouragement to do the right thing, and do it safely, but just like everything else with kids, it takes parenting as well, and there is a lot lacking in that area all the way around. Sticky subject, and a good, thought provoking poll. Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready Theodore Roosevelt | |||
|
One of Us |
I'm kind of torn on this one. I fully agree that there is too much government intervention already and this would be creating more, but I also have a tremendous respect for the animals we hunt and think we owe it to them to be proficient in the weapons we choose to kill them with. I dont know if all states require one, but here in GA and every state I have hunted, a person is required to pass a hunters safety course before they can get a hunting license. The course here was 12 hrs but all classroom time and taught nothing about marksmanship. Granted I took it 25 years ago, but I dont think it has changed too much. IMHO I think it would be a good idea to add some type of basic marksmanship class to the course and maybe get in a little range time even if it is with rimfires or BB guns. I cant think of anyone that would be taking a hunters safety course that wouldnt like the idea of getting to shoot a little bit and can't imagine it being a deterent. IF you think about it most of huntes are shown the basics of shooting by a family member or friend or something along those lines. How many of those really know how teach or instruct in a way that is easy for a new shooter to understand. Ot for that matter were good shots themselves. Not that many I would bet. It's no different than in school, we all had a teacher at some point, that could really convey the lesson in a way that we could understand and make it easy to learn and enjoyed the subject and did well in it. We all had teachers that were just the opposite and we didnt do as well. Teaching someone to shoot is no different. Just my thoughts Adam 30+ years experience tells me that perfection hit at .264. Others are adequate but anything before or after is wishful thinking. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think that most States require Hunter Safety Courses be taken.I am in full agreement with that.I am not in agreement with anything more than that.The less buracracy,the better. Everyone at some time during their Hunting career,will make a bad call.Anyone who says otherwise is full of shit.As long as another person is not hurt or property damaged it is a learning experience. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I voted yes and the only thing I say is let's make sure people can pass a shooting competency test. If someone is going to be allowed to bring a high powered firearm into the woods then they should be able to demonstrate that they are competent with using it. Furthermore, be able to demonstrate such ability every 5 years or something. I would have no problem with this. In fact, I would feel safer than with some of the yo-yos running around out there now with their 06s and bigger. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I too have mixed feelings about more Government, but I have strong feelings against letting just anyone hunt. I fully agree with landowners, clubs, outfitters requiring a proficiency test before a hunters goes out. It's only fair to the animals and sport. "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then is not an act, but a habit"--Aristotle (384BC-322BC) | |||
|
| One of Us |
Hunter safety is ok.Some other gov. crap not ok. | |||
|
one of us |
I'm glad my state requires hunter education before you can get a hunting license. With all of the idiots running around here, turning them loose with guns in the hills would be mayhem. It's bad enough on the city streets. At least they are only killing each other and I don't have to go to the city. Have gun- Will travel The value of a trophy is computed directly in terms of personal investment in its acquisition. Robert Ruark | |||
|
one of us |
I voted no because we certainly don't need any more government red tape. However, I do support the hunter safety requirement and would probably even endorse a five to ten-year "refresher" requirement. Most professional certifications require regular refresher or renewal courses/training, why not hunter safety? I took it the first time at 11 or so and remember little of the actual course. I'm actually looking forward to retaking the course with my kids in a few years. _____________________ A successful man is one who earns more money than his wife can spend. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I beg pardon: I didn;t vote. This was because, I don't think there were enough choices on a issue that can be a bit complicated. I'd like to know who's paying for such a program. If it were hunter-funded; maybe. I also wonder: how much of a 'fix' will these programs actually provide? We're dealing with human beings, after all. Some people can't hit a elephant if they were inside one, regardless of how much training and practice they take. In theory: those folk would be weeded out, but.... It comes back to; how much money are we willing to spend on such ventures? How much of a benefit will they really provide? Just my 2 cents... | |||
|
| one of us |
Adamhunter. I too am a Hunter Ed instructor. Here in Arizona, we have a range day that includes the students shooting 5 round from three positions, kneeling, sitting and prone. We don't do the off hand position for reasons of muzzle control and sfaety. One range day, the students (not all are kids) do map and compass, a simulated hunt, a blood trail excercise where the one that "finds the buck" actually finds the dollar bill planted at the end of the trail. Along with the shooting of the .22 rifls, they also get to load, shoot and then properly clean a muzzle loading rifle. All in all, one hell of a good time for the students and instructors alaike. Paul B. | |||
|
One of Us |
I'm never going to be for more gov't or bureaucracy. I do like the hunter certification programs. When I did it, twenty years ago, we did go and shoot. That said, the shooting tests to become certified for concealed carry are a joke, and passing them proves very little. Failing them however, proves a lot. Tough call as to the proper course on this one. | |||
|
| One of Us |
It seems like this could be part of hunters ed. I know in my state you can't hunt without going through hunters ed first. Just add a shooting portion to the class. Sand Creek November 29 1864 | |||
|
| One of Us |
I re-read the question and it asks about hunter "competency" not "marksmanship". Marksmanship is IMO fairly easy for the person of average build, eye sight, strength and reflexes to learn. I think most of us here could pass it even as far as requiring 3 straight hits on a slowly moving 6" target standing off-hand with a scope at 100 yards. And certainly at 50 yards. But "competency" is the real problem, which is more a matter of judgment, intellect and self-discipline on what and where to shoot and when. I can understand trying to teach that with examples, but I'm not sure how it can be tested. Does anyone? For instance, how do you get rid of those who shoot at sounds in the woods or front-yard concrete deer ornaments? Do we do an action-practical type test where you have to make an instant decision on shoot or not shoot with good guy/bad guy pop-up targets or something of that type? I'd probably leave it like it is except with the addition of heavy class room work on ethics and provide specific examples of what to not do. The examples are endless. But putting in tests won't relieve buck fever and won't guarantee you'll pass up that monster buck that's running at 400 yards. It won't guarantee someone won't think it's fun to shoot a squirrel with a .300 Magnum. It won't guarantee someone will always keep their gun pointed in a safe direction or even keep it on safe for that matter. And it won't stop some of the really bad abuses that can appear with real good marksmen, but are character flaw or personality related and more an ego thing or lack of respect for the game and for fellow hunters and for landowners. Frequently these things are "self-correcting" because such individuals get themselves kicked off the farm or out of the club. But they just go somewhere else. And they would have no trouble passing a course or test of any type. In any event I can see how this is going. In other fields, such as several professions, we start out with voluntary continuing education classes. Then they become mandatory. Then that becomes a big business in itself. Then specialization certification creeps in. Then that becomes mandatory. Then the fees for all this go up 10X over as many years. Then periodic re-testing occurs to the brilliant minds of the rule makers. Then it becomes fact, and finally the whole thing is so squeaky clean and error free, that everyone's looking for the door and wants out!! Btw, on the European health care, I don't know about Britain but in some of those countries you're allowed to have private insurance on the side in case you don't like what you're getting from the state owned doctors and hospitals. I'm not so sure the Alien (my name for him) is going to allow that here...when he gets the right to assign you a doctor, look out! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Very well said!!!!  | |||
|
| one of us |
I agree. On top of that, most if not all, states require you to pass a hunter safety course before you can get a license. So, in a sense we already have it. | |||
|
| One of Us |
the government is already in most aspects of our lives. i do not want them in any more. when are some people going to realize that the government (and their requirements and associated costs) are not the answer to the individuals problems or concerns? | |||
|
| One of Us |
I voted no because the question was very vague. I would need more details to make a more informed decision. I hunt for the most part in Georgia, though I am a non-resident. I have taken the hunter safety course before I started hunting. I have never been asked to provide proof having taken when I have purchased my hunting license. Even when I have purchased them online. The DWR may have a record where I have provided it in the past, I'm not sure. | |||
|
| one of us |
+1 too............... LIFE IS SHORT..... | |||
|
| One of Us |
I left everything vague on purpose. Mostly to get a varied response. The idea was you were either against or for without details, stipulations, etc. So far it seems to be a split decision. My original intent was to get everyone to think about the "slob hunters" post and use the competency idea to weed out those who violate the law as well as those who gave hunting a bad rap. I never intended it to be a "government" dominated conversation. Everyone pointed to Hunter Ed but as hvy barrel pointed out; it hasn't been enforced. I've never been asked either. I'm going to say something that will get me in trouble. Hunter Ed is a unenforced joke that is only attended because it is mandatory before you can hunt. I've never seen anyone fail. I've even helped with a class that one student couldn't READ as a 12 year old. He passed without basic reading skills. How was he supposed to be able to read the regs, laws, etc!!! While I agree that the gov't is already plenty involved. I would not support a required competency test. I would however support re-upping hunter certification every 5 years or so. "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then is not an act, but a habit"--Aristotle (384BC-322BC) | |||
|
| One of Us |
It might be area specific. When I took hunters ed in Kansas 2 students failed the hands-on part and had to come back.
Sand Creek November 29 1864 | |||
|
| One of Us |
About the only requirement that I would support is a Hunters Education Course. Which is already mandatory in most states. | |||
|
| One of Us |
A friend who is a rangemaster at a private corporate shooting range was at the range when a member brought in a local sheriffs swat team to shoot but he didn't stay to supervise the team.My friend was shooting his custom 6mm rifles at a 100 target getting excellent groups,he decided to hang 2 targets at 200 yards and fired an excellent tight group.One of the swat officers asked if he could fire at the extra target,my friend gave him an ok but when they removed the targets the swat officers "group" couldn't be covered by a lid from a 5 gallon bucket.The unsupervised officers weren't following range rules so my friend asked them to leave,they objected ,he told me he gave them a choice of leaving or he'd call the sheriff who is a personal friend of his.They left the range.The member who brought them to the range and left w/o supervising the swat team was voted out of the club. | |||
|
| One of Us |
It's been a long time but Hunters Safety class covered the basics and you had to have some skill with a 22 at least when I took it in my State - CA (the worst hunting state by far) More fees and excuses to keep hunters out of the field would make most of the idiots in Sacramento as happy as could be.... Next year we can't buy ammo via online retailers. If I had any confidence in who would administer it - I'd support something similar to European competency testing, but remember what we have here in our ever growing bureaucracy. | |||
|
| One of Us |
How to make hunting illegal? TEST it out of existance. I would be very much in favor of a serious test of both marksmanship and hunting skills and knowledge, HOWEVER; it is just the sort of thing the Obama's and Eric Holder's of this world would LOVE to have in place to make it impossible to A. Hunt (one less EXCUSE to own a firearm) B. Own a firearm of ANY type. Some sample hurdles to jump over: Antelope are often shot at 300 to 400 yds, isn't it REASONABLE that you and your rifle should be able to hold a 4 or 6 inch group at 400 yds? (Field positions only, no benches in the prarie.) Tracking skills are important and the ground isn't always snow covered. Isn't it REASONABLE that you should be able to track a game animal that is lightly wounded over dry ground? Especially if that ground is rocky... You should know something about the game you hunt, isn't it REASONABLE that you should have at least a 36hr. course in the biology and management of each and every animal you choose to hunt? With refresher courses every few years to make sure you are "current". I could go on and I'm sure you all could come up with some "reasonable" requirements. Remenber these requirements don't have to be realistic, just sound good to the non-hunting public especially when presented by the sh*t-meisters in the eco-nazi movement. | |||
|
| One of Us |
As I recall we test drivers; if the same quality of hunters can be expected to result from instituting a "hunters" test as the motorists we get from a "drivers" test, I think we would be better off to leave well enough alone. It is not the test I object to, it is the innefectual and possibly malicious administration of the test that bothers me. While we are at it . . . Never mind, I am probably preaching to the choir. | |||
|
One of Us |
+1 I voted yes for something like this, HUNTER SAFETY, not for anything else. Anything else would cause more problems than it could possibly solve. I know a few LICENSED DRIVERS (needed to pass at least two tests to get license) that I would not drive with again on a bet. Passing a test don't mean a thing... JUST A TYPICAL WHITE GUY BITTERLY CLINGING TO GUNS AND RELIGION Definition of HOPLOPHOBIA "I'm the guy that originally wrote the 'assault weapons' ban." --- Former Vice President Joe Biden | |||
|
One of Us |
Folks, I have been reading this since it came up, and the best I can say is that it is a Bull Shit arguement. Hunter numbers, WORLD WIDE are declining annually, anything else thrown up as a road block to having new hunters enter the sport, will only make it easier for the P.T.B.s, to find ways of ending hunting altogether. From my experience over the past few years, STUPIDITY and GREED can not be legislated out of existance. At some point, either we start expressing our disappointment with modern attitudes of instant gratifacation and the size of the trophy is all that matters, or we prepare ourselves for the ultimate end of our sport. To many folks have become enamored with huge trophies, regardless of the amount having to be spent and with all the gadgetry that supposedely helps someone be a better hunter. One thing we definitely DO NOT need is uselesas and unenforceable goverment intervention. I have seen to many folks that could place one bullet on top of another off a bench looking at paper, yet when put in real hunting conditions were some of the most consistent "Gut Shooters" around. Just my opinion and I don't care what anyone else thinks, BUT, actual field hunting conditions can not be duplicated satisfactorly on a test range. Let's stick with mandatory Hunter Ed, and not start trying to duplicate systems from Europe where only a small minority are able to get out and hunt. Unlike Europe, if hunting numbers continue to decline in America, the reasons to keep the sport viable will be lost and hunting will be stopped. Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't like slob hunters, but I hate the idea of further government intervention. A hunting test won't get rid of slob hunters any better than a driver's test gets rid of slob drivers. DRSS Member | |||
|
| One of Us |
So you figure things on the road would be better if nobody was required to pass a driving test?
Sand Creek November 29 1864 | |||
|
one of us |
I would like to vote yes,but voted no.If you have to have a test,there will be an added fee,more regulation. ****************************************************************** SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLUM *********** | |||
|
| One of Us |
No. However it does not seem to stop MANY really crappy drivers from getting a license. My point was that it takes at least TWO TESTS to get a drivers license and as a former professional driver, I saw (and still see) stupid a** people HOURLY on the road. Actually it takes more than that because you have to pass a written test, then have mentored (permit) driving, then pass another written test and a driving test. As CrazyHorse said, Must be the same for drivers... JUST A TYPICAL WHITE GUY BITTERLY CLINGING TO GUNS AND RELIGION Definition of HOPLOPHOBIA "I'm the guy that originally wrote the 'assault weapons' ban." --- Former Vice President Joe Biden | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Hunter Competency Test Poll
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia