Hunters training and education

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enysse

Hunter recruitment is very hard in the USA. When I was child I could knock on a door and get permission to hunt just about anywhere. That ended a long time ago. With leases, gas prices, land prices, vehicle and house payments....parents are stretched harder and harder to make time and money to get kids in the field. And with the internet and video game and every other thing the main stream media is blasting on the radio, internet, newspaper, tv, etc. People are finding other things to do with their time. A lot of times, people quit because they see no game. Every state in the USA uses hunting licenses like a revenue source, not caring if the populations of game animals are low and predator populations are high. It's about selling people to spend money to hunt. People either find a enjoyable way to hunt within their budget means or they quit.

I sit a lot of times on the sideline, because I have to save my money to hunt. That doesn't bother me...I have the passion and drive to hunt. Most people I met don't have that desire. They need instant results hunting or it's on to the next big thing.

As far as training people to hunt. I like the way the USA does things. I think it a older hunter's responsibility to show new hunters the right way to do things.

---

Very well put. This mirrors my views as well. Who is going to carry on our hunting traditions? Our children of course. We have in place a very sound training/safety course that is required of all new hunters. Make it too difficult and you would see a substantial drop in participation.
Hunter recruitment is the key to all of hunting's future. I am lucky to be involved as a mentor in a "learn to hunt" program in Wisconsin. (USA) Next weekend we will be taking out 42 young hunters on their first turkey hunt. Over the years I have seen first-hand the excitement of these young hunters as they were guided to a real hunting experience. Talking to many of these young adults years after, showed that the majority went on to take the appropriate hunter safety course and entered the field to enjoy the privilege of hunting.
As TOM and enysse have stated so very well... Its a older hunter's responsibility to show new hunters the right way to do things. Training is a good thing, but not so much as to alienate and discourage participation in the wonderful outdoor experience of hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diamondhitch

Brick, "a joke" is probably a bit strong I just find it to be as you say, very "Rudementary". I would love to see a shooting component added for one - with actual practical range experience. Poor shooting is quite rampant I think mainly because most people do not know how to properly staibilize a firearm so how will they ever teach their kids? I would say that maybe 5% of hunters I have met even know that a sling is designed to stabilize your arm while shooting and even fewer know how to adjust one properly. The only type of resting position a large majority of hunters here know is off the mirror of the truck.
It would be nice to be able to practice practical hunting skills like how to properly stillhunt and such. I think alot of people road hunt simply because walking at full speed down the center of a wide open cutline is not as productive and that is all they know.

The biggest problem with expanding that course to help people be proficient hunters and marksmen is the time and expense involved in something of that scale. The current system has definitely dramatically reduced the number of people who cant tell the difference between a Mulie and a Whitetail and I think that is exactly what it is geared for.

---

Diamond, when I saw that RSA required at least a shooting test (proficiency) before you could get your Senior Hunters certification I was amazed. How can they be so far ahead of us?

The hunting mentor programs now try to take youngsters out that don't have hunting in the family background.
AHEIA gets requests all the time form parents who's children want to learn how to hunt or shoot and the parents have no inclination or interest, but will support the child in something they are interested in.



It is a lot of fun to take new hunters out. My Swazi Hunter posts here are a good example. Although not new to hunting in general. he was brand new to hunting here. Passed the course and we went and got some "Biltong" here.
It is way too much fun to take rookies out for their first hunts.

As everyone knows, without the new hunters our minority status is expanding.

Camp Wainwright used to use a set of eight or ten pictures of doe Whitetails and Mule Deer to help hunters properly ID animals.
That was back in the day before does could be legally hunted and there was a season in the camp where you could take Whitetail does and not Mule Deer does. You want to talk about an eye opener.
Most hunters used antlers to ID the deer. Not good for initial doe hunting seasons.

Graduates are much better now.

Join up and take one of them out.
It is a great program.
It also goes hand in hand with the youth tags now available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRICKBURN

Diamond, when I saw that RSA required at least a shooting test (proficiency) before you could get your Senior Hunters certification I was amazed. How can they be so far ahead of us?

The hunting mentor programs now try to take youngsters out that don't have hunting in the family background.
AHEIA gets requests all the time form parents who's children want to learn how to hunt or shoot and the parents have no inclination or interest, but will support the child in something they are interested in.



It is a lot of fun to take new hunters out. My Swazi Hunter posts here are a good example. Although not new to hunting in general. he was brand new to hunting here. Passed the course and we went and got some "Biltong" here.
It is way too much fun to take rookies out for their first hunts.

As everyone knows, without the new hunters our minority status is expanding.

Camp Wainwright used to use a set of eight or ten pictures of doe Whitetails and Mule Deer to help hunters properly ID animals.
That was back in the day before does could be legally hunted and there was a season in the camp where you could take Whitetail does and not Mule Deer does. You want to talk about an eye opener.
Most hunters used antlers to ID the deer. Not good for initial doe hunting seasons.

Graduates are much better now.

Join up and take one of them out.
It is a great program.
It also goes hand in hand with the youth tags now available.

---

I would be interested in taking a kid out, with either rifle or bow we should at least be able to knock down a whitetail buck in a couple outings. You will have to PM me some info.

As for not being able to ID deer, my eye opener was the first time I hunted in Saskatchewan. The first day out I saw a 180" Mulie and asked my buddies family if there were many big Mulies around, they said "we dont have any Mulies around here, just Whitetails"??? I saw 4 more Mulie bucks that week which makes me wonder how many Mulies got shot as Whitetails back then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diamondhitch

I would be interested in taking a kid out, with either rifle or bow we should at least be able to knock down a whitetail buck in a couple outings. You will have to PM me some info.

As for not being able to ID deer, my eye opener was the first time I hunted in Saskatchewan. The first day out I saw a 180" Mulie and asked my buddies family if there were many big Mulies around, they said "we dont have any Mulies around here, just Whitetails"??? I saw 4 more Mulie bucks that week which makes me wonder how many Mulies got shot as Whitetails back then.

---

Taking a kid is a first step I believe, jut to give them a taste of what hunting can be.
Education and camps is second step.
A minimal course and tests is a must in my view, that's step number three.
now, if you really want to have a working system, and some will scream here, fourth step is unfortunately regulations and... penalties...
One example, here we are obliged, in case of wounded animals to call for blood hounds. A list of hound drivers is provided. failing to do so, and being caught of course, leads to a heavy fine. this has dramatically reduced the number of lost game, and the number of wounded animals found by people walking or trekking. Which, incidentally, reduces the anti-hunting claims that hunters are heartless killers...
Another example, killing a doe of one species instead of another species will lead you to a heavy fine (a few thousand $), believe me hunters will take some extra time identifying correctly what they shoot. I am not saying that over-policing is the answer, just that proper game education, combined with proper game management and appropriate deterrent may help our cause.
now, what do we want? Better hunters for better hunting or more hunters regardless of their qualifications?
It seems that some countries definitively have taken the path for quality rather than quantity...
The US has the chance of huge hunting territories, so the rules can and should be different. I would love to enjoy some of the freedom to hunt you have. I love hunting there, have met some of the best hunters I know but have to admit that some of the things I have seen were disheartening... A good US hunter is a galaxy away from a bad US hunter, ethically, at the game knowledge level, tracking and shooting skills, while, say in Sweden or Germany, the difference will only be mostly in the amount and quality of game he obtains (read his core hunting instinct...).

Yes, there are plenty of bad hunters in the USA. Some didn't have to take hunters education, others just feel entitled to hunt any which way they want to until caught by a warden. It disheartens me some for sure. There is plenty of poaching. I admit we don't thing 100 percent perfect. The whole democracy thing, makes regulations loose. My two cents.

There always will be plenty of excellent hunters in the USA. Men and Women that follow the law and do things right. And there are always fellow hunters trying to make the bad hunters, better hunters.

My first question echoes what Diamond asked. Jepetto, why is there a 50% failure rate?

For the most part, I agree with my American colleagues. Our individual states are on the right track with regard to hunter training and education. Obviously, some states are doing a better job than others. Tom is spot on with his assessment, and so is Brick. The training is rudimentary and focused at 12-14 year olds. This is sad, in my opinion. In Colorado, as well as many western states, a child cannot hunt big game until they reach the age of twelve. At that age, and if the child has had no prior hunting experience, we have essentially lost them-especially little girls. I see no reason why the age requirement shouldn't be removed and then "parental discretion" could be applied. In Texas, for example, there is no age requirement to hunt big game, nor is there any hunter education requirement providing the junior hunter is accompanied by a certified adult hunter (a mentor). I like this system! It legally provides opportunity for new hunters- naturally-when they are ready.

My daughter shot her first deer when she was six. She excitedly aimed the .223 rifle, pulled the trigger, and killed her deer all by herself while sitting in my lap (I am a hunter ed instructor as well). I restricted her shots to no more than 20 yards-her effective range with open sights. Since then, she has been to Africa. She has five warthogs, a steenbok, and a duiker under her belt, again all killed while sitting in my lap (in Africa she used a crossbow). She has also bolted four more deer, a coyote, and several turkeys. And to think, this year she gets to hunt deer and elk in her own state... I have to ask, who is missing the boat?

Jaco speaks no truer words when he says, "Jepetto62, I do not believe for one second that when it comes to training that there is such a thing as over-doing it......"

However, if you fail them before they have been given the chance to touch the experience (when they express a desire), then who really fails? Yeah, as hunters we need to step up.

I believe the training should be free (or at a very minimal cost) and ongoing...presently in the US it is not. The laws are in place to provide an element of safety and welfare for the general public, conservation and preservation for wildlife and natural resources, and equal opportunity for everyone. When there is deviation from the law equal opportunity is greatly reduced. Training and additional ongoing training is critical to success. It sort of makes me wonder if special programs could be implemented to encourage ongoing training? Maybe things like participation in special seasons or perhaps preference points could be awarded...thinking out loud

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iamyourhuckleberry

My first question echoes what Diamond asked. Jepetto, why is there a 50% failure rate?

For the most part, I agree with my American colleagues. Our individual states are on the right track with regard to hunter training and education. Obviously, some states are doing a better job than others. Tom is spot on with his assessment, and so is Brick. The training is rudimentary and focused at 12-14 year olds. This is sad, in my opinion. In Colorado, as well as many western states, a child cannot hunt big game until they reach the age of twelve. At that age, and if the child has had no prior hunting experience, we have essentially lost them-especially little girls. I see no reason why the age requirement shouldn't be removed and then "parental discretion" could be applied. In Texas, for example, there is no age requirement to hunt big game, nor is there any hunter education requirement providing the junior hunter is accompanied by a certified adult hunter (a mentor). I like this system! It legally provides opportunity for new hunters- naturally-when they are ready.

My daughter shot her first deer when she was six. She excitedly aimed the .223 rifle, pulled the trigger, and killed her deer all by herself while sitting in my lap (I am a hunter ed instructor as well). I restricted her shots to no more than 20 yards-her effective range with open sights. Since then, she has been to Africa. She has five warthogs, a steenbok, and a duiker under her belt, again all killed while sitting in my lap (in Africa she used a crossbow). She has also bolted four more deer, a coyote, and several turkeys. And to think, this year she gets to hunt deer and elk in her own state... I have to ask, who is missing the boat?

Jaco speaks no truer words when he says, "Jepetto62, I do not believe for one second that when it comes to training that there is such a thing as over-doing it......"

However, if you fail them before they have been given the chance to touch the experience (when they express a desire), then who really fails? Yeah, as hunters we need to step up.

I believe the training should be free (or at a very minimal cost) and ongoing...presently in the US it is not. The laws are in place to provide an element of safety and welfare for the general public, conservation and preservation for wildlife and natural resources, and equal opportunity for everyone. When there is deviation from the law equal opportunity is greatly reduced. Training and additional ongoing training is critical to success. It sort of makes me wonder if special programs could be implemented to encourage ongoing training? Maybe things like participation in special seasons or perhaps preference points could be awarded...thinking out loud

---

To answer your questions, failure rate is in part people giving up (which to me proves they do not have the right motivation) and people failing the test by itself. The whole process and courses is by the way pretty cheap, may be a couple hundred bucks over two years.
Your special season is actually an interesting point. Here we do have special tags, like old ibex, they could be given to people willing to go the extra miles in hunter's education. Food for thought...
Now, to be honest, having a rigid system like we do has some bad side. My son and daughter have both hunted. My daughter is 12 and has shot impalas and kudus, but will probably stop there. She had the chance to try hunting and she has to freedom now to decide. My son is 13 and has shot oryx, impalas, giraffe, waterbuck and... buffalo. He wants to be a PH and lives and dreams hunting. He had the chance to try hunting and decided it was his passion.
All this would not be feasible in Europe, they have to wait to be 18, then take the courses and exam.
So, I guess there is some schizophrenia here, advocating a system, but also trying to circumvent it.
May be softer rules, combined with the possibility for kids of shooting on adults tags, under supervision of well-trained hunter? A but like you do in the US, but with the obligation to train and learn to get your own license afterward...

Quote:

---

failure rate is in part people giving up (which to me proves they do not have the right motivation) and people failing the test by itself.

---

Maybe so, but it could also prove that lifestyles have different priorities. Either way, 50% now have a chip on their shoulder and may rally against the current system-possibly eliminating it altogether. Seems to me the hunters in your country should be striving for a 100% success rate for sustainability reasons.

So yeah, maybe it's too much.

Great topic, thanks for bringing it up!

My experience, having lived in a number of locations in the U.S., is the separation made between firearms safety and hunter education. Firearm safety documentation in the form of a limited class in handling firearms and basic firearm function is required to obtain a hunting license. There is usually a part of those hunting education classes dedicated to ethics but these are short, brief, simple information which probably gives the impression that ethics afield is a minor consideration. As indicated in previous posts, most "hunting" education was historically provided through parents, uncles, neighbors or friends. In our current day and time, I believe most young hunters get more in depth education from watching the abundance of hunting shows on TV or dvd.

While I admire the in depth instruction of hunting in other countries by professionals, including wildlife biologists, to require such instruction and competence prior to issuance of a hunting license goes against the blanket freedoms that have been traditional in the U.S. for hundreds of years.

I think it would be a tremendous boon to hunting here if some of the hunting celebrities on the TV and DVD's would start endorsing specific sources of information on wildlife, ecology, marksmanship. I would also like to see these same stars model this by presenting segments of biology of their quarry in every show as well as techniques they use to improve their marksmanship. (We in the U.S. love to find heros in our entertainers be it sports or movies. A friend said we worship our "jesters" well).

That said, I am sure there are a lot mores misses and/or lost animals by these folks that never make it through the editing room.

Quote:

---

While I admire the in depth instruction of hunting in other countries by professionals, including wildlife biologists, to require such instruction and competence prior to issuance of a hunting license goes against the blanket freedoms that have been traditional in the U.S. for hundreds of years.

---

While I understand your point, I need to point out that blanket freedoms nearly decimated our "public" natural resources prior to the 20th century. As Tom brilliantly stated, 'There has to be a balance', and hunters are not the only folks giving input. Equal opportunity is for all...it would be arrogant for hunters to think otherwise, since it is still a privilege in this country to take public domain. A little extra course work is not a lot to give if that what the public asks from us.

Quote:

---

I think it would be a tremendous boon to hunting here if some of the hunting celebrities on the TV and DVD's would start endorsing specific sources of information on wildlife, ecology, marksmanship. I would also like to see these same stars model this by presenting segments of biology of their quarry in every show as well as techniques they use to improve their marksmanship. (We in the U.S. love to find heros in our entertainers be it sports or movies. A friend said we worship our "jesters" well).

---

Another good point. I agree...It can't hurt!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diamondhitch

I would be interested in taking a kid out, with either rifle or bow we should at least be able to knock down a whitetail buck in a couple outings. You will have to PM me some info.

---

I'll send you the web site and you can sign up to be a mentor.

By the way, if anyone else wants to start an iteration of this program in your neck of the woods I am sure that the folks here would be more than happy to share their ideas.


REPORTS

We have a similar program here in Wisconsin (USA) As I have mentioned before, this year our hunting club has 42 young people that we are going to be taking out turkey hunting next weekend. Our state program is called "learn to hunt" and is offered at no charge to anyone that has not hunted before. The state provides the rules, guidelines and a free turkey harvest tag. We raise funds threw banquets and fund raisers to support this program. All mentors are volunteers. I can tell you first-hand that it is deeply rewarding being a mentor. It is a nice way to give back by sharing your time and knowledge with a potential future hunter. We also have learn to hunt programs for deer and bear hunting.

I am a hunter education instructor in Manitoba Canada. Our hunter ed is similar to that in Alberta. I think our program is very effective and gives a thorough safety and firearms handling coarse. The other parts of the program only touches on wildlife management etc. but give a good start to a persons hunting education. Experience will take care of the rest. Well said Brickburn.
Cheers, Mike