As to a shooting test...it would prove nothing other that a hunter either can or cannot pass some arbitrary standard.

Case 1: For years Hunter A has limited his shots to 15 yds due to his own abilities. He's a Class A hunter who takes game cleanly year after year. But upon taking a test, he doesn't meet someone's idea of "proficient" so he can no longer hunt. The test failed to do anything here, but burn a seasoned hunter.

Case 2: Hunter B can stack all his arrows in a 6" bull at 60 yds. He passes the shooting test with flying colors. Then he goes out in the woods and takes 100 yd Hail Mary's at every deer he sees. The test failed here as well, as it can't predict or enforce a hunters decisions or actions.

Case 3: Hunter C takes his 40# scoped paper target bow to the proficiency test, which he passes. But, he uses a 70# hard cam bow to hunt with, which he may not have been able to pass the test with. The test failed to serve any purpose here as well.

Cost and Logistics: Who is going to fund this "test"? Hunters? Taxpayers? Who will coordinate the locations and dates of the tests so that bowhunters can take it within reasonable travel distances and time constraints? (There's ~300,000 bowhunters that Pennsylvania alone would have to accomodate.) If a bowhunter did not pass the "test", how often could he retake it? Immediately? Next day? Next week? Surely he could retake it, right? And if he could retake it, sooner or later the odds would land in his favor. So what's the purpose?

A proficiency test would be nothing more than costly hassle for bowhunters...hoops to jump through in order to recieve a meaningless little gold star.