Lost_By_Choice

Don't get me wrong, I think it's an important requirement and I'm glad we have it, but here is the scenario that I think it's kind of hurting the hunting community.

I don't know how many times I have been talking to non-hunters about my hunting adventures. They become very interested in my stories and they eventually hint that they would like to give it a try. But lets face it, most adults when they hear there is a class involved, quickly lose interest. Especially when most of the other people in the class will be 12 year olds.

This makes it hard to introduce new people to the sport that did not grow up in a hunting family. I'm not saying change the requirements in place, but maybe some sort of one time "mentorship clause" that allows expierenced hunters to take first time hunting adults that did not get the opportunity as kids to take part with out taking the course first. Then, if they chose to keep hunting the following year, they will have to take it. I don't know, but I think it would broaden our hunting community. The very least, even if they don't keep hunting, it would give one more voter an understanding of what we do. What do you guys think?

westtexducks

They have that very thing you are talking about here in Texas. For the first year only a person may go hunting with an adult that has taken their hunters safety course as their mentor. If they like it and decide to keep hunting then they have to get their hunters safety certificate if they don't like it then they are not out anything. I love this new law that they just recently put in to action here in Texas I think it will help with the number of recruits each year especially the older folks who would like to give it try but dont want to be stuck with a bunch of 12 year olds first. But would rather give it a test drive first before they get in to deep.

Bocajnala

I believe that we are. I realize the value of a safety course, and I did take mine when I was ten, because I had to. But, I know several people who have turned me down after finding out they needed a class to go with me. They'll still come out and shoot with me, a few have even helped me with deer. But they won't hunt because they cannot get a license.
I know I was taught a lot of the stuff long before the course by going with my dad. This helped me in the class and made me feel good when "I knew it all" *Hah! Ya right* and the other kids didn't. But I still learned everything I know from my family.
I think there is a place for the course. Helping new hunters learn and get started. But I personally do not feel that it shuold be required. A way to eliminate would be to have a test a person has to pass before getting their first license. To show they know proper gun safety.
-Jake

ihookem1

I think we are to some degree. I honestly don't think ya should need a safety course after a certain age. I think anyone 21 and older should know enough to be safe. I that person does not then all the courses in the world can't help stupid.

Lost_By_Choice

I'm glad Texas saw a need to alter the way they do business Westtexducks, I am almost certain it will help broaden our community. Hopefully other states follow in the same direction.

Muley Hunter

I think any adult getting into hunting should be happy everybody knows gun safety.

Being an adult doesn't qualify you for having common sense about guns. Or anything else for that matter.

Lost_By_Choice

This has nothing to do with dismissing safety, merely the ability for one adult who has passed the safety requirements to "mentor" another adult in the field.

Muley Hunter

I understand that. My point is why would someone be put off by taking a safety course when coming into hunting. They should be glad that it's required.

Being put off by kids in the class is not a reason to not take the class. I'd prefer someone who is in an area that i'm in and carrying a gun. Took the class, and not leave up to some buddy to teach them.

My .02.

Lost_By_Choice

Same reason people tandem sky dive their first time instead of jump solo, until they know if they are going to like it or not, they don't want to go through all the hassle. Doesn't mean they don't want to be safe. Difference is skydiving is never on the chopping block for being banned, it doesn't require persuading voters to secure its future.

Hunters safety doesn't ensure safe hunters just like drivers safety doesn't ensure safe drivers. It doesn't make them safe, only ensures that they at least know better. You still always have to be on the look out for "the other guy". Let's face it, some people are just idiots and they are going to do what they are going to do.

Would this allow some of those "idiots" to mentor other "idiots", probably, but those same idiots already passed hunters safety, so I fail to see the difference. Neither process is full proof. At least this way, they would still have to pass the course on top of being mentored.

On second thought…… maybe a compromise would be some sort of special certification to be a hunting "mentor", which would allow a person to take adults hunting for the first time prior to taking the course. That might not be a bad way to go, it would "screen" the mentor pool a little bit.

Terasec

I would disagree,
I am not a fan of shortcuts,
Is someone is discouraged by having to take 10-12 hour course for the privilage of a lifetime of hunting, then maybe hunting isn't for them.
Most that I know that love the outdoors, come out really appreciating the course.
Personally I think the course is too short.
As for a mentor? Who qualifies the mentor?
Just because one is a hunter doesn't make them a safe, ethical legal hunter.
Most of the poaching and game law violators are rarely new hunters, but usually seasoned hunters.
Many veteran hunters also develope bad habits which can get passed to new hunters.
We as hunters are always free to mentor new hunters, don't need state/fed mandating regs for us to act as mentors