<font color=red>&quot;What state do you all live in? In Va. seasons and bag limits are set by state bioligist, reg changes are recommended by hunters themselves for the most part in conjuction with the state bioligist.&quot;</font id=red>

Tazman, I wish we were set up more like you folks are. Here in Illinois, we have a Department of Natural Resources, which encomapsses everything for the most part. Hunting & fishing is only a small part. For the last 10-12 years we've had a bowhunter as the Director, which has been great. Now, we've got a gun-grabber as our Governor-elect, who has publicly promised to remove our Director. He gets to appoint the replacement, and the new higher-ups to follow.

Hunting regulations are a very political process here, and often times have no biological foundation. I'm glad to hear that my worst case scenario couldn't happen in Virginia. I wish I could say the same for Illinois.

JRW

Jrw There is no inconsistancy in my post's. You are reading what I am saying but you don't wish to comprehend what I am saying. I am saying you have to learn to fly, you have to learn to drive and #ell yes you should learn to hunt before hunting.

any one can shoot a pie plate six times with a little practice no matter what brand of bow or if they shoot traditional. It does not take a world champion archer to accomplish this and you know that. Even your friend can do it. If he still chooses to only take 10 yrd. shots at deer good I commend him. The reson I am suggesting that the test be 20 yrd. at a pie plate is becouse a pie plate is roughly the size of the vitals on a deer and 20 yrds. is about the average shot distance. The test is not becouse of people like your friend he is ethical and knows his limit. Will this test stop people from shooting 50 yrds. heck no but what it will do is atleast ensure that they are capable of hitting a deer in the vitals at an average distance.

I also never said I was a cut rate competitive archer but I do shoot alot of 3-d in the summer to continue to improve my shooting ability. I guess now your going to tell me thats stupid and unneeded also becouse us competitive shooter's can drill target's but we can't hit a deer.

Glening yea you probably do do fine in the woods with your bow and yea you probably do have great ethics. So what do you suggest we do about the one's that don't? Since you belittle me and other's who suggest we do some thing to prevent this problem what is your solution? I don't see you giving any suggestion's besides to do nothing.

If we as bow hunter's keep growing in number's and they keep becoming more and more unethical and just babbling throught the woods wounding deer that will do more to hurt our sport than haveing a mear competency test just to ensure that people that go into the woods to take the life of an animal are actualy capable of doing just that. You are reading too much into what we want to do. I don't want to prevent anyone from hunting I just want to make sure that they can kill a deer before they take to the woods to do it. After reading the post's on here it seems very evident that there are alot of people who choose not to bother with the basics of hunting and just go hunting then come and ask question's after some thing goes wrong. That is not the way to do things. You say that this will just make hunting a pain in the butt why? If taking enough time to shoot 6 arrows is too much of a pain in the butt for to hunt you must not be very serious about hunting.

A few people have said that in alaska you have to do this and it works great it run by hunter's not anti's for years the government has also has similar test for people to participate in hunts on government land in at least MD. and PA, that I personaly know of and the anti's haven't gotten in and changed those regulation's either. I still think you guy's just simply don't want to be tested on your ability plain and simple. You say you never said you were over regulated so then why taking 6 shots be over regulated then?

I personaly hope that this program does get implemented. I think it will make people step up to the plate and become serious about hunting or not go hunting. I agree with you guy's that not evert one need's to take this test but we are getting so many people who do that it is time for some thing to be done.

<font color=red>&quot;I guess now your going to tell me thats stupid and unneeded also becouse us competitive shooter's can drill target's but we can't hit a deer.&quot;</font id=red>

That would be rather odd, given my competitive shooting history. Please don't argue things that I haven't even said.

<font color=red>&quot;It does not take a world champion archer to accomplish this and you know that.&quot;</font id=red>

No one on this thread has said that it does. Why do you keep countering an obviously rediculous point that hasn't even been made?

<font color=red>&quot;Even your friend can do it. If he still chooses to only take 10 yrd. shots at deer good I commend him.&quot;</font id=red>

Whether he could or couldn't, with more practice, is not the issue. The issue is who are you to tell an obviously ethical and sucessful bowhunter, who knows his limitations and stays well within them, that his shooting isn't good enough? Why should anyone feel inclined to live up to your arbitrary shooting standards when he's already demonstrated his ability to cleanly take animals without wounding losses.

You said that the goal of this is <font color=red>&quot;to make sure that they can kill a deer before they take to the woods to do it&quot;.</font id=red> Well, this guy has already proven that point, with more deer in one year than many &quot;experts&quot; here have taken with a bow in their lives.

Apparently though, that's still not good enough for you. And that...IS the issue.

JRW

Once again I am not talking about your buddy I am talking about the people who choose not to limit themselves and practice. If that means we all have to take the test I am for it. Nothing will make you see the good in this test. If this test would help one guy realize that he is not up to par and convince him to practice and let him kill a deer he would have other wise wounded it's worth it. If what I am saying is so bad what do you suggest? Just let more and more slobs go into the woods and continue to wound deer? what is your answer all you do is put down what I am saying so suggest some thing better!

<font color=red>&quot;Once again I am not talking about your buddy...&quot;</font id=red>

Yes you are, you said...<font color=red>&quot;To the guy crying becouse his buddy only shoots 10 yrds. I guess he wil;l just have to learn to shoot 20 it's not that much of distance sorry.&quot;</font id=red> To which I responded accordingly. Please, let's not start back-peddling here.


<font color=red>&quot;I am talking about the people who choose not to limit themselves and practice.&quot;</font id=red>

First, the practice issue...

How much practice does it, in your opinion, take to pass this test? Wait, you already answered that with, <font color=red>&quot;any one can shoot a pie plate six times with a little practice&quot;</font id=red>...and...<font color=red>&quot;every one here knows that any one who has a tuned bow good arrows and a little practice can shoot at 20 yrds&quot;</font id=red>. Why even set the bar, if you're only going to raise it an inch or so off the ground? We're half-way home now.

How about the &quot;limit themselves&quot; part.

How will a proficiency test make people &quot;limit themselves&quot;? Wait, you answered that already too, with, <font color=red>&quot;WHOA WHOA WHOA ethics and be being able to hit the broad side of a barn are 2 very differnt things&quot;</font id=red>...and...<font color=red>&quot;It may not stop a person from taking a 50 yrd. shot or even from wounding&quot;</font id=red>.

Inconsistent? Oh, yes. Just a touch.

<font color=red>&quot;If this test would help one guy realize that he is not up to par and convince him to practice and let him kill a deer he would have other wise wounded it's worth it.&quot;</font id=red>

That reminds me of a Sarah Brady lobbying for gun control by saying things like, &quot;if it keeps just one person from being shot, it's worth it&quot;. Sorry, that argument doesn't hold true there, and it doesn't hold true here either. I wouldn't expect that type of argument to be used by sportsmen, against other sportsmen, but apparently, it is. Which is sad.

<font color=red>&quot;What is your answer all you do is put down what I am saying so suggest some thing better!&quot;</font id=red>

You obviously missed when I posted, <font color=blue>&quot;First, I have no problem with mandatory Bowhunter Education.&quot;</font id=blue> I'm not sure how you missed it though. It was the very first thing I said when I first posted on this thread.

Where we differ is on mandatory proficiency tests which, by your own admission, will not ensure that people stay within their effective range and reduce the chances of wounding. And this IS the problem, not whether or not you can hit a pie plate at 20 yards.

JRW



Edited by - jrw on 11/12/2002 13:22:07

JRW If you have no problem with manditory bow hunter education what in the #ell differnce does it make if you have to be able to shoot your bow? If you have to learn how to blood trail,field dress,select the proper shot,and ethics why wouldn't you have to learn to shoot your bow? Being able to hit some thing is the most important part of hunting if you can't shoot it doesn't matter becouse all you will do is wound or miss game. Now I definetly believe that you just don't want to be scored on your shooting ability there is no other reason. You make no sense at all you think that you HAVE to take a bow hunting edu. class but how well you shoot your bow shouldn't matter OOOOOOK.




This takes me back to when I was a boy and daddy told me &quot; son don't ever argue with an idiot becouse he'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experince&quot;. I think this is what he was talking about.

JRW I am done debating this issue nothing would change your mind and the real reason you don't want that test doesn't have any thing to do with anti's or the government. Like the fella said above the anti's wouldn't waste their time with ping pong ball's they go strait after baning hunting. Even if the anti's want to change it who are they just becouse they want it doesn't mean they will get it. They don't get much of want they want that's why their alway's pissed off ( not that I am saying we shouldn't worry about anti's).

<font color=red>&quot;Being able to hit some thing is the most important part of hunting if you can't shoot it doesn't matter becouse all you will do is wound or miss game.&quot;</font id=red>

Absolutely. And if a guy knows his effective range is 10 yards, stays to it, and cleanly kills what he shoots at...who are you to tell him that he can't hunt because he can't group in a paper plate at 20 yards?

This is the entire problem with the mandatory proficiency test that you seem to want to subject everyone to.


<font color=red>&quot;Now I definetly believe that you just don't want to be scored on your shooting ability there is no other reason.&quot;</font id=red>

Kind of funny that you should pull that one out, after I posted...

<font color=blue>&quot;BTW, when you've taken more than four consecutive State Championships, two consecutive NFAA Sectional Championships, and National Championship Runner-up...all in two years of competition...come talk to me. When you've repeatedly outshot the last two IBO Nat'l Triple Crown Champions in your class...give me a holler. Until then, I'm not much impressed with your competitive shooting statement, because your dog's barking up the wrong tree.&quot;</font id=blue>

Yeah, I definately shy away from having my shooting abilities scored. LOL!!!


<font color=red>&quot;This takes me back to when I was a boy and daddy told me &quot; son don't ever argue with an idiot becouse he'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experince&quot;. I think this is what he was talking about.&quot;</font id=red>

It is a shame that after your arguments contradicted each other, you reverted back to immature name-calling. Don't be upset with me because I tore it apart and showed you why it doesn't hold water. Be upset with yourself. Next time, come better prepared.

If you can't calmly discuss/deabte the points, I guess you should throw in the towel on this one.

JRW





Edited by - jrw on 11/12/2002 15:38:18

Jason,

How about grandfathering it in? I know most of us &quot;aged&quot; (shew did I say that lol) have NO problem being successful bowhunters and proving it at that, I wouldnt slap anyone in the face in that department. We have learned through trial and error the rights and wrongs, spent the time needed to become what we are today both in the books and on the fields. Also, myself as an instructor, I end up teaching folks with much great hunting experience then and am truely humbled at times in the prof. testing with these same people. Possibly a mentoring program, I know I wasnt allowed to hunt with any weapon till I showed a level of proficency both in how I handled weapons be it firearms or bows, and a level of proficency with them!


However, when you look at the new and the young to the sport, trying to stress a level of commitment and dedication in doing so almost keeping them from making the mistakes others are. NO it wont fix all the problems many have posted here. But like I said in my first post, starting someone in the right direction to begin with is the first key to success. Let them fail and fail again, they are more apt to fail. Let these same people teach others the art of &quot;bowhunting&quot; and these new folks are already short of a full deck.

Now you ask how this prof and class room TESTING (which btw, there is both written AND prof testing that you MUST pass in order to receive your Ak state IBEP cert!)is going to help eh? No not all folks need to be quoted in the range department, your 10 yard buddy is a case in point. You know as well as I however, there are far less 10 yard shooters, espically ones that actually say and when the time comes STICK to there limitations, in the bowhunting world today! Read on....

Unfortunatly for many today, the key in bowhunting is the drive for success, plugs like longer season, more harvest tags, better areas for monster bucks, 150&quot; class this and 170&quot; class that etc etc..what it all boils down to is the need to kill and many&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;MANY&lt;&lt;&lt; mind you its all about a punched tag, if not, the season/hunt/weekend was a waste (sad attidue Imho)! Look at how they write, how they hunt, and the attitude they hold.

Hopefully this hole testing, both written and shooting (as they are both proficency testing one physical, one mental) will set them on the road to success on being a successful bowhunter. Defining an quoted range distance of X yards/meters is a tough decision, one in which may or may not be needed. I agree there is and will in the future be a better way to teach this class, as that is what we are trying to accomplish, this certifcation/education class. For now I agree to it, having a hole state certification (which we dont have...YET) and see very few if any of these dedicated folks failing the testing we have currently set up today at the ranges and sized targets we are using for the shooting test. Also taking a written test showing the knowledge you have on game and many situations, a bare bones minimum, but yet something to start off with and a solid foundation for the right direction. For now this is what we have and it is in the minority that have taken it or are bowhunting in other areas and need not take it, that disagree with this testing. I know many that dont agree on the data as much is long since outdated, which is in the process of updating btw. But until we can come forward collectivly to make changes and tweak what we do have, the biggest group of bowhunters in Alaska felt something needed to be done, atleast in the high profile areas where there are many group users, I am sure that will change to the hole state in due time. If you want problems in receiving this test, look no farther then Alaska! Considering there are tons of villages and towns only accesable by planes, looooooong boat rides, or freezing cold arctic snowmobile rides that could just as easily kill you getting in and out.

Its not to statisfy the anti's as they will never be happy until hunting, trapping, and fishing is gone as we know it, That is already a proven fact so its a point that not need be hashed! Its to keep the mindset of a bowhunter good in the general publics eye. Its nothing more then showing we as hunters, here specifically bowhunters, actually care whats going on, nothing that is new since the time of Teddy R., or the NRA's beginning, Fred Bear or Howard Hill on Tv both hunting and shooting. Having hunters on the cover of outdoor life like it used to be, the list goes on and on. We know we probably will never get back to the accpetance level we had then, but dang it if I am going to fail and loose what I have due to individuals and there misguided exploits!

Like I have said, its about education...much like taking a hands on test. Who are we to test someone who has spent the past 5 years working as an electrical apprentice, yet some level of quality (for lack of a better word) as an electrician must be achieved and the only way to find that out is to test them on it before they are handed there journeyman status. Or the fella who has guided the past 15 years and wants to hold the status of master guide. Bummer more tests. Does it discriminate, I am sure to some extent, does it educate, your dang right it does. Nothing more then a tool that will hopefully show the &quot;bowhunters&quot; and non hunters alike that we as a bowhunting society will not put up with slobs. Does it hurt the good guy, nope, will it completly stop the bad guys, probably not tomorrow, but the more we have good, the better we are as a group.

Dan,

Your keyboard must be pooped.

IMO, what's missing the most in hunting today (not just BOWhunting) is ethics and how-to education (field dressing, tracking, etc.). In your position, I'm sure you see more of this than I ever will.

Obviously, I've never taken your course (fly me up and I will), but I have taken our State's hunter safety course (not required due to my age) as will as an NBEF/IBEP course (also not required in IL). The classroom and outdoor portions (blood-trailing) were where the how-to happened. In the process of that, ethical issues like public image and effective ranges were discussed.

If anyone walked out of those classes and missed it, well, there's no teaching them then.

Look, I highly doubt that there's a proficiency test out there that I couldn't pass with my recurve. Not tooting my horn, but that's just the way it is. So, it really doesn't directly effect me one way or the other. I still think mandatory proficiency tests are a Band-Aid solution and does nothing to solve the problem.

In all the debating here and elsewhere, the only meaningful thing that proficiency tests have been shown to produce is, as you said,<font color=red>&quot;showing we as hunters, here specifically bowhunters, actually care whats going on&quot;</font id=red>. I agreed with this when I refered to mandatory proficiency tests as something along the lines of a &quot;warm & fuzzy PR move&quot;. I think you might have misinterpreted what I meant by that.


If memory serves, and it may not, bowhunters can keep taking the test up there over and over until they pass, right? That's not the way it's done down here. We have certain areas that require proficiency tests to gain access too.

Remember that thread on the Trad forum a while back by Dick4Bows? I shoot with him quite a bit. Now, he and a buddy of his, who I also shoot with, took a proficiency test for such an area earlier this year. Dick's a hell of a good guy, but he's been fighting the worst case of target panic that I've seen in my life. Accordingly, his buddy, is a better shooter. Dick passed the test, and his friend failed. The test didn't quite work out like it was supposed to.

Now, Dick knows what his effective range is and stays within it...and it's less than 20 yards. To his credit, he's been going to CO for many years to try to bag his first elk. Last year he passed up a shot that would have been a chip-shot to most, because it was just a few yards too long for him. This guy doesn't need a proficiency test to avoid wounding, he's got his ethics for that. And ethics, as we've all agreed, is not instilled when a person stacks arrows into a pie plate.

JRW



Edited by - jrw on 11/12/2002 16:26:09

come on up, I'll gladly take you out for birds or bou and show you our class!

Like I said it aint perfect, and for some of the old timers like you and Dick, (humbly speaking here of course <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>) it's nothing you dont already know/proven etc.

I wont disagree to the bandaid, but for now ya gots to stop the bleeding some how. Take it to the doc and see how to actually fix the wound, its all preventive medicine none the less. The shame is like a wound, its a slow healing process! Hopefully my 12 hour days teaching are worth it to the students.

they can only retake it when the class is scheduled or set it up with one of 2 &quot;home&quot; instructor ranges set up at there houses approved by the state. (proper targets, distances etc etc).

A new friend of mine just failed the proficency testing. It was a learning experience for him and I have no doubt he will pass the test in the spring when he learns a base ball cap and no gloves at 0 degrees out of a tree stand is a no no (8 yard target btw!). Btw, at 20 yards the man can out shoot most folks but managed to strike out on the black bear target, it happens, education is learning, learning is progressing/fixing errors and driving on.

Also that is kind of why I was thinking possibly &quot;grandfathering&quot; the class in. The older bowhunters, (not older people new to bowhunting), would not be required to take this class/shoot. You hit the nail on the head on what is missing, we are saying it a different way however, apples and oranges <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> but yet they are both fruit.

man where is my grease fittings, these keys are going flat !