proficiency testing
 

In my state there are certain areas that are bow hunting only, mostly on the islands where it is more populated with people . There you have to take a proficiency test issued by the state to be able to hunt there. It is good for two years then it would have to be renewed.Although i don't hunt there i take the test just on the outside chance i might but mostly to show land owners that i am certafied by the state that i am an expert marksman . It helps when asking permission to hunt their land . I come across to many peoplethat take up the sport at the last minute or don't practice and make crapy shots.do think it would be a good idea to have a mandatory test to be able to get a liscence every where or would this be to much of a problem for the state or the hunters ?I would be for it as to weed out the people that don't want to put in the time to make ethical shots

RE: proficiency testing
 

What exactly does the test consist of? I kinda like the idea myself.

RE: proficiency testing
 

I think it's a great idea that will never happen because it would cost too much money. The DNR is hurting for money as it is. Revenues are down, and they want to raise license fees. If you had a proficiency test, you would definitely sell fewer licenses, AND it would cost the DNR alot of money to administer the program. So it will never happen even though that would be great if it did. We'd have fewer slob hunters and fewer wounded animals.

RE: proficiency testing
 

I am certain it would be hard on the state, but we already have mandatory bowhunter safety in NY. You have to shoot in the class to show you know how. I wouldn't necessarily call it a proficiency test (and you don't have to retake it), but it is a start in the right direction.

RE: proficiency testing
 

Check out this thread as to why we should have a test.

http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=2398149

RE: proficiency testing
 

The test isn't that hard you have to show up with 5 arrrows with broad heads and put 3 of them in the kill zone on a simulated deer while the state watches and determines if it is a good shot or notfrom 20 yards away . Basicly you need to put it in a 6 inch circle from 20 yards . I wouldn't mind if they would put it back further

RE: proficiency testing
 

I like the idea, like qzq38 said maybe we would have fewer slob hunters out there.

RE: proficiency testing
 

The last thing I want is the Govt. wanting another thing from me. I could care less if Billy Bob three teeth shoots a 16 point buck in the sac and he comes over and beds under my stand.

RE: proficiency testing
 

the problem is they don't usualy do that ,they run off to diea slow death and are never recovered .

RE: proficiency testing
 

Guys

You cannot legislate stupidity;)

RE: proficiency testing
 

But, by gosh, that won't stop 'em from trying.

RE: proficiency testing
 

Let God sort that out. I hit what I aim for and don't care what others do on their ground.

RE: proficiency testing
 

i too hit what i aim for . I agree you can't legislate stupidity i just feel it is like driving a car that you need to show that you can drive before they give you a license to drive
it seems like it is a privilege more than a right to hunt

RE: proficiency testing
 

yeah, and you can't fix it either:D

RE: proficiency testing
 

Damn it, LOL

RE: proficiency testing
 

I know where your comming from. I agree with it. I just don't want big brother in my hunting more than he already is.

RE: proficiency testing
 

I agree I don't like the government involved in a lot of personal matters. Its just one of those things that bother me that some don't put the slightest efffert into being a good hunter

RE: proficiency testing
 

you can train all day every day and still NOT be a good hunter... some people have a natural instinct for it and require very little if any training to be a good hunter...

whose definition of good are you going to use??? how good is "good" and where do you draw the line... do you not think that some first time hunters, with no guidance, using only the common sense that was given to them, can't be ok hunters their first time out????? can you quantify hunting ability????

I'm playing devil's advocate here mostly cuz as is mentioned above, who here really wants ~more~ govt controls over something we've been fighting to keep (and so many others are fighting to ban)????? fact is that it is unrealistic to even want a proficiency test, it is expensive, and impractical... peer pressure is the best tool... use it to your advantage...

though I've got to admit, a small part of me is sitting here listening to this going "how friggin arrogant can some of these folks be?"... defining a hunter and labeling someone not worthy and etc... be careful guys, attitudes like this might actually shrink our ranks and give us less of a voice against the anti's... we should be welcoming these people into our ranks instead of blindly ragging on them as inferior people for not subscribing to your exact qualifications of what a hunter is and should be... kinda like how the harley riders used to berate the rice riders, they've found there is more strength in numbers and they all share the same desires even if they act on them in a slightly different manner....

RE: proficiency testing
 

In AK it's required that you have an IBO or equivalent bowhunter certification to hunt in any archery specific hunts. ADF&G has 3D targets that they purchase for putting on the class but anyone can become a certified volunteer instructor and teach classes (after some training and acting as assistant instructors). They then have access to the training materials when they put a class on. This helps to keep costs down for the Department. Also by accepting certifications from other states costs are reduced. I see nothing but good from requiring bowhunter education so that people go into the woods with at least basic knowledge of why a bow is not a gun. The proficiency test part of it is so ridiculously easy that if a person can't pass it they should be kept away from all sharp objects, not just broadheads!

RE: proficiency testing
 

I could see an up side to it.

RE: proficiency testing
 

I participate in a Deer Management Program run by a town in my area. Each year they make you re-qualify (plus I think they do a quick police background check.....as the program is administered by the local PD). I think they wanted 3 of 5 arrows into a 6" circle from 25 yards. If you wanted to hunt from the ground, they wanted you to hit 3 of 5 at 35 yards. They did not require you to use broadheads.

RE: proficiency testing
 

I'd support a proficiency test as long as it is a one time test and it's accepted by every state or atleast the vast majority.

Tom