RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

Our urban deer units all have proficency testing before you get placed on a team. The test is up to the captain of each team. In our case, since most of our hunting is done at night, we have to shoot 4 arrows onto a 6" paper plate (tacked on the back of a block...white on white) from 25 yards. All four arrows must hit the plate....oh yea...and this is after dark. If you have never tried shooting a bow with nothing but semi-dim street lights to see by....its a whole new world.

We have acctually had guys with crossbows fail miserably.

As to the pressure of having people watch you shoot....its not as much pressure as having the life of an animal just a bit of back tension away from the big corn pile in the sky. I love the excuse of...well I can't shoot targets worth a dang...but I'm deadly on the real thing. Bull Crap! If you can't hit a stationary paper plate with all the time you need...how can you hit a deer in the dark at unknown distance? Just like how can you hit 6 ducks with 6 shells if you miss 10 straight on the skeet field?

Most all military bases I know of require you to qualify with your bow or your firearm. However, none that I know of base your odds of being drawn for a tag or a hunt on how well you do. Its a pass/fail thing. If you pass (and its pretty easy) then you get to hunt that season...no requal needed. If you fail....come back in a week and try again. I honestly don't know anyone who has failed a qual for a military base. The urban teams...its around 50% pass rate...and there ain't no second chances, not with us anyway.

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. I'd imagine there are some that would use that excuse just as an excuse, but for some folks it's legitimate. Just because you haven't seen or experience it doesn't make it impossible.

I'm going on experience with people I know. One friend of mine will wear out targets when shooting with friends, but put him in ain a big tournamentand his shooting goes downhill. He has killed his share of deer with a bow. Another local guy was practically untouchable at local tournaments, but get him to a big one and he blew up. One I mentioned earlier, who I have had the pleasure to meet and shoot with but honestly don't know that well, has evidence of his deer hunting prowess on video--but as I said, I doubt he'd pass a test unless it was very easy. Ever hear of Steve Hohensee? He used to make White Bison longbows. Steve will tell you he can't shoot for crap in front of a crowd, but he's taken some huge animals, including goat and brown bear. He's one heck of a hunter, but according to his own wordsstinks at targets.

Drawing on an animal may be more pressure to you--it is for me too--but obviously it's not to others.

For what it's worth, I don't think a test would bother me a bit. I often shoot with strangers at tournaments, and if it's affected my score I can't tell it. I just don't think the testsmean anything.

I don't hunt in the dark, so I can't speak for that situation. That's not exactly the usual hunting scenario.

Chad

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

Well, in a sense I do agree with you Chad. Capstick once made the same analogy about shooting leopards and why good shots blow the easy one on a leopard at 45 yards....

"Its sort of like tapping in a two foot putt. Sure its easy on the mini-golf course with the kids...but make that same two footer for birdie on the 18th at the US Open and you'll sort of know what its like to shoot a leopard in a tree."

However, someone who is a good shot knows how to block out distractions... and keeping your cool is one of the factors they look for in the quals. In many cases, its just the same as shooting game...you can't let whats going on around you make you lose focus of what you are doing. But, at the same time....you need to be aware of it...for safety concerns of course.

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

Chad,
We have disagreed in the past, but I am on the same page with you. That is why I am not in favor of shooting test. I have never heard of shooting deer at night, and for the life of me can't phantom why it would be white on white targets, anyway I digress. I too know of a number of people who don't like, or can't shoot well in front of others. Most of these guys and gals flat put the game on the ground!

I for one can't see where it would be a problem unless you just wanted to be one heck of a shot at 3D shoots, a fun activity with some benefits, but it isn't the be all and end all for real bowhunting. I know I am beating a dead horse, but the shooting test if given should only be a portion of the testing. I am about to step on some toes, but I would guess that a number of people who have voiced their opinion regarding shooting test. Some of which advocate shooting skill as the holy grail, if required to test before being issued a license, and that test included blood trailing, compass reading, shot placement, stand placement/concealment, knife shapening, broadhead sharpening, bow tuning, first Aid, CPR, field dressing, and care of game for the freezer, many would never obtain a license. I have seen far to many dull heads, dull knives, and sorry blood trailing, lost game,to be very concerned and ready to endorse such a measure.

Even with a well placed shot, game is lost far too often because of the lack of what use to be basic "hunting skills". Even with a firearm, game will not always drop in it's tracks. Which is more important, shooting skills alone, or all of the above?

Until, or unless we are willing to make sure the hunter is up to the task totally, any test is just a feel good thing to make someone else think the problem is being addressed. So if you think the problem is being addressed by these test, you have your head in the sand my friend

Personally, I think we should be the ones to make it happen. The IBEP is one big step, but we have a lot of people in the woods who have never taken the course.

Each archery club should at least conduct mock blood trails once or twice a year. Broadhead sharpening seminars, proper ways of placing stands and blinds would also be helpful.Many paramedics, andlocalFire Departments can make a First Aid/CPR training available. If cost is a conern, fund rasiersto cover it, such as a shoot should take care of that problem.

It takes more than just wind direction to be considered in proper stand placement. What has stand placement got to do with shooting skills, one might ask. Simple, good stand placement will allow you to get the best shot, at game that is not spooked, at a range that you are comfortable with. You can take any part of a triangle you wish, but if you don't have all three sides, you ain't got the total package. Bowhunting is a knowledge, skill, and mental game. Three sides, you can't focus on just one thing, it's got to be all three. Bowhunters who do that, are the one's who get the job done on a regular basis.......Nuff Said

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

I have to admit--several years ago, when I first heard the "I can't hit a target, but I can kill a deer!" thing I thought the same thing..."BULL!". It doesn't seem logical, but after getting to know several folks that actually do have that problem I know it's a real thing. Like I said, live critters tear me up a lot worse than shooting in front of strangers, but for some folks it's just the opposite.

I don't think being a good shot on targets is a requirement to being a good hunter, and I totally agree that there are many other skills that are just as important, but I also think that being a good shot on targets can only be a good thing for a hunter. Besides practice, I've learned a lot from other archers I've met, not to mention getting leads on some dandy hunts.

I think trailing, sharpening, etc. seminars is a great idea, but I seriously doubt there would be enough participation to justify having it. Folks show up at shoots for that reason--to shoot. Seldom will anyone take time out to do something they look at as if it were work. Hunting videos seem to sell a whole lot better than "how-to" videos.

For instance, I couldn't tell you how many people have said they wanted to learn how to make a string. When I've set up as a vendor, I always put out extra chairs and invited anyone interested to sit and watch and ask questions while I worked--no charge. Very, very few ever did--lots said they would or wanted to, there's just too many fun things going on and it would take up too much time. I know I'm guilty.

I wouldn't support requirements to pass certain tests to get a license, because it can give too much power to the wrong people. Someone may have a problem with stick bows, or compounds, or muzzleloaders, etc. and could very well make it next to impossible for certain folks to pass any test. I don't trust government regulations, and don't like the thoughts of having more. Too many opportunities for money and politics to get involved.

Interesting discussion!

Chad

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

That, my friend, is all the more reason that we must police ourselves. Maybe we have made it too easy to be a bowhunter. I'm not into select eliteclubs or anything like that, but allowing people to slip through the cracks just to say we have x number of people in bowhunting is a big mistake. Heck if they don't want to do what it takes, then let them pick up the 25-06 and get after it.

With the destruction of the family unit,the hunting heritage is no longer being passed on. We have a lot of people out there, without the proper information, this will not strengthen our cause, but will only serve to weaken it. We are the first rung on the ladder that is under attack by the Antis, let's not give them any more ammo then they have.

Maybe my idea is not the best way to deal with the problem, if you have a better one, "I am all ears". You mentioned that you would not favor a test in order to get a license, you take one to operate your car, if your are a cop you take one, if you are a doctor you take one, if you are a lawyer you take one, if you sell realestate you take one. Who do you think are administrators of the test this thread is about? I might be reading you wrong, but it appears you have less problems with that then a test to get a hunting license. That test would be much fairer, that a proficency test being conducted in the fashion that they currently are.

Iguess we will have to agree to disagree. I sure had fun with this one, can't wait until the next thread. Thank you all for participation, you have all raised great points and caused me to think more deeply about the issue. I have decided to approach some of the powers that be with some of our ideas. Maybe some good will come from them, if not, then I can move on with a clear mind and heart. I would have taken action, instead of just complaining.

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

These people only have control over one small section. What worries me isthat thegovernment (any sector) has a tendency to appoint folks to a job that the politicians in charge owe a favor, are related to, etc.--who may or may not have an agenda, or even a clue concering what they are doing. Makes me think of a trip I took several years ago with a good friend of mine. We had our bows, and had to pass through customs. One of the customs officers asked my buddy if his recurve was a "semi-automatic". That's what I fear--someone like that in a position of power.

I wish there was a fair and safe (safe for us hunters) way to conduct such tests, but like I said--I don't trust the government to do it. As in the tests you mentioned--ever run across a driver that has no business being on the road? How about a doctor you wouldn't let practice on a goldfish? I have, and they were licensed. Just like the proficiency tests, they don't weed out nearly all the bad ones.

I don't have a better idea--I wish I did. I honestly won't hunt some places during the beginning of rifle season, because of idiots--but I rather deal with the idiots than run the risk of loosing my season to a beurocrat with an agenda.

Chad

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

I think the test should be limited to 1 chance only for the season. It should be something realistic, like a deer moving along pulley wire at 40 yds. Shoot with broadheads only. If guys can't hit the 10 ring on that, then they shouldn't hunt that season.

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

No, quite honestly I think that if the guy shoots PERIOD...irregardless of where his arrow lands...he shouldn't be allowed to hunt that season. I'm a right fair shot with the compound (the stick and string...well its coming along...but not past 20 yet), but you won't find me and mine shooting at moving deer anyway...nevermind 40 yards.

As to the qualifications before getting a hunting liscense...thats what hunter's safety is for. Most states are now encorporating bowhunting, as well as praise be, treestand safety as well. All good stuff. Does it have a prac app portion of the test....no. Its just on general safety procedures. Which, in my mind, is still a good idea. Could they make it tougher...sure they could. But, as blackwidow said, they want to get kids hunting. It is a bit of a dillema. As to the mock blood trailing etc....the only way to teach someone how to blood trail deer...is to acctually blood trail deer. For my relatively young age, I have tracked a whole heck of a lot of deer. And take right much pride in my ability to find what others have given up on. The number one mistake I have found is hunters trailing WAY WAY WAY too fast. If blood is scarce, or dries up...I'll get down and crawl and look for tracks, or even just likely paths where the deer may have gone. Also...gotta check waist high on the surrounding vegetation. It has been proven quite often, that folks who end up having to bring out reinforcements for tracking (and it does happen) usually have not hit their game where they initially thought or intended.

RE: Shooting Skills Test Requirement/Good or Bad?
 

You nailed it SC! I wish everyone had that much common sense--the woods would be a whole lot safer for everyone!

I also agree that the only way to learn to track a deer is to track a deer. I guess learning on a fake trail could help some, but the advice you gave is very good. That's the kind of thing a test won't touch on--it doesn't matter how many arrows you can stack into the 10 ring at 20-30-40 yds if someone is going to take 60 yd shots at a deer running through the brush and give up on tracking if the animal doesn't fall in sight. There's no way to dictate, or test for, hunting ethics.

Chad