Kids and hunting


PDA






Ben Shepherd
July 21, 2009, 02:40 PM
As a hunter ed instructor I find this article http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31952727/ns/us_news-life/?GT1=43001 a little biased (no surprise, considering the source) but it's a touchy subject for sure.

Here in my state we have adult supervision requirements, but even with those we've had a couple of accidents with young hunters that can be traced to youth/small size mixed with inexperience. One of them a fatal incident involving a young hunter, a boat, and a magnum load in a 12 gauge, and his grandfather.:( And fully 70-80% on average of the reported hunting accidents in my state every year involve someone under 20 and a 22.

With that being said-

I'm all for encouraging young hunters, no question there. But it's a subject that can be very tough to discuss without getting out of control. And right now it's a wrestling match in my mind in ways.

I'm curious to what the THR community thinks and has to say on the subject.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kids and hunting" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RoostRider
July 21, 2009, 04:37 PM
A heated discussion with insults of drunken lazy parents about this very subject can be found here.....

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=463740

Perhaps we could have a logical discussion about it over here instead?

To that end I propose a hunter education requirement, for free or very slight charge (less than a permit) as a somewhat acceptable solution.... if the 'kid' can pass the test he knows the rules.... if he fails to obey them, the penalties should be harsh...

schlockinz
July 21, 2009, 07:30 PM
I had to pass a hunter safety class with shooting (clays and .22 silhouettes). They almost didn't let me pass at 13 because I would look when I pulled the trigger with open sites (no joke, game warden was very adamant about that).

I think a test with range qualification should work, that way, safe behavior when daddy isn't standing with you can be verified.

Kindrox
July 21, 2009, 07:53 PM
My point in the "drunken" thread, which I did not articulate as clearly as I should have, is that we give adults more freedoms than children because adults are capable of exercising good judgment, time in and time out. I didn't say they always do, but that they are capable. And as such we hold them to a higher standard then children when they fail to exercise good judgment and someone gets killed.

Children, as a class of citizenry, are not capable exercising good judgment, time in and time out. As such we restrict their freedoms but then also don't give them adult punishments when they fail.

My entire objection to the solo hunting of a 14 year old is the solo part. I understand that even with the presence of a responsible adult something bad might happen. But at least a very reasonable, responsible step was taken to prevent harm.

The only justification I have seen for allowing solo hunting of children is that bad things about it don't get reported in the news very often. Even if it is actually true that child solo hunting does not result in very many deaths, I don't see it as a justification. Many things children could be legally doing (but arn't allowed) probably would not result in deaths. For example, why not let children of any age marry, drive, travel, get abortions (legal some places I know!), sign contracts, smoke, drink, star in porn, have sex with adults, ect ect as long as the child was "educated" before hand?

Most of the things on that list would not result in very many deaths, are being done NOW by "responsible" children, and arn't being done very responsibly by some adults.

Ergo, under the logic espoused by pretty much everyone I saw in favor of child solo hunting, those in favor of child solo hunting should be in favor of removing all age restrictions of just about everything on my list above. If you are, at least I can respect that you are consistent in your logic. If not, you would strike me as a hypocrite.

DammitBoy
July 21, 2009, 08:05 PM
I don't see any problem with having any child under the age of 16 supervised while hunting.

The idea of hunting with youths is it is a family activity, a bonding activity, a learning experience.

Very little family bonding and learning takes place when the kid hunts alone.

Big Daddy Grim
July 21, 2009, 08:09 PM
My family comes with me it's our time together could'nt see them goin alone not cuz I feel there not safe but because not goin with them feels like punishing me.

RoostRider
July 21, 2009, 10:10 PM
It being "time together" is a great thing, but not a pre-requirement to hunting by even the largest stretch of the imagination.... and to that end, perhaps his dad (or whoever) was going to join him... or had left early for some reason... or isn't around.... or wanted him to experience doing this on his own after teaching him for years (quite a feat if this kid had actually taken a bear)

Should kids who can't have their dad there be kept from hunting even if they are responsible and proven proficient? No dad? Sorry boy, you gotta go try to find someone to take you hunting.... good luck

Ever hunt alone? It's a lot of fun and something any responsible child with a desire should learn for self confidence reasons if no other....

Some of my best and worst memories of home as a kid are of sitting alone in a tree stand all day with a high caliber rifle by my side... or tromping through the woods looking for grouse with a shotgun at hand.... sometimes I even went out alone after school before my dad got home !!! *gads*... ON PUBLIC LAND EVEN... (public land makes up the VAST majority of available hunting land around this state and most others)

I understand this is a touchy subject because no one finds the loss of a life an acceptable thing.... but I can't see taking away wonderful experiences from thousands of kids is an appropriate knee jerk reaction to a couple of isolated incidents....

Kindrox- cutting and pasting your posts from that thread over here is in very poor taste.... if we wanted to read them, we would do so over there (I have commented there and I even provided a hot link).... the hope was that this thread would not end up like your thread.... and well, your actions are counterproductive to that cause... please refrain....

bang_bang
July 21, 2009, 11:14 PM
My grandfather would take me hunting every time I wanted to go, up to around age 14 or so. As he got a little older, I got a little more independent and starting going by myself. Once I took my first few deer unsupervised (gutting and hauling them home by myself too), my grandfather started staying at home more, knowing that he had taught me the ropes of hunting. Around age 16, my grandmother became ill, so my grandfather took care of her full time. In doing so, I became the solo hunter...but only a radio call away from help if need be. I even took the biggest buck I've shot thus far while hunting on the hill across from the house (my grandfather lives on the hill above me). I shot this buck while my grandfather was watching me through binoculars...almost as though he was out there with me. :rolleyes:

I always told my parents and grandfather where I was going to be.

I always took a radio.

I never ventured into places I was unfamiliar with.

I always..ALWAYS made sure I had enough food/drink for overnight, a lighter, flashlight, and extra ammo. Not to mention a few bandages and such, which is always a good idea in case of a knife slip or whatever.

Every person matures at different rates. Not every 14 year old is as mature as I was...and I'm sure there are some more mature than I was too.

Common sense is a lot of it...such as unloading your firearm when crossing fences (or at least laying it down in a safe manner...pointing in a safe direction). Paying attention in hunters ed and actually absorbing the information taught is a big first step. Practicing safety while hunting is a whole different story with a young teenager though.

Kindrox
July 22, 2009, 12:33 AM
Roost, I did not realize you are actually Ben Shepherd or his offical spokesman. My bad!

RoostRider
July 22, 2009, 04:24 AM
I didn't try to portray myself as anyone aside from RoostRider, the guy trying to have a constructive conversation about this subject over here... instead of participating in the illogical arguments and name calling you have resorted to in your thread....

It's a simple, polite request.... obviously a concept that is lost on you.... sorry for the confusion there... far be it from me to somehow try to keep you from trolling via 'cut and paste'... just noting that it is not necessary and in bad taste. .... but you already know that, don't you?

I guess anyone who wants to see the logical fallacies in the argument you presented here and over there (via the venerable 'cut and paste' function) needs only to understand rudimentary ideas of logical thinking, or reference the thread over there... :rolleyes:

caribou
July 22, 2009, 06:38 AM
Take the Kids along, EVERY time.

That way , even if their not hunting, they are learning.
They learn to be comfortable outside and will be safer for it.
Keep then busy, keeps them happy, makes great memories and builds skills they can fall back on.
Put time into your kids, nothing beats that.
Raised seven and a couple spare for a few years and all are still alive.
Teach them what YOU know they need to learn.
More Education ='s less Stupid and that mutiplys safety

.
The baby girl in my wifes arms was two weeks old and on her first hunt~~LOL!!~~
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0092.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0329.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/IMAG0043.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/PA020052.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/aaaaaaaaaaaaa11.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0090.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0070.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0328.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0322.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/101_0775.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/PICT0038-1.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/gthjzt102-1.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/summer677.jpg

The wife cant threaten me with having to watch the kids!!
Besides, I hate doing dishes, no matter where I am.....:evil:


Now go buy your kids some ammo, and take 'em out......:D

Ben Shepherd
July 22, 2009, 10:02 AM
A little more clarity since I didn't do too well originally-

I teach hunter ed, so it's a given I wiant to pass it on, pay it forward, etc., and have zero problem with kids in the field.

Here in Utah, a range test is required, as it is in all states that teach it. AFAIK, it's a national minimum standard that everyone follows (similar to DLs).

And we do have direct communication requirements with young hunters (under 16) here that means line of sight and voice communication (no radios or walkie talkies).

But the fact remains that a majority of our accidents involve young hunters and 22s. The reports I get bear this out year after year. The fatality I mentioned is directly attributable to "too much gun". Kid was running a heavy load in a semi-auto 12 gauge on a waterfowl hunt, and the first shot knocked him around. In trying to maintain control of the firearm and himself, the muzzle ended up pointed at someone, and the trigger was pulled.

Recently, we have dropped any "age" requirement for small/upland game and waterfowl, and the big game age limit was dropped from 16 to 14, and there's already talk of dropping big game to 12. Average size 12 yr. old with a hot 180 in a 300 mag after an elk? :scrutiny: I've actually had a 7 year old pass hunter ed. Barely. But he did it. But if someone he's hunting with figures that 5 foot 60 lb. kid can handle a 3 1/2 goose load?



Legal is one thing, but sometimes folks just lack the wisdom needed for the task at hand I suppose.

Kindrox
July 22, 2009, 10:48 AM
Ben,

You have seen a lot. What are your thoughts on the age at which kids are ok out hunting alone?

Art Eatman
July 22, 2009, 01:12 PM
I have mixed views on this, just because of my own background. My grandfather let me shoot his .22 rifle when I was six or seven years old. I know that when I was only eight, he'd hand me the .22 and some shells and point to the pasture and run me off to keep me out from under his feet as he did chores around the farm.

My instructions? "Now, be careful. Don't shoot a cow." I didn't shoot horses or neighbors, either. :)

I was not alone in this pattern. Many kids in the 10-ish age range hunted alone or as a pair. And at age 12 I had my own personal .22 rifle that stayed in my closet.

I doubt, however, that anybody in the family would have turned me loose at an early age with a big-game rifle or a 12-gauge shotgun. In general, somewhere around 12 or more is where kids start having better coordination and some potential for judgement.

Still thinking out loud, and looking back, I guess it's somewhat different for rural kids than for city kids. Rural kids already have a lot of background "osmosis" about the outdoors, and probably more shooting experience.

Since the majority of all kids nowadays are from cities and towns, odds are that more age controls could be useful. Not saying I like it, but it's sorta "The way it is."

Ben Shepherd
July 22, 2009, 02:06 PM
Yep. Like sm would say, it has a lot to do with "how raised".

Solo hunting big game were it my call? A 14 year old with the right mentality would be just fine I'd say. It's a rare person indeed that at 12 years old has the needed physical size to handle a full size gun. And if you're talking about someone that young small enough that a youth model stock won't fit without modification, I'd wager that above 90% of the time you're dealing with a person physically small enough that they will have issues with the recoil generated by humane big game calibers.

But, how to prove that someone that young has the brains is the question. Too young to have much of a track record dealing with things requiring complete and total personal responsibility to judge competence in a lot of cases.

Kindrox
July 22, 2009, 02:12 PM
I found a local story with more details:

http://www.goskagit.com/home/article/concrete_boy_found_guilty_of_manslaughter_2/

The first story I read did not mention he was with his 16 year old brother, who also encouraged him to take the shot. The first story I read also did not mention that the two boys were on a popular hiking trail, and shot at something 150 yards away in the fog.

Being on your own property with a gun seems fine to me. Art, I doubt your granfather would have given you a gun on a foggy day, pointed you to a popular hiking trail, and told you to bring back a bear.

It is interesting to me that nobody belives jail time is appropriete here. I am curious if that would be true if the shooter was a 40 year old man.

Ben Shepherd
July 22, 2009, 02:59 PM
The jail thing- We're dealing with minors legally. Laws vary greatly in that respect, rightly or wrongly.

And to avoid situations EXACTLY like this one, our legal restrictions here state the adult within contact with the youth hunter be 21(18 doesn't cut it), and if said adult is not the parent or legal guardian, said adult needs written permission from same.

Art Eatman
July 22, 2009, 04:23 PM
Let's back up and start over: How many hunters, each year, have shot another person in the mistaken belief that they were shooting at a game animal?

Next question, of those, how many were youthful?

SFAIK, most of those who did get accidentally shot were other hunters. The difference here is that the shootee was merely hiking.

Which to some extent says that the public attitude is that hunters take a risk that hikers should not be exposed to--even during hunting season and in a hunting area.

Ben Shepherd
July 22, 2009, 04:29 PM
Valid point. Out here with most of the youth accidents it's 22's after rabbits, and another hunter in the same group is usually the victim. If it's adults involved? More often than not it's adult/adult on the turkey hunt.........
One of those "well it sounded like a turkey" things.

Root causes? Piss poor target ID in the latter case, youth and inexperience, added to lack of respect for the "it's only a 22" rifle cartridge in the former are usually the causes.

bang_bang
July 22, 2009, 05:39 PM
Piss poor target ID in the latter case, youth and inexperience, added to lack of respect for the "it's only a 22" rifle cartridge in the former are usually the causes.

Exactly.

Being 110% certain of your target is a must before you pull the bang switch. I never shoot ANYTHING unless I am absolutely sure that this specific animal is the one I want to take.

Experience and learned skills varies from person to person. Knowing how a deer sounds in dry leaves vs. squirrels is hard to determine. Determining squirrels from humans can be as tricky as it can get. Experience with the noises, sights, daylight shooting hours, angles, etc. has to be gained over several years of hunting with an adult.

The "it's only a .22lr" is probably the biggest of the 3 points here. I used to think that too when I was younger, until I blew a rabbits face off with one. A gun is a gun, it's made to send lead from point A into point B. ANY caliber is lethal.

Respect everything that can hurt you. If you try and play with it...9 times out of 10 it will win.

Ben Shepherd
July 22, 2009, 05:55 PM
Experience and learned skills varies from person to person. Knowing how a deer sounds in dry leaves vs. squirrels is hard to determine. Determining squirrels from humans can be as tricky as it can get. Experience with the noises, sights, daylight shooting hours, angles, etc. has to be gained over several years of hunting with an adult.

Bingo. Which is why it's such a devisive issue. I would make the case that an attentive youngster that's been woods tromping and hunting with dad since he was 4 or 5 on his own hunting rabbits or squirrels with a 22 at 10 is in a far different place preparation wise than a 14 year old that has only attended the minimum 12-15 hour hunter-ed course turned loose with an '06 after a deer with adult supervision........

boils back to "how raised". And anymore, it's far more likely to be an urban jungle upbringing with liitle exposure to firearms and hunting.

RoostRider
July 22, 2009, 06:00 PM
The problem with some of this is that all public land is open to hiking at all times (with little exception). Much of that same land is open to hunting and other uses that are incompatible with hiking in close proximity.

I in no way endorse the idea of "if you want to hunt, buy your own land" as espoused here and in the other thread.... or the equally ridiculous concept of "if you want to hike, buy your own land".... the public land is for everyone. period. Regardless of age or anything else (aside from escaping from legal incarceration I guess). Reasonable restrictions are in order in some places and times (on any user, including hikers) and you have to understand when going out to use the public lands that you are not the only user, and you should not be! Throwing issues like the use of public land into the equation does not get to the heart of the issue....

If this hiker had accidentally wondered onto private land and been accidentally mistaken for a bear and shot this would not be any less tragic, and the shot would not have been any more justified. One isn't taught to identify the target and whats beyond it, but only on public land!

The issue, as I see it here, is more about when is 'old enough to hunt alone' and 'how much education is needed before hunting', not when is 'old enough to hunt alone on public land' .... as it make no difference where you are hunting, the rules are the same...

To that I contend that no one can tell you when your child is old enough to hunt alone, especially not some arbitrary law. (edit- couldn't agree more with those who point out the experience aspect, but we have no idea how much experience this kid had)

If the parents acted irresponsibly in allowing their kid to hunt there (or hunt at all), they should be held liable for their actions (or inaction), if not, it was a horrible accident and nothing more... the child should be punished in the way that society deems correct to punish children who make a terrible, unintentional mistake.

Kindrox
July 22, 2009, 06:30 PM
To that I contend that no one can tell you when your child is old enough to hunt alone,

Where does it end? Should I be able to determine at what age my child is able to drive alone? We have people on this board safely driving (according to them) at ages 9-10. So why shouldn't that child be able to get a driver's license if the parents agree, and the child passes a driver's test?

I am guessing that if you asked this kid's parents the day before the shooting if he was mature enough to be out hunting without parential supervision, they would have said yes. The whole Lake Wobegone thing has everybody's kids being above average, so are parents really the nutural judge needed for this?

I guess I don't see a shooting on your own land to be such a big deal because as kids we could go driving on our own land, but not on public property. Roost's logic would seem to imply if a kid is not safe to drive on the public roads, he shouldn't be driving on his own property. But property rights come into play.

RoostRider
July 22, 2009, 07:15 PM
Your cross logic was proven false in the other thread.... but we can go through it again I guess... if you can remain civil this time.... we don't want this locked down like your thread...(the royal 'we', not just Ben Shepherd)

1. Cars are not guns....
2. they don't make cars especially to fit kids (the whole 'too much gun' idea revealed above)....
3. driving requires FAR more and constant attention to FAR more elements...
4. driving is FAR more likely to have an adverse affect on others due to a momentary judgment error....
5. they do let 'kids' under 16 drive with special permit in most states....
6. A=B and B=C so A=C arguments are seldom correct, fail logically, and are most often used to divert the real subject.... which happens to be HUNTING ALONE AS A MINOR, not driving....
7. all of these same arguments could be levied against adult hunters/drivers/shooters/4 wheelers/dirt bikers/etc... and they are!!... by nuts who think the logic makes sense because it comes to the solution they want to hear...
8. by this logic, hunting should be illegal for everyone, because we cannot prove that everyone will exercise good judgment all the time...

I am sure there are more errors that I missed in this logic, but it got pretty well covered in that last thread.... and I'm not going to stoop to 'copy and paste' arguments here so lets try to stick to the subject matter, shall we?

Where would you draw the line? and why? what makes you think you know when is 'the right age'?

I understand your issue Kindrox, and you are not without some valid input.... I wouldn't let my kid hunt alone right now!! and he's 13.... I doubt I will let him hunt alone at 14 because he doesn't get as much experience as I did as a kid... he has way too much to learn right now, and I want to share the experience with him.... but he's not the representative of 'kids'... when I was his age I had been going on 'supervised' hunting trips for years already.... I came home from school and was allowed to go out and hunt until supper... so were my friends....

"Kids", however you want to define them, are not the problem.... proper education is.... any 'kid' old enough to read and obey in school can be taught to respect the 4 basic simple rules of hunting and can be trusted as much as an adult to abide by them...

It is this kind of thinking and knee jerk reactions that gets all kinds of things outlawed that shouldn't be, and the whole of society suffers because there is a very very small segment of the population that can't handle it.

You don't punish every kid because one of them screwed up. You don't take away the rights of others because someone mishandled his own. You don't judge vast groups of people based on the actions of one or two.....

I feel silly here, because even my son understands these basic things.... he learned them before he was old enough to walk in the woods alone, much less go hunting...

PS- Caribou...... those are some awesome pictures!!!.... wow.... just wow

rbernie
July 22, 2009, 08:13 PM
Let's take a deep breath and try to keep this on The High Road. :)

The car-vs-hunting tool analogy breaks down in many ways, but certainly the outcome of a mistake can be equally devastating with either tool.

I guess that I am in the camp that says that hunting on private land is a private matter. On the other hand, it is not unreasonable to expect that hunting on public land would open up the hunter to restrictions favored by the public. If one of those restrictions is a minimum age limit to hunt alone - I can see how the public at large may favor such a thing.

We can argue over the same ground as we do when we debate background checks (prior restraint, no demonstrated problem) but I'm not sure that it'll be productive. Very few gun laws ever recognized a minor's right to bear arms, and hunting has always been that odd exception to that rule. So in the end, the debate will coalesce around those who see their offspring as trustworthy of such responsibility, and those who distrust the offspring of others.

I do believe that the issue is largely academic; far more people are killed by having a deer jump in front of their car than are killed in hunting accidents (let along hunting accidents where a minor was the hunter).

Gaiudo
July 22, 2009, 08:40 PM
I really don't see the parallel with the car/gun analogy. With a car, on a public road, there is the potential at any second to make a poor decision, and kill several (or dozens of) people. This is just not the case with hunting, which is a basically isolated activity even on public land, and with far simpler rules (only four of them, really!). The 10 and 12 year olds I know that hunt regularly are perfectly capable of keeping these basic rules.

I agree, however, that it is largely an academic issue, with a tiny pool of incidents to draw from. The paucity of examples is also due to the nature of the activity.

While public opinion or emotions might be convinced of a minimum age requirement based on just a few incidents, IMO the facts just don't justify additional regulations. I don't think it's an age issue, but an education/responsibility issue, which transcends age. We have (relatively speaking) plenty of incidents with adult hunters making poor decisions based on lack of education or stupidity (though even these are statistically insignificant). Why try and regulate a perfectly safe and long-running practice that helps the broader cause of hunting by getting kids to learn basic outdoor skills and woodcraft?

In the academic conversation, I am interested in discussing what legal or civil ramifications (if any?) the kid or his parents should face in the case that poor judgment is made. Lawsuits? Perhaps, that would seem justified at times. Criminal charges? I don't see many instances where criminal activity would seem to describe cases like this. We do know this kid now has to live with the terrible consequences of his actions, and of not properly identifying his target (even if he was listening to his older brother when he pulled the trigger).

Kindrox
July 22, 2009, 08:40 PM
Roost,

I’m sorry, I missed the posts where these things were proven and looking back, still don’t see them.
Addressing your points one by one . . .

1. I think we can both agree on this one. I am not sure how to interpret this fact so I’ll move on.
2. Cars are made to safely allow 5” slight build women to drive safely. By age 12, 50% of boys are this height and weight. So I think this point doesn’t help your argument. And can you support an assertion that child hunters are typically fielding custom fitted guns?
3. It’s probably true in some settings, like on major freeways of large cities. But I’d say this is not a true statement for 99% of our geography. I think guns require a lot of constant attention myself. I presume you agree that they must always be pointed in a safe direction, finger off the trigger, ect. And just like with hunting, I assume you would set the limits of where they can drive and under what weather conditions, correct? So if the parents are setting the correct conditions, why is this element a deal breaker in driving but not in hunting?
4. I would say you need evidence for this. How many children go hunting versus the number of adverse affects? Kids DO go driving, and I don’t recall the last time I saw a crash with one of them behind the wheel making the news. So anecdote vs anecdote, it seems a draw to me.

If Ben is right about what sort of kid is appropriate for solo hunting:

I would make the case that an attentive youngster that's been woods tromping and hunting with dad since he was 4 or 5 on his own hunting rabbits or squirrels with a 22 at 10 is in a far different place preparation wise

How many kids have been in woods tromping and hunting with dad since he was 4 or 5? For 99.99% of the hunters I see, dad takes a couple days off once or twice a year to go hunting, and doesn’t step foot in the woods the rest of the year.

The bottom line is, all the arguments to the contrary aside, nobody here it seems would share a shooting range or hunting ground with unsupervised kids. Doesn’t that pretty much end the debate?

Now what you want to do with this information is another debate. Perhaps you see child solo hunting in the same light as smoking or drinking – things that lead to harmful consequences more than helpful ones – but we keep around none the less.

But shaping the argument that kids, as a class, are ready to be given a gun and sent out in public alone, is intellectually dishonest if you yourself won’t go hunting where you know unsupervised kids are also hunting.

rbernie,

I know hunting versus driving is not a perfect analogy but I don't think it is half bad. Roost speaks of not baning solo hunting for the bad acts of a few. I know that in the 1920s there we no age restrictions on driving what so ever, and I assume children were driving. I don't know if was the bad acts of a few, but here we are with minimum driving ages and the momentum is on restricting under-age driving privliges further and for good reason.

Drinking is another example. Children had been drinking legally in the united states, prohibition excluded, for at least as long as they have been hunting. Prohibitionists used drinking age laws as stepping stones to total banning.

Now that you know this, are you suddenly in favor of eliminating the minimum drinking ages, in order to set the prohibitionist movement back? I'm not, even though I am against prohibiting adults from drinking. Prohibition aside, I think minimum drinking ages are a good thing. I don't have to be against a sane restriction just because I am against an insane restriction.

Gaiudo
July 22, 2009, 08:54 PM
The bottom line is, all the arguments to the contrary aside, nobody here it seems would share a shooting range or hunting ground with unsupervised kids. Doesn’t that pretty much end the debate?

Completely difference scenarios. Doesn't end the debate for me in the least.

But shaping the argument that kids, as a class, are ready to be given a gun and sent out in public alone, is intellectually dishonest if you yourself won’t go hunting where you know unsupervised kids are also hunting.

The only "intellectual dishonesty" I've seen so far on this discussion has been your analogies and your logic. Every one of your points above are suspect at best.

2. Cars are made to safely allow 5” slight build women to drive safely. By age 12, 50% of boys are this height and weight. So I think this point doesn’t help your argument. And can you support an assertion that child hunters are typically fielding custom fitted guns?
Most small kids hunt with youth models. Shotguns (870 Express Youth) are commonly made so, as are .22's, and even high-power centerfire rifles. This isn't a "custom fitted gun" in the least. Just the proper tool chosen for the proper person. I wouldn't give my wife a Porsche to drive... now THAT would be scary. :-)

3. It’s probably true in some settings, like on major freeways of large cities. But I’d say this is not a true statement for 99% of our geography. I think guns require a lot of constant attention myself. I presume you agree that they must always be pointed in a safe direction, finger off the trigger, ect. And just like with hunting, I assume you would set the limits of where they can drive and under what weather conditions, correct? So if the parents are setting the correct conditions, why is this element a deal breaker in driving but not in hunting?

Geography has very little to do with the frequency of roads being drive in this country. The VAST majority of driving is on interstate or city roads. If we could geography, I wouldn't have a problem with a kid driving a truck in a field somewhere, there are simply much fewer opportunities for problems. A roadway, however, is entirely different. The same argument could possibly be made for CCW vs. Hunting. And, to your point, the law has already stated where one can and cannot hunt legally.

As I stated above, I think the entire hunting vs. driving analogy is all bad, not just half bad.

Kindrox
July 22, 2009, 10:15 PM
Completely difference scenarios. Doesn't end the debate for me in the least.

Does your unwillingness to share a hunting ground with unsupervised child hunters have any bearing on the debate?

Every one of your points above are suspect at best.


Great! Then it will be easy for you to debunk my assertions. Please stand and deliver.

Most small kids hunt with youth models.
I'll assume your rebuttal to #2 is true if you will accept that 50% of 12 year old boys are physically large enough operate a car, within its design parameters.

Geography has very little to do with the frequency of roads being drive in this country.
If you are confident in your ability to direct your child with where and when he may hunt, why aren't you confident in your ability to direct your child with where and when he may drive?

Put another way, how are you confident your child will follow your instruction as to hunting, if you don't believe he would follow your instructions as to driving?

Allowing parents to decided the limits to driving would allow rural children to drive, just as they may hunt, while city kids can be forbidden to solo hunt (after all, just how is a downtown Seattle child going to solo hunt anyway?) or drive. Wound't many rural parents would welcome the extra pair of hands being able to help with driving chores?

jbkebert
July 22, 2009, 10:49 PM
As a hunter educaion instructor myself I have no problems with having adult supervison requirements. Kansas recently changed the minimum age to take Hunter Ed from 10 to 11 years old. The rationalization behind this is that parents had a false sense of security. Just because a child passes hunter ed and can imitate the actions of the instructors and fellow students in a class room and feild enviroment. This does not mean that they will use the same judgement in the feild.
I am very happy be a part of a great group of instructors in Shawnee county KS. Before each class begins instructors volunteer to take a certain number of students hunting. The March 09 class 12 instructors took a total of 18 students turkey hunting. The Sept 09 class coming up 15 instructors will be taking 35-40 students on a dove hunt. The instuctors provide the place to hunt the ammo, possibly the gun as well. We pay for the permits the whole 9 yards. This Oct class I'll take two students deer hunting. I would love to see more instuctor organizations across the country adopt this system. Just set the number or students that are able to be taken and use a lottery system.
Now for the bad part. Hunter education is used more and more as a baby sitting service. Parents drop their 12 year kids off and disappear. Our class last a total of 2 1/2 days. I know this is a lot of time. I would love to see a requirment that a adult has to accompany the child throughout the class. Only problem with that is adults are more disruptive than the kids. We also watch more safety violations being committed by adults than the kids. So not sure what the answer is on that issue. As a whole I beleive that all kids city or rural need a responsible adult mentor be it a uncle, brother, sister, mom, dad what ever to guide them. I truley think this is the only way we will pass it on.

RoostRider
July 22, 2009, 11:02 PM
Sorry to say this, but Kindrox is a troll (intentional or not).... once again he resorts to diversion "comparisons" or "A=B and B=C so A=B"... lol.... even to defend against comments against the 'logic'... lol .... he either truly doesn't understand the flaws in his arguments, and no amount of explaining will suffice until he decides to learn, or he is intentionally baiting and/or trying to make a HUGE issue against hunting (since all of his arguments could be reposed to represent adults as well)...

He admittedly (in the other thread) is not a hunter, but grew up around guns and hunting (smacks of 'ethical' reasons for not hunting... and opposing those who do... which I can respect and debate, if presented honestly, and not behind a guise of concern about all those people in danger by hunters)... and I don't trust his intentions aside from keeping this thread at the top of the "New Posts" search by way of relentlessly repeating his same rants (even resorting to cut and paste repeats).... even if you answer his question, he just asks it again.... and again.... and again.... (like the little kid who wants to go to the park....)

Oh, and Kindrox, I have shared hunting areas with unsupervised 'kids' on many many occasions... not that this answer will keep you from repeating that question either.... *sigh*... sorry to burst your bubble, but no one was even winged...

RoostRider
July 22, 2009, 11:16 PM
Sorry, that post took a while.... didn't see the post above....

jbkebert et. al.- It would seem that most commentary agrees (and all who have extensive experience in this area) that education and training are the key... not arbitrary age requirements....

And for the record..... I went with my son through his entire Hunters Safety course (6 sessions 4 hours long each)... well, aside from the test.... I already did that when I was 11(?)... (and it wasn't even a requirement then!!!)... there were no other parents there to watch but me (some were taking it too! right on!!) .... lots of 'drop and go'....

Thanks to all you guys for committing your time to train kids to hunt safely!!! My son and I appreciate it a LOT....

Art Eatman
July 22, 2009, 11:25 PM
We all know from experience that the competence at responsible judgement will vary across the years without regard for, say, 8 or 10 vs. 12 or 14. After all, the incident that started all this was begun by a boy of 15. Therefore, any regulatory effort about solo hunting by young people will be fairly arbitrary. Any regulation will be, naturally, "One size fits all," without regard for individual differences.

I'd still like to know if this is really a problem requiring regulation as an attempt at an answer? Or is it really just more "feel good"?

It seems to me that the car analogy is irrelevant; there are already laws in place which, generally, say 16 or over. Yet, we occasionally see the news item about some 12-year-old doing something stupid. However, those are infrequent--so back to my questions.

RoostRider
July 22, 2009, 11:49 PM
I think it's pretty clear we are talking about "feel good" here.... given the very very very limited occurrences....

Some are really more upset about the lack of a long time jail sentence for this kid, and or his parents.... feeling he didn't get his 'just due'.... but I would argue that this is a matter of how we punish kids for negligent actions resulting in others being injured, not about the age of the hunter....

Kindrox
July 23, 2009, 12:29 AM
I didn't know mearly disagreeing with Roost made me an anti hunting/gun troll. Perhaps unknowingly to even myself, I was planted here three years ago with the mission of "fitting in" to destroy the 2A community from within? Good thing sharp counter-intelligence agents like Roost are able to smoke folks like me out :rolleyes:

I have never hunted. Not from a moral objection, but because my dad never hunted as a child and had no interest in hunting as an adult. And silly me, I didn't sneak out with a rifle and take matters into my own hands :). I grew up in Washington, I didn't know I legally could have snuck out and gone hunting alone.

Now I live in Texas where hunting is a largely futile exercise of the well to do. And frankly I don't have an interest in hunting. I guess that makes me a bad person?

Why am I really against solo child hunting in public? I remember my childhood and my friends. We wern't bad kids, were were just kids. I woulden't go back and time and hand myself a gun and send me out. I thought I knew a lot about guns, safety and life as a kid. Looking back, I was a child and I made childish mistake. Lucky for me, lives where never on the line.

After volunteering with teenagers for a couple years in more recent times, I wouldn't hand any of them a gun and send them out alone in public either. Let the parents decide is a popular cry here. Yeah, right. Tons of parents have their heads up their butts about the real state their honor roll kids are actually in. As I got to know these kids, I found out the real deal with drinking, fighting, sneaking out, and a few drugs on the side.

I'm not for banning the 99.9999% percent of responsible people to account for the 0.0001% of the irresponsible. I oppose most gun laws. But I also have a brain. When it comes to kids, I am not for allowing the 99.999% of irresponsible kids to be out in public with a gun to be sure the 0.00001% that are responsible don't have to get to the trouble to get an adult to go with them. Yeah, that's right, I say it's about one in 10,000 kids that I'd trust with a gun out in public.

Being that our parents AND youth continue to grow more and more responsible every year, I'm sure the issue will simply wonder off to die :neener:

Gaiudo
July 23, 2009, 12:40 AM
As someone who doesn't hunt, doesn't seem to know many true hunters or their kids, or really even have a modicum of truth regarding actual hunting culture, I'm not sure that you are in much of a place to evaluate the kids that are out there hunting on a daily basis, Kindrox. We don't just "give kids guns and send them out alone in public". Nothing could be further from the truth. Before you try and evaluate something you have no concept of, and especially before you suggest that you know how to regulate it, perhaps you should try it a couple times and learn what the reality actually is?

And I had a fantastic hog hunt in Texas just last month. Futile? It was lovely. Get out some more, Kindrox! You'll end up enjoying it.

Kindrox
July 23, 2009, 12:58 AM
I have friends that hunt. Last fall the richer of the two won some tag lotto for elk in some western state, flew there and got bupkiss. I don't know what the whole adventure cost, but he got nothing and I am sure he paid far and above what a simple scenic tour would have cost.

The other friend for two years running has tried deer leases here in Texas. Last summer, after driving down every weekend for months to re-stock the corn feeders, the lady owner gave them their money back and kicked them off since she was selling the land. He didn't get his corn or gas money back.

So they found another spot and went back to driving down every weekend to re-stock the corn feeder. Then comes hunting season and he drives down every weekend to not see a single deer! He did see and shoot a single hog, so for his $1,500 lease fee and countless weekends driving too and from the lease, he wound up with like 75 pounds of hog meat.

I had some of the sausage at lunch, which he spent $100+ to get processed (I think getting sausage was extra above cutting a wrapping). For the expense it should be some of the best I ever taste. I don't recall the specfic trials of the two of them from the year before, but neither of them got anything then either.

Where I grew up, come dusk, getting a deer would have been like shooting fish in a barrel. In Texas, I'll pass.

Kindrox
July 23, 2009, 01:41 AM
even have a modicum of truth regarding actual hunting culture

Frankly I have a real hard time buying into the responsible parent instilling responsibility into the child model because, quite frankly, in my opinion the percentage of bad adult hunters is not 0.000001%. As I said I was a farm boy. In my later teen years I was in North-East Washington state, farming. Deer season was about three weeks every fall.

Where we were was good hunting land. Deer would come out of the hills at dusk to feed on the alfalpha. Every farmer knew when deer season started and ended. For three weeks cows and horses got shot, fences got cut and gates got locks cut or smashed.

A farmer friend had a drunk hunter use his house as a backstop. He ended up getting the drop on him, called the sheriff, and got him arrested and his car towed. It never happened to us, but stories of armed hunters threatening violence to farmers (generally because the farmer found them trespassing and told them to clear off) circulated every year. These outrageous hunters, when confronted, usually spouted off about their right to get to the game animals and how we were actually infringing on them.

Because of the outrageous stuff, we didn’t allow any strangers to hunt our land (people stopped by and asked every year).

AGAIN I DIDN’T SAY IT IS ALL HUNTERS. Farmers hunt too. Farmers have friends and family that hunt. I am not against hunting, or hunters in general. Well practiced hunting does farmers and their communities a favor.

As far as I could tell, these were the hunt for a couple days a year, then back to their city job, never to set foot in the woods again until next year crowd. But this was not one story per valley per year, this was dozens of incidents, per year, just in our small section of valley.

And I have not even brought up coworker Randy from outback Oklahoma and his tales of teenage hunting, drunk, from the back of a speeding pickup truck, with a spotlight. From his stories, it wasn’t just a couple kids doing it. Of course hunting might be overstating it, I don't know that they did anything with the dead ones.

For a few people, "hunting" has turned into a sort of god worship, and god forbid anyone "infring" on practice of it.

When I see people who say nobody and nothing is going to get between them and them thar deer, it reminds me of those outrageous hunters of my youth.

Gaiudo
July 23, 2009, 03:25 AM
Hmm, unresolved issues perhaps with bad hunters and hunting practices, perhaps? The past begins to poke through the surface...

I'm not here to counsel you about your past, but the fact of the matter is what you describe is a tiny minority of hunters. It's like comparing punk street racers to most drivers. I'm sorry you had a tough experience in your upbringing, but that does not properly describe the vast majority of hunting culture.

And with those kind of past experiences, surely you of all people should recognize that the issue of youth hunting is a ridiculously insignificant statistic? The problem is not child hunters, but irresponsible hunting, regardless of age.

RoostRider
July 23, 2009, 06:25 AM
Before you try and evaluate something you have no concept of, and especially before you suggest that you know how to regulate it, perhaps you should try it a couple times and learn what the reality actually is?

Sooo much has come to light about Kindrox's motivation in these couple of threads.... A classic case of projection.... lots of people have this problem... "because I couldn't control myself as a kid, neither can the vast majority of others" (1 in 10,000 was it??? lol)... again, another common tactic of the anti-whatever... he is bitter, and it shows in every post... he can't even use rational logic.... because he is irrational about this subject.... good luck convincing him of anything....

He has no desire to actually understand the culture (as obvious), only in cutting it apart (again, common for the knee jerk reactionary)... he loves to make wild generalizations and assumptions about everything, from drunk lazy parents to a homicidal kid who used hunting as an excuse to kill a woman in this case (former thread)... just assuming this kid acts as he would of in his youth it would seem..... His parents should have taken him hunting.... or at least worked with him about his behavior (clearly beyond the control of his parents)... now he thinks this is a 'normal childhood' he had..... it's sad, and the best we can do is hope that he doesn't 'pass it on' like we responsible hunters do our tradition and respect...

"Volunteering with kids"????.... how many of them were raised around hunting?.... am I to understand that you volunteer with troubled kids, and you base your 'knowledge' of kids on that and your experience as a kid who couldn't control himself and couldn't be trusted around guns????

I, for one, am really really glad Kindrox doesn't hunt.... lol.... he sounds a little unstable..... I'd sure rather be in the woods with an unsupervised kid hunting than him... lol

Kindrox
July 23, 2009, 08:50 AM
I, for one, am really really glad Kindrox doesn't hunt.... lol.... he sounds a little unstable

You can lean on what ever mental crutch you want, clearly you need one.

rbernie
July 23, 2009, 09:15 AM
Guys - we need to be able to talk about things without bickering, or the talkin' is useless. I wuz gonna lock this one down, given the state of where it is, but I've decided to give it a little more of an opportunity to be useful.

Yes, there are slob hunters. There are ALWAYS slobs in whatever pastime/vocation/activity you enjoy. As shooters and hunters, we cannot allow the slobs to define who and what we are and we cannot allow the debate to focus on the slobs to the exclusion of the majority of the community. This discussion maybe could focus on that goal. :)

Ben - you likely haven't gotten out of this what you wanted. In the end, the 'know your target and what's beyond it' lessons need to be reinforced for all who pick up a firearm. Obviously, inadequate target identification seems to be the common mistake for multi-party hunting accidents (kid and adult alike) and any effort to teach kids hunting really needs to focus on how to really be sure of the target. Frankly, I dunno how you teach a kid to recognize appropriate targets without having lots of paired (adult/child) hunting trips in which the adult provides the eyes/ears/decisions. It is also my belief that the notion of target ID and backstop is simply not being reinforced enough for many new hunters, given that more and more hunters are coming into the sport from a suburban background (where targets are demarcated pieces of paper and backstops are berms on a range, and neither are really given much thought).

I dunno how you legislate this away. I don't think that you ever fully can. I especially don't think that the problem is 'large' enough to warrant unaccompanied age restrictions on all involved. Having said that, I certainly would not be adverse to expanded hunters ed courses that addressed the 'know your target and what's beyond it' more fully, and/or mandatory yearly hunter's education courses for minors.

ETA => here's the Texas law on the subject:

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/learning/hunter_education/required.phtml

Every hunter (including out-of-state hunters) born on or after Sept. 2, 1971, must successfully complete a Hunter Education Training Course. Minimum age of certification is 9 years of age.

If you were born on or after September 2, 1971 and you are:

under 9 years of age, you must be accompanied*.
age 9 through 16, you must successfully complete a hunter education course, or you must be accompanied*.
age 17 and over, you must successfully complete a hunter education course; or purchase a “Hunter Education Deferral” and you must be accompanied*.
Please note that some federally controlled areas require all hunters using that site to have hunter education certification. In Texas, this includes Corps of Engineers property and most military reservations. Be sure to check with the specific area prior to going hunting.

Hunter Education Deferral (cost: $10) Allows a person 17 years of age or older who has not completed a hunter education program to defer completion for up to one year. A deferral may only be obtained once and is only valid until the end of the current license year. A person who has been convicted or has received deferred adjudication for violation of the mandatory hunter education requirement is prohibited from applying for a deferral. Take the course by August 31 of the current license year and receive a $5 discount. The one-time Hunter Education Deferral is available at license vendors and went into effect September 1, 2004.

* Accompanied means: By a person who is at least 17, who is licensed to hunt in Texas, who has passed hunter education or is exempt (born before Sept. 2, 1971), and you must be within normal voice control. Proof of certification or deferral is required to be on your person while hunting. Note: Certification is not required to purchase a hunting license.
Given how many folk that hunt do so only sparingly - I actually think that yearly hunter's education sessions with the minor's (under, say 16 years old) is probably not a terrible idea in general.

Gaiudo
July 23, 2009, 10:17 AM
I figure that the only way to decrease the amount of slob hunters (and shooters) is to start them out right when they are kids. Once they are adults, its pretty hard to fix.

So, I suppose the best thing overall for safe hunting is to get MORE kids in the field earlier and to encourage proper youth hunting from the getgo. That doesn't mean releasing them into the woods like wolfkinder and expect them to know instinctively what to do. Proper discipline needs to be used at all times. The benefits of youth hunting for the future of hunting far outweigh the (statistically negligible) risks.

I wish that there was a better program available to teach kids how to hunt. I mean, nothing is more boring than sitting in a classroom in hunter's ed. And I don't know if it does much in actual skillsets. Perhaps if we had tracts of land set aside solely for the purpose of under 15 and under hunters, with a limit to how many kids per day? Kinda like the Walkin Areas we have, but specifically for kids. This marked land could be both accompanied, and then once they've proven themselves, unaccompanied, just to give them time in a safe environment.

just thoughts in the early morning...

Art Eatman
July 23, 2009, 10:48 AM
"Now I live in Texas where hunting is a largely futile exercise of the well to do. And frankly I don't have an interest in hunting. I guess that makes me a bad person?"

Not a bad person, but silly remarks like that first sentence tend to reduce one's credibility.

I still ask: Is all this really warranted? Is the problem large enough that some sort of legislative action is truly needed? How many unaccompanied young hunters shoot a person instead of what was thought to be a deer/bear/whatever?

In general, laws don't prevent anything; they merely provide for punishment. My observation over some sixty years of driving is that while traffic laws are purported to be all about safety, they're mostly used for revenue enhancement and punishment--which is even more reason they're irrelevant to this discussion.

Kindrox
July 23, 2009, 11:32 AM
Guys - we need to be able to talk about things without bickering, or the talkin' is useless.

It seems to me there are a few subjects where we employ gun grabber methods for ourselves. It seems I can't just be a guy who has seen the good and the bad in hunting, and then wants to make a rational choice. To some, if I am not "with us" in fighting off any and all laws about hunting, be they rational or not, then I am "against us" because I am a closet anti, or have unresolved issues, and basically am downright unstable. Interesting that to some I have already demonstrated that I would be dangerous to have in the hunting ground, but I guess just hunky dory carrying about my concealed .45.

A lot of the gun grabbers I run into have the same base rational, just a different starting position. To them I can't be someone who sees the good and bad about guns and gun owners, and then wants to make a rational choice about what laws I support and to carry a gun myself. To a lot of them I (and the general CCW population) carry guns because we have unresolved issues or are unstable.

Just like with some of our own, often there is no rational discussion with them either. They know your wrong and the fact you don’t agree with them brands you a dangerous nut, end of discussion.

Now I have treated a few people here like a "hostile witness" but I have been more than willing to discuss specifics, and I don't think I have resorted to "your wrong, I don't know why, but I simply know you are".

Not a bad person, but silly remarks like that first sentence tend to reduce one's credibility.

Art, you didn't get my humor on that one. I am not an expert on the subject of hunting in Texas, but all the hunters here that I know personally are all paying $1k+ each for deer leases. And again, based on the people I know, even after paying your big bucks for a deer lease, it is possible you might go for years without even seeing a deer during hunting season.

Factor in high costs ($1500 to me is a fair chuck of change, plus I don’t want to spend all my weekends restocking the corn feeders), hunting being a low priority for me, and a high perceived risk of walking away at the end of the year with nothing, and I have made the (I hope rational) decision not to bother with it. Again, if I was back on the old family farm with a $25 deer tag that I could “fill” just about any day of the week on my own property, perhaps things would be different.

I am not running down the people that do this and don’t get a deer, they seem to know they probably aren’t going to get anything but they enjoy it none the less. But I do recognize that around DFW, hunting is probably out of reach for many of the landless poor who don't have connections.

In general, laws don't prevent anything; they merely provide for punishment.

My question is, why have a law for anything? Keeping it on a smaller subject we could possibly hope to discuss, I’ll refine the question to, “Should there be any laws that specifically govern hunting?”

If your answer is no, then I understand your stance on child hunting. I don’t agree, but I understand. If your answer is yes, then I’d ask follow up questions about what laws make sense to get an understanding as to why you don't see it about this one.

How many unaccompanied young hunters shoot a person instead of what was thought to be a deer/bear/whatever?


Are there any records kept for this one? According to Ben, an actual instructor,

"But the fact remains that a majority of our accidents involve young hunters and 22s."

Which for me suggests that if a majority of our accidents involve young hunters, perhaps a few extra rules there could might be possibly thought about?

The remedy being bantied about as the solution is, drum roll please, more education! Hay I like education too. But the other actual instructor in the thread had this to say about his experiance of the young:

Just because a child passes hunter ed and can imitate the actions of the instructors and fellow students in a class room and feild enviroment. This does not mean that they will use the same judgement in the feild.

Could this possibly be because book learning is not quite as good as logic and reasoning skills + experiance? Say it ain't so!

It is very interested that when I make the same general assertions, they are the

stupidest thing I have heard anyone say EVER

We can argue about the conclusions, but to me, the two actual professionals here don't sound very different from me on the actual problem statement! How come they arn't branded as stupid?

Anti's are known for irrationally refusing to acknoledge facts. Are we free of their mental hang ups?

Gaiudo
July 23, 2009, 12:01 PM
Frankly, Kindrox, your arguments are far different than Ben's statements.

No one is saying that hunter's ed is sufficient to just throw kids out in the field. Those of us who advocate youth hunting place the greatest onus on education in the field, not in the classroom. I don't believe that hunter's eds classes are all that useful in isolation. The classroom should be used to certify that someone has the baseline knowledge, but experience in the field is the only way to actual educate kids. And if you don't let them get into the field, on various levels of difficulty and responsibility, they will end up uneducated and dangerous hunters.

It seems to me in recent years that there has been a perspective that a Hunter's Ed course is sufficient to educate someone (adult or child) on the ins and outs of hunting. Somehow, (as typically happens) by legislating a baseline education course, folks have started thinking that this govt. mandated course is the answer for appropriate hunting skills. I think this has been a negative turn. Education in the field, at any age, is the only way to become a good hunter.

With all the funds thrown to hunters ed, we could be a LOT more creative in how we educate our kids to hunt rather than sitting them in a classroom. Dedicate state land to youth hunting, with dedicated instructors. Teach them in the field. Require a baseline of hunting with an adult, and then require a few "solo hunts". There are many ways we could be doing a better job than we currently are educationwise.

Ben Shepherd
July 23, 2009, 12:13 PM
EXACTLY-

Hunter-ed is in all actuality a 99 level class in the grand scheme of things. And as an instructor, I do not make that statement lightly or mean it as a disparaging remark towards hunter education in any manner.

RoostRider
July 23, 2009, 03:58 PM
It seems to me there are a few subjects where we employ gun grabber methods for ourselves. It seems I can't just be a guy who has seen the good and the bad in hunting, and then wants to make a rational choice

I think there are some subjects where anyone will employ any means they deem necessary to 'win', regardless of real value.... myself included... this just happens to be one of yours... but yes, we all have those hang ups....

You certainly can't "just be a guy who has seen the good and the bad in hunting, and then wants to make a rational choice"...because, as you have noted repeatedly, you have never seen the good in hunting.... you see out of control kids, wreckless hunters shooting cows and horses, rich elitists pricing out the little guy.... yet you have never been hunting..... (BTW- I seriously contend the 'facts' about how many fences, cows, horses etc... you have seen destroyed by hunters.... not that it doesn't happen, just that it is a TINY minority of cases)

How could you possibly be any sort of truly informed of the "good"?

I see kids

1. learning self sufficiency
2 Building pride and a sense of accomplishment
3 the reality behind their lives and those around them
4 the potential, good and bad, in firearms
5 the consequences of firearms use
6 patience
7 real practical skills
8 putting food on the table
9 tradition
10 respect for nature
.... and much more....

..... and I see them learning all these things with and without supervision. But the without supervision part adds to what they learn too.... a sense of self worth comes more from doing it yourself, employing the skills you have learned, than having someone show you how its done again and again.... a large part of the purpose of the exersize in teaching them is so that they can do it on their own...

PS- No one here said you shouldn't have a CCW.... but no one here said you should either.... see?... because we aren't pretending to be the guys who know when you are ready to take on such responsibility (that's the anti's job).... see?

Skillet
July 25, 2009, 05:41 PM
NOBODY, no matter what age, should be hunting alone. we are all to out of elements to be hunting alone. where i hunt, that is just asking for a death sentance. a broken ankle can do you in alone while out in the wilderness. i don't think that it is a question of age, but a question of common sense. where i hunt, you don't hunt alone, it's a great idea to carrry a sidearm, you don't hunt with a 2 wheel drive pickup, and you always make sure that your four wheeler is in tip top shape before setting out. and take extra gas and maybe another four wheeler. if something breaks down where i hunt, it's about 1.5-2 hours back to camp, and that's just on a four wheeler. and that's just going back to camp, which is a long ways on a truck back to civilization. so where i hunt, if you are hunting alone on foot, you can get lost, be easy prey for a mountain lion, and spend a few nights in the cold.
take a buddy. and a good radio or sattilite phone.

age laws are stupid, because age is one thing, maturity is another. if you are physically and mentally capable, why not own a gun? when you turn 18 or 21 you don't magically become responsible. it comes with priviledges and how you were raised. the constitution doesn't state "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.-oh except for people that are under the age of 18 or 21." if you are old enough to vote, why not have a handgun? if you can be in the military at the proper age, why not own a gun? if you have to pay certain taxes, why not have a gun? i have seen 12 year old kids handle guns perfectly by the book, and yet i have seen forty year old men handle a gun like it was some sort of a ragdoll.

Leaky Waders
July 26, 2009, 07:11 AM
"I have never hunted." I quit reading his posts after that...they are too long anyways.

"NOBODY, no matter what age, should be hunting alone." I disagree. Sure, if you're in the deep of some unknown woods, bring a partner. But if i'm hunting some field by my house, I don't need someone to escort me from the hidden dangers of Where the Wild Things are.

If I can fish alone, I should be able to hunt alone. Do I want too? No, I want company, but if I have a day off I don't want some legislator telling me I can't hunt some well known property because they think it's too dangerous.

As far as the age and hunting thing....I think hunter's education is awesome. I've been twice. The first when I was a Boy scout, and nearly 16. I still have the patch sewn on an old game vest.

Next...when my oldest turned 12. Now he's 17. We'll both be going again too, because my youngest still lacks the class and he's 13. When I get back from deployment, we'll all 3 of us go again.

I don't think there should be an age requirement, other than existing laws to hunt. But, I think there should be some guidelines as to what game can be hunted without supervision.

If the 14 year old was truly alone. And, he killed some 200 lbs bear...wth was he going to do with it? Quarter it - alone, and pack it out?

I think the supervision requirement should come into play as to how a pln can be worked after felling the game. In other words, to hunt small game, people could hunt alone, because that game - doves, rabbits, squirrel etc - can be harvested and carried out in a game bag.

For large game, the plan for moving the game would involve a vehicle (4 wheeler, truck, bobcat or something) so an adult capable of operating the equipment should be along.

Anyways, my two cents.

-LW

Art Eatman
July 26, 2009, 11:53 AM
I've been hunting alone, most of the time I've hunted, for almost seventy years. Since around 1973 or so, I've gone 20 miles into uninhabited back country to my camp. My hunts would commonly be walks of some ten to twelve miles, varying in route from day to day.

What I figured out as a kid was, "Don't get stupid." Seems to work fairly well...

RoostRider
July 27, 2009, 01:24 AM
NOBODY, no matter what age, should be hunting alone. we are all to out of elements to be hunting alone. where i hunt, that is just asking for a death sentance. a broken ankle can do you in alone while out in the wilderness. i don't think that it is a question of age, but a question of common sense. where i hunt, you don't hunt alone, it's a great idea to carrry a sidearm, you don't hunt with a 2 wheel drive pickup, and you always make sure that your four wheeler is in tip top shape before setting out. and take extra gas and maybe another four wheeler. if something breaks down where i hunt, it's about 1.5-2 hours back to camp, and that's just on a four wheeler. and that's just going back to camp, which is a long ways on a truck back to civilization. so where i hunt, if you are hunting alone on foot, you can get lost, be easy prey for a mountain lion, and spend a few nights in the cold.
take a buddy. and a good radio or sattilite phone.

I respectfully disagree. I have hunted alone many times, including as a kid. I have never used a four wheeler, and I have hunted in some of the most remote territory in the 5 state area (BWCAW- 1,000,000 acres of nothing but woods and lakes- no pickups, no four wheelers and no gas).

I am somewhat out of my element, as you say, but that is part of the experience that I treasure.... doing it on my own and working only with what I have with me... some would say that is 'asking for a death sentence' where I have hunted too, but I could not agree... people have been hunting alone for as long as there has been people.... long before these conveniences, or even firearms for that matter...

That being said I like hunting with people more I think.... sharing is a part of it for me... but it shouldn't be mandated by law, only your interpretation of common sense (clearly, common sense is a subjective term.... and someone else's 'common sense' might tell them not to do things I can do with ease... or vise versa)

This all is largely irrelevant to this issue, as is the "what would he do with a bear if he got it"... because 'hunting alone' might be construed as something as simple as being beyond the voice and sight of a guardian.... that's how it is in MN anyways... (a kid on a stand 1/2 mile away is "hunting alone")

It is quite possible this young man was very near to home, and or assistance if needed....

moooose102
July 27, 2009, 11:29 AM
well, i am going to take my 8 year old boy with me deer hunting this fall. not on the first couple of days, but i want to introduce him to the actual hunting experience. he can not shoot, nor would i let him yet. he just is not responsible enough at this point. but i want to give him some of the beginning pointers about watching for game, how to locate them, BEING QUIET, etc., etc., etc.. when he becomes eligable to hunt, i will keep him right with me for several years. direct supervision and imidiate correction to any mistakes is the key to making a good hunter. i really do not care if we get anything or not. that is what i hope to accomplish in the first few days. but teaching him how to go about hunting safely and effectivly will be my big reward.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kids and hunting" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!