Tom over at Black Bear Blog has been running a series of stories on Washington State’s plan to allow a limited elk hunt in the Mount St Helen’s National Monument with the use of hunters who have completed the state’s Master Hunter Program. Tom’s opposition to the program was mainly the cost, the time commitment and the special hunting privileges graduates receive that is not available to all licensed hunters. I disagreed and here is why;
Advance Hunting training and certification whether offered by the state or an organization I think is a great idea. Teaching advance skills or verifying that individuals know these skills on a voluntary basis I think should be encouraged. I realize that many of the skills taught in this type of class may already be ones known and practiced by the individuals taking the class but it’s the only way you can know everyone knows the same thing is by training everyone the same way. Very much like hunter safety class I doubt I learned much in it but I now can prove I was trained to a standard. Will it make you a better hunter? Maybe maybe not? But as with the Hunter Safety there is an overall improvement in hunter safety with those who have completed a class as opposed to those who haven’t so I don’t think you could argue that it won’t help.
I also strongly believe that the cost of such a program should be paid for by those who choose to participate in it. Wildlife agency budgets are on the brink of disaster as it is so requiring them to fund additional programs could push the budget over the edge.
Special Hunts in sensitive or populated areas I think is a trend we are seeing across the country. When wildlife gets over populated something has to be done. Many places have and will shut hunters out and opt to use pricey sharpshooters to take care of the problem. The biggest argument used when deciding who to use to hunt in one of these areas is safety. By having an established program that has proficiency as part of its requirements this opposition can be defused. I think it’s a good thing and can help put hunters in a better light.
Now specifically the hunt in Washington State will be held on a National Monument where traditionally hunting is seldom allowed. There will be a lot of public scrutiny and I think it’s prudent that you have knowledgeable hunters. Using an established program that has shooting proficiency as part of the certification process will hopefully make it so the hunt gets off the ground and approved. If proof of proficiency is as important as the news stories make it out to be then you either use what you currently have or you set up a program specifically for the hunters that get drawn.
I do agree with Tom over the “class system” for hunting and if you think that makes a hunter more ethical then your wrong. I don’t think there are degrees of ethically so the forest service spokesman is bogus either you are or your not.
