mobow

Here's a thought, and it's JUST a thought......We all here, and have read on this thread, that the goal should be a paper plate @ 20 yards......I've also read that sadly some can't do it....I also know the vitals on a deer are fairly large, but is the goal of hitting a paper plate a 20 yards too..............big??

What I mean is, an 8" circle leaves a lot of room for error, doesn't it? Wouldn't it be better if the goal was a 4" circle @ 20 yards?? I don't know, it was just a thought I had and wonder what you guys think. This has turned into a pretty good discussion....

RIStrutStopper

This is a tough one. I'm not into big brother, but I do believe you should be proficient with the weapons you use to hunt with. In RI there are a few areas where you do need to pass a proficiency test to get tags for, and the rest of the state all you need is your archery hunter safety card. The proficiency card is good for 2 seasons. I don't hunt the areas where you need the proficiency card for, but I take the test anyway. All it is is a big piece of cardboard with a deer silhouet outline. There is a much lighter outline of the vitals that you can't see from 20 yards, but its easy to see if you're in there when you pull your arrows. They replace the target often so you can't just aim for where everybody else has hit. Out of 5 broadhead tipped arrows (must be broadheads), you need to get 3 into the kill zone. Let me tell you, its amusing but sad to watch this test. The yahoos come out of the woodwork. Some people can't even hit the silhouet at 20 yards, never mind the vitals. Just think, these people can just buy a licence and fling arrows at game. I know about folding under pressure, I have missed shots at deer, but this test is something no competent archer should fail.If you plan to hunt, you owe it to the game to know your equipment andensure it is in tune and be proficient with it. BTW, you can only take the test once per day, but if you do fail, you can take it the next time its offered.

GMMAT

Thinking about this from the DNR/WRC's point of view......why do they care?

Hunters, to them, are a means of population control. Period. While I suppose they'd like to see animals taken ethically and quickly.....in the end...I guess they don't care if that animal bleeds out in 20 seconds or 20 hours. Why would they want to EXclude more "predators" from the woods.....and at the cost (to them) of more man hours and $$ (to provide testing).

fshafly2

We had many variations on proficiency testing on the military base for many years. My favorite was:

Three~broadsideMckenzie targetsout from 10to 25 yds, range finder permitted.
Four broadhead-tipped arrows
Elevated stand (~12 ft) (unless the shooter was ground-only)

Shoot at all three target targets, you must get at least an "8" three times with four shots. (The arrow shaft had to be inside the line, no line cutters). The fourth shot can be at a target of your choice. Fail, and come back another day.

-fsh

SwampCollie

Well, here is another something to bounce around between the ears.

How about we, as members of this forum, (and here is the hard part) try and uniformly come up with a practice regimen for the upcoming season. Heck we could make it a sticky, or someone could write an article about it for the main page. Doesn't have to be anything fancy, but how about a minimum goal of either arrows per day or per week, or hours per week. All of this to the end of a self-test at the end of August. Make it 4 on a 4" plate at 20 or whatever. And you can keep the results to yourself. This is just about making you better, not proving anyone worthy or not.

Admittingly, most of us practice a heck of a lot anyway, and we do it happily, but there are always new members, and new bowhunters floating through, many who may read, but may be reluctant to post, but I submit that if we had such a thing, then there would probably be a few people who would take some good advice away from it. And subsequently, they would practice more. Everybody wins.

Whatdayathink?

PS: I think this has been one of the most pro-active and pro-ductive threads I've ever read on the forums. All very positive, very upbeat.

Germ

Swamp great idea

I also think we need examples of when to shoot and when not to shoot. We all know a great shot at a bad angle can be trouble. Being a "good" shot is only half the battle, but a great place to start.

SwampCollie

Absolutely.

I know Rick James was writing at one point about how he will go out to his little range and just practice with a rangefinder and at figuring yardage. Thats another very very good tool to use for bow hunting.

LebeauHunter

That's cool Swamp,

But we are somewhat preaching to the choir in this thread.
Remember, we have guys on this forum that shoot 2" groups at 60 yards.

Still good to keep in mind on down the road when I'm tempted to pick up my bow without putting in the practice.
Set a standard for yourself and stick to it.

Arthur P

Just about everyone, regardless of equipment choice, has a certain distance where they can hit what they shoot at, every time. What I'd like to see with proficiency tests is allowing the shooter to close the distance to where he knows he can't miss.

Whether or not he has the ethics and discipline to hold himself to that distance when he's hunting is a different matter altogether, and it's something you simply cannot test... But you'd at least force the guy to be honest with himself about his capabilities in order to pass the shooting test.

I see both sides of the coin. There are some scary individuals out there, ignorant about archery to the point of barely knowing which end of the arrow goes where, dumb as a box of rocks and have absolutely no grasp of the concept of ethics. A profiency test would go a long way to weeding out the bozo crowd.

On the other hand, the whole idea worries me. Put some burro-crat () in charge of writing the rules for a test and the nitwit could easily come up with a test NOBODY could pass. We're better off without them.

hkbwpro111

[/align]that there could be a double edge sword, you start by having a performance based test the next thing you know the test would unfair for the average hunter!