Read on the WEAU website that 10 licenses were sold to "hunters" under 1 year old this season.
Unethical parents exploiting the law for a $5 tag. This was not the intent of removing the age restriction. Luckily, the youngest reported harvest was by a 4 year old.
The other ignored reason, and I think the most important, is access to hunting land. That is why so many people have quit the sport. When I was a kid, I could literally walk to land to hunt from my house. Now, private landowners will go so far as to threaten a kid who would wander onto their land to even hunt squirrels. In addition, thousands of acres of FCL have been replaced with MFL-C parcels. What is left for accessible land has become concentrated with regular Joe's who can't afford their own land. If accessible land was equal to what it was back in the 1960s-1980s, I genuinely feel we wouldn't be talking about such drastic hunting license purchasers.
Starting to hunt at age 8 or 12 doesn't really seem to make any difference.
JC - in today's society, you're more right than wrong. Kids today get sucked in by electronic babysitters at an early age. When I was a kid (back in the early 70s) it was tinker toys or go fishing. We fished because tinker toys weren't much fun.
Geography plays a lot into it. Country kids are much more likely to become fishermen/hunters. My son is turning 8. I have to bribe him to go fishing with me. Just moved out of Eau Claire into the country last spring, hope I did it in time. Yesterday we took a walk in our woods, found a bear? den and he identified deer and rabbit tracks. He said "I didn't know we had so many trees to climb. It makes me glad we moved."
I think decreasing the age limit will have a small impact on hunter recruitment, but an impact nonetheless.
This is an emotional issue (for some anyway). No amount of rational thought, reasoned arguments, common sense, or fact will sway someone from an opinion they arrived at through emotion. In fact, I believe the opposite is more likely to happen - the more facts presented to counter such an opinion, the stronger the emotional person will hold to their belief.
Or in another way of speaking, "Thank you for the well thought out, rational response to my convictions. You have shown me the light and I have changed my mind based on your input - said no one on Lake-Link - ever."
Agree to disagree. I don't see what benefit it gives the State to get rid of the rule that only one gun is allowed between a mentor and a kid. The only benefit, at all, is that they were able to generate a bit more revenue (by removing the minimum hunting age) by expanding the potential client list who will potentially purchase licenses. It will NOT make a difference in retaining hunters. How many nonhunters would say that if they could have started hunting at age 6 instead of age 12 they would be hunting today?
I will gladly call in people I see having their kid partake in a deer drive by themself, gun in hand, but very hard to catch them. No backtag makes it nearly impossible unless you can catch the crew coming out of the woods and getting in their cars. Talk about a bad situation that could occur....
Your not understanding me clearly. I don't trust either. 7,8,9,10,11,or 12! This is why I'm arguing for the mentor ship program. If the rules are followed BFD! Your point is solely based on hear say and violations. If age 12 is so ready to go and so mature I'm surprised uncle sam isn't recruiting them for the armed forces. Kid is a kid. I'm sure if we searched we would find some 7yr old way ahead of a 12 yr old. Its foolish. The mentor ship is a great thing if the rules are followed. Your point is understandable. Its like saying everyone that voted for Trump falls into the basket of deplorable's. Its a inaccurately wide cast statement. Everyone is going to break the law?
Yep, they are morons for violating the rule. But again, to say a 7 year old is as mature as a 12 year old is inaccurate. I would rather have the same kid at 12 walking alone with a gun than the same kid at 7 years old. The brain is usually not even fully developed until age 11-12, and quits emotional development as late as 25 from some of my old pysch classes. These morons are sending their kid out alone with a gun with a partially developed brain. I would argue these "mentors" don't have a fully developed brain for letting their kid partake this way. Enough said.
Wisconsin was not overly liberal whatsoever in regards to hunting and kids. Here is a link (a bit outdated, but useful):
https://gothunts.com/hunting-age-requirements/
I know it is the minority of people doing this. But if you rifle hunt public land north of Highway 64, don't be surprised to see kids walking alone between adults on a deer drive. I would recommend to steer clear of that.
I'm all for it. Change it to 1 gun. Not that big of a deal. What your arguing about, this 7yr old carrying a gun all on his own is a violation of the mentor program. Can't you let that go? Someone broke the law, it happens every day JC. Are you gonna start complaining about everything? Maybe you feel guilty "or that person you know that knew.'' about seeing a violation and doing nothing? If your pissed about the only 2 wardens in your entire county not being there for your every call at a moments notice, that is a different story. Bottom line is it get kids involved! If you think a 12 year old can go out into the woods all on their after some couple a week hunter safety course and be fine your dead wrong!! Even at 12 they have minimal life experience to be safe. There is nothing you can say to rebuttal that. Oh 7 to 12 is so much more mature, no its still a kid. By the time my boy is 12 and goes threw hunter safety he will have already learned a large portion of it, making it easier to retain the information. Don't be so blinded by a morons violation.
"Wisconsin is still pretty much a liberal state and the people always fear change. Just like when conceal carry passed. After a year with this rule change, people will see everything is ok and the sky is not falling. "
You are right, and I am a proponent of concealed carry. You have to be 21 years old, not convicted of a felony, not charged with domestic violence, have a hunter's safety certificate or other hands-on training, and not have psychological deficiencies or other mental health disorders. Putting weapons on mentally stable law abiding adults makes sense. Another example of restrictions/rules that are put in place to protect the public.
Putting weapons in the hands of 7 year olds, and on top of that some idiot parents letting them walk alone on a deer drive since they now can each carry a gun....can you explain the vetting process for the child, and the vetting process for their "mentor?" Perhaps we should give us more freedom and let 7 year old kids practice concealed carry.
Exactly Madforlabs, yet we keep putting these people in office. I've heard this song and dance so many times. Republicans point at Democrats, Democrats point at Republicans, its a flipping merry go round. Welfare, Immigration, Homeland Security are way more important than how old a kid should be to hunt. But I'm glad your so focused on this.
EXACTLY Brad! The process of creating fish and game laws transparently via a process that incudes debate and consensus is all but gone. Replaced by politicians slipping law changes through with no public involvement. THAT is a huge issue. This is but one of many examples in recent years.
