Brittany Zebrasky, then 8, poses with an elk taken during a New Mexico hunt in 2003. While Brittany didn't shoot the elk, she could have, as New Mexico is one of seven states with no minimum hunting ages. Brittany, who has also faced a nearly lifelong battle with brain cancer, has gone on to become a poster child for young hunters. This photo was used in support of a recent campaign to lower the hunting age in Wisconsin, where the Zebrasky family lives.



After Wash. accident, msnbc.com review finds lack of age requirements


Just before Tyler Kales was led from a Mount Vernon, Wash., courtroom to begin serving his sentence earlier this month, he apologized to the family of his victim.

“All I want to say is how sorry I am,” the reed-thin 15-year-old said in a quavering voice to relatives of Pamela Almli, 54, who died instantly when Kales mistook her for a bear and shot her in the head Aug. 2, 2008, while hunting in the fog in western Washington's Skagit County.

Kales, convicted by a judge of second-degree manslaughter in June, received 30 days in juvenile detention at his July 10 sentencing.

The case highlighted issues about hunting on public land in Washington that were news to some state residents. First, hunting in close proximity to hikers was perfectly legal. Second, there was no requirement for trailhead signs to warn hikers like Almli that there were hunters in the area.

And while Kales was not old enough to have driven himself to the trailhead, in Washington state there is no minimum age for hunting without adult supervision as Kales, then 14, was doing that day with his 16-year-old brother.

Washington is far from alone in allowing children to hunt with firearms on public lands without adult supervision, an msnbc.com review of state hunting regulations found:

* Seven states — Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Vermont and Washington — set no minimum age for solo hunting.
* In Texas, kids can hunt alone when they are 9.
* In Alaska, Louisiana and Tennessee, the minimum age for unsupervised hunting is 10, in Missouri it’s 11, and in nine other states it’s 12.

That's a total of 21 states in which kids can hunt alone at age 12 or younger. And in 19 of them, young hunters afield by themselves may pursue any game — big or small — that is in season. Laws on hunter education and licensing vary from state to state. And federal laws prohibit anyone under the age of 18 from buying a rifle or shotgun. No one under 21 may buy a handgun.

While low minimum hunting ages in some states and a complete lack of them in others may come as a surprise to non-hunters, they are supported by many members of the hunting community who say that when kids begin hunting, alone or supervised, should be up to their parents.

“I was very surprised” by the lack of a minimum hunting age, said Washington state Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, a Seattle Democrat who hikes often with her husband and their golden retriever on the ubiquitous trails of the Evergreen State. A previous minimum solo hunting age of 14 in Washington was stricken by a 1994 law.

“Right now you could have a 6-year-old get a license and hunt bear,” Kohl-Welles said.

Also amazed was Kales’ defense attorney, Roy Howson, who favors a minimum age of at least 16 for solo hunting and argued that the boy should not have been charged with a crime at all. “Wasn’t this bound to happen at some point?” he asked. “If kids are allowed to hunt, sooner or later you’re likely to have something of this sort happen.”

Working with the Washington Trails Association, a hiker advocacy group, Kohl-Welles introduced a bill to set a minimum age of 16 for solo hunting in the state. The bill was bottled up this year by some lawmakers who wanted the age to be set at 14, but Kohl-Welles said she will push it again next year.

The lack of a minimum unsupervised hunting age is “a gaping hole,” said Jonathan Guzzo, the trails association’s advocacy director. “From our perspective, we viewed it as common sense. If we’re telling people, ‘You can’t drive a car unaccompanied until you’re 16,’ you shouldn’t be going into the woods with a gun until you’re 16.”

Guzzo stressed that his group is not opposed to hunting. “Hunters make huge contributions to public lands statewide and we think they are historical users of the landscape who serve an important purpose,” he said. “But we have more understanding of the limits of the human brain. Young people do not have the judgment that adults have. For the most part, 14-year-olds do not have the judgment that a 16-year-old has.”

On the national level, Guzzo’s comments won support from Jim Kessler, policy director and co-founder of the progressive think-tank Third Way who previously spent four years at Americans for Gun Safety. Both groups seek tighter gun laws but are not opposed to hunting.

“I find it shocking actually that there aren’t laws that prohibit unsupervised hunting by minors,” said Kessler. “For a lot of families, hunting is passing on values from fathers to sons and it’s about responsibility and there are a lot of good lessons there, but it is far too much responsibility to give to a child or a minor teen, far too much responsibility. You need an adult there.”

CONTINUED : Worries about sport's future

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31952727/ns/us_news-life/

I noitce the article failed to mention that, Indiana at least, requires hunters born before Dec. 31, 1986 to complete a hunter safety course and pass a written examination in order to get a hunting license. Kids are just let loose out in the wilds with guns.

Laws on hunter education and licensing vary from state to state.

Having a minimum age requirement is not the cure grace...having a required hunter safety course and firearms training is the answer. I know ten and 11 year old kids who are very careful and proficient with guns. I know a particular 50+ year old that I refuse to hunt with because he is flat out dangerous. I do not agree with sending a 5-6 year old out alone with a gun, but every kid IS different. And think about this.....a 16 year old kid is safer in the woods with a gun than on the street in a car, yet we send em out every day driving.

Heh, my bad.....must been the small font :-)

I think kids would be more apt to have accidents or be prone to violence [outside of hunting] if trained to use guns at a young age. Their brains aren't fully matured/developed.


Case in point:
A startling case in St. Johns, Arizona in late October involved an eight-year-old boy who shot his father with a rifle. This was the same kind of rifle his father had used to teach the boy to hunt. The youth had a good record in school, and there had been no report of any abuse of the child nor of any conflict between the father and child. Yet the authorities determined that there was premeditation and planning in the killing of the father.

If this kid wasn't around guns, his father would probably still be alive today wouldn't you agree?


The International Hunter Education Association even agrees hunting accident stats will rise if hunting age limits are lowered. They said that risks are high teaching violence to children and will cause problems because when children are around guns there's a greater risk for an accident. And there are many deaths that involve a parent killing a child, or a child a parent. Children should not be exposed to violence because they don't have the adult cognitive skills to manage their feelings and may resort to using a gun in circumstances where a adult would not.

Now I don't know what their definition of "children" is, but I'd guess under 13, although mine would be under 16 as it pertains to hunting and guns.


http://www.ihea.com/

Grace, a fucked up in the head kid is gonna be that way regardless of guns being around or not. The kid in your story would have killed his dad with or without the gun. It was premeditated, meaning a knife or a baseball bat could have as easily been used. And hunting does NOT Teach kids violence , it teaches them HUNTING and gun safety etc. It also teaches them that there are REAL consequences to gun fire. I agree that little kids have NO BUSINESS WITH GUNS UNSUPERVISED, but both of my boys have hunted with me AND CARRIED GUNS when they were very young ( 10-12) . As I said the individual kid is far more relevant than the kids age.

I know I was carrying a rifle in the field by the time I was 12, my brother as well.

But then, we were raised with firearms.

I'm guessing but I would think that if you used experience and training vs age alone; one would find the level of training has a bigger effect then age.

Some are ready to handle a firearm very early; some should never be allowed anywhere near them. You can't tell by age alone.

Impressive elk, too.

When it was alive you mean.

Probably be a lot harder to get it onto a plate, though.

grace, how can you say that and not think the same of the seafood you eat? I am not jumping on you or trolling for an argument I am serious....why is killing the elk not a good thing to do but killing a shrimp is? How do you justify the differing values you place on each one? How do you determine which is worthy of your anger and which is worthy of cocktail sauce? Please no flippant answers either, I am serious.

When did you ever hear someone say, while looking at a dead shrimp -

"Impressive shrimp, too"

Kind of irrelevant to the question don't you think? I am not trying to pick on you but you kind of remind me of a woman I ran into once. I was in the process of writing up a substantial order. She was eating a roast beef sandwich and I asked her husband if he hunted...She started screaming at me that I was a murderer, refused to allow me to complete the order and asked me to leave her home......all the while she had the sandwich in her hand ( true story I swear) her husband walked to the van with me apologizing the whole way saying he used to hunt every day he could until he married her.....I think he was a dumb ass myself lol. How could THAT lady justify her sandwich yet condemn me?

OHIOSTEVE


Not at all. I don't find dead animals worthy of compliments. I don't think an animal lying there dead is impressive. I believe the animal in life is impressive. It really wasn't a dig against hunting. Unless I did it subconsciously. My point was I don't find anything impressive about the dead. Could you walk up to a casket and say, Impressive looking man? Of course not. And you might find that a crazy analogy, but that's how I feel about finding beauty or worthiness in something lying there dead. If a horse got hit by a car and was lying there in the street bleeding and dead, and someone said "impressive horse"...don't you find that odd? Just because a hunter shot the elk, doesn't make the dead animal more impressive than one hit by a car by any means.

Impressive shrimp!!

LOL. Leave it to you.

Grace ,,, a case against your point . >>> i killed my first squirrel at five with a shot gun , killed my first deer's at 15 with shotguns and high powered rifles . i've never killed any body . i was shooting hand guns at 12 ,course i got my first pellet pistol at five .

last time i check i think there were a total hunting accidents { not deaths } in one year were around 90 that was for US and Canda.

I'm certified as a hunter education instructor here in Colorado, and I teach, oh, about 3 classes a year. Speaking from my own experience, most young people that come to the course are serious about learning and learning how to hunt safely and ethically, and getting their card for passing, which is required to purchase any hunting license. Every once in a while, you get a "bad apple", but they are the exception rather than the rule. And they can be weeded out.
We have a minimum hunting age law in our state, and I would be opposed to raising it. Here, you have to be 10 to hunt small game, upland birds, and waterfowl, and 12 to hunt big game. We don't have a high accident rate here, so raising the minimum age is, in my view, unnecessary. Like Frankie, and others here, I started hunting very young, before their was any minimum age. I started hunting ducks with my dad and grandfather, both avid waterfowl hunters, when I was 8. I killed by first deer at 12 and my first elk at 15. I have never had any accident, close call, or been cited for any violation.
I think the International Hunter Education Association's position on this is misguided. In my view, many attempts to raise minimum hunting ages are nothing more than a cynical attempt by anti-hunters to further erode hunting. They know very well that hunting is an activity that must be started at a fairly young age if it is to become a life-long pastime. There is a reason, after all, that HSUS supports high minimum hunting ages. And we're not naive enough to think it has anything to do with safety.

Why the hell would he marry her if she hated hunting? What a douche bag. What she is demonstrating is the exact same sanctimonious hypocrisy we see from vegans who criticize meat eating, when their diet also causes animal deaths in crop agriculture. The hypocrisy boggles the mind.

Elk are always impressive animals, alive or dead. I've got the head mount of a 7x7 bull that I took several years ago over my fireplace and it always gets a "wow!" response from people who haven't seen it before. You'd hate our house, Grace. My wife and I are both avid anglers and hunters and we have stuffed dead critters all over the place.

thats what I couldnt figure out UNLESS she was like a few women I know. Act like they are really into whatever it is you are doing UNTIL they get an I DO and half of everything. I know a couple of guys who married those types. I am very lucky. My wife cant do the walking required for the hunting I do ( accident years back shattered her knee) But she LOVES the roosters and would always help with everything when I was active in it. Likes hunting when she has been, and tells everyone that she knew what I was into before we got married, and there is no sense in trying to change that now.

Grizzly

Edited by Grace.

I agree!!


Grizzly

No, you misunderstood them. They actually said OW. What the hell else they gonna say when they bump their head on it?


Grizzly

I really would. I never will understand why hunters want to stuff the dead animal and display it. It's a bit macabre.

That is impressive. Much more impressive than the shrimp.

Yeah, very cute kid.

Because it looks better than cheap art from Target, Grace. Seriously, there are several reasons. First, the mount may be sentimental; a lasting reminder of a particularly fond hunting or fishing trip with family or friends. Second, because the specimen may be exceptionally large or unusual ( i.e. a non-typical antlers ); a true trophy specimen. Third, because it may be the culmination of a lot of hard work on the part of the hunter or angler. A hunter may chase the same elusive buck for several seasons or a fisherman may work the same lake or stream year after year in search of a trophy. Fourth, because it brings a bit of nature and the great outdoors into the home. Or it can be all of the above.
Also, taxidermy is an art form. It takes skill, creative ability, and an eye for aesthetics on the part of the taxidermist. Like any art form, it will not be appreciated nor understood by everyone. Everybody has their own tastes.

BTW, if it is "macabre" to take the skin of a dead animal, stuff it, and hang it on wall, is it also "macabre" to take the skin of a dead animal, turn it into shoes, and wear it on your feet?

Got a hell of a lot more meat on it, too.

I'm very lucky, too. My wife is Native American and comes from a family of die-hard hunters. She enjoys hunting and fishing about as much as I do. She ain't afraid to get her hands dirty. I like that.

Grizzly

This is what group shot photographs are for, nicely framed on the wall.


Grizzly

See, this is so wrong. A hunter happening upon a large buck or rack (or vice versa) is oftentimes chance. Shooting it is no different than shooting a scrawny one. No special skills are required. It's the same woods, same hunter, same stand, same gun, same day. So you're bragging on luck. It's like you guys use those antlers as an extension of your penis. Pounding your puffed out chest BIG MAN SHOT BIG BUCK! Course you guys would never admit that as you're in serious denial.


Grizzly

That's possible sure. Trailing the same buck so you can shoot it and tell all your friends, maybe get your picture in the local paper. Braggarts. But again, I don't find any special skill involved. You just try a little harder and walk a little longer. Or sit and freeze a little longer.


Grizzly

So do picture windows. Or potted plants, a vase of flower, photographs.. I don't find dead animal mounts natural by any means.


Grizzly

Can't argue that.


Grizzly

No. Unless they leave the eyes, head, tail, feet sticking out of the soles.

Sorry, Grace, your view of hunting skills is way off-base.
Hunting is much more then just walking and shooting.

You should watch native african hunt-guides at work. I watched a video of guides telling where a african bufalow was hiding in some brush by looking up into the trees! Why? The 'tick-birds' that ride along on the 'loe' sometimes fly up into the trees to try to act as 'scouts' for the buffalow.

Griz can probably tell you more then me, but elk can be dang difficult to outsmart. And play around while hunting a kodiak bear and you could get mauled(They will circle and flank their trackers) You have to be able to spot when a kodiak is trying to turn the tables.

Decide to just go prancing thru the woods after deer; my personal experience is your get nothing. Deer hearing and sense of smell is so amazing, you learn to respect them....and outthink them.

Grace; you have to learn to think like a predator to be a good hunter. That's a skill in itself: many hunters never quite get the hang of it.

Iowa

It sounds like shopping.

Grace, you are so far off base it isn't funny. I spent days in a stand this past winter and got ONE opportunity for a shot. I understand that you don't like it but you are allowing your bias to make your statements sound ridiculous.

I find it utterly remarkable that someone who is not even a bystander to an activity can be so keenly aware of which skills are and aren’t brought to bear in its performance.


I wonder if Grace has considered the case of turkey hunting. Where my standard operating procedure is to announce my location by calling to a bird, communicating with it and cajoling it into close range (30 yards max). Or perhaps my calling to it and its arrival shortly thereafter is simply a matter of coincidental luck, I don’t suppose there can be any skill or woodcraft involved.

Irony.

So today I had an offsite meeting to tour a unique venue location for a charity gala this fall. The venue was beautiful overall, outdoor gardens, waterfalls, large pond, fountains. Inside was also impressive, like a gentleman's upscale lodge, huge library, wine room, palm trees, natural fiber rugs, fireplaces, 40' long natural carved wood varnished tables, not banquety at all. Enter the Safari Room. OH MY Effing GOD!!!!! I was stopped in my tracks. The 5000 sq ft (guessing) room was completely wallpapered in dead stuffed animals. The ceiling even had geese, ducks, various fowl suspended in simulated flight from fishing wire. There were various skins thrown about, heads, stuffed snakes coming down a fake tree, a full grown like 10 pt. buck, 3 full grown lions, one on the back of some antelope, cheetahs, a leapord attacking the hind quarters of a wildebeast, elk, doe, reindeer, water buffalo, buffalo, wolves, black bear attacking a coyote, doe, fox ripping into a pheasant's chest, mountain goats, an array of species of antelopes too many to name must have been about 40 horned antelope type animals on that wall alone, moose, ducks, owl, bob cats, lynx, cougars, coyote carrying what looked to be a day old deer in its mouth, key deer, fox....

I asked the events person where these animals came from?? She said the owner and his friends are avid hunters, and a lot of these just weren't allowed in their living rooms. I have a hard time believing 1 man and his friends (unless he's got 100 friends) killed all these animals. I now know what Over Kill really means. I told her it was a bit disturbing and she agreed that when she first started there it was, but now she's used to it. She also understands some people (sponsors who are donating from $5000 to $50,000 for a table) might find it upsetting if they're vegan or AR. It's something to consider. Seriously. If it was just a couple heads, ok, but this was beyond the beyonds. I'm not so sure we'll use them. I took some pictures from my phone but have to load them. Maybe tomorrow.

Grace ,,, i've killed over 500 whitetails and never left Alabama .

Then you missed my history. I grew up in a hunting county. PA. Mountains, Luzerne County. In the fall, walking home from school it was commonplace to see deer hanging splayed open from swing sets, or towed on the back of a truck bed or car trunk. I had relatives who hunted, but moreso, several long term boyfriends. It was what they did, what their fathers and grandads did. I hunted. I killed an animal. I've seen animals killed. I've tracked wounded deer with hunters. So I'm not totally in the dark.

I was remembering this:
http://www.ethicdiscussion.com/discuss/ind...st&p=159122
Though plenty of it jives. And I see now that I look that at it again that least some of it is a joke.

Still, your impression of your friends, relatives and beaus was that they we're traipsing haplessly through the woods and that their success was mostly -- if not pure -- happenstance? If so, I wonder if they agree.


I'll freely admit that I've had plenty of instances of what I'd call "luck" in the woods. But at the same time, I doubt that those would have happened without some degree of woodcraft -- excessive noise, unaware of my surrounding, etc. More often, success is the result of scouting, reading game signs, knowing the lay of the land and the habits and traits of the game being pursued, in addition to plain tenacity. And specifically, while turkey hunting, success is usually a result of a vocal conversation and pure guile. While I'd call myself lucky every time I killed a turkey, that this was accomplished without any degree of skill, as you intimated, doesn't hold much water -- pardon my hubris.

BTW, I ought to add that bringing turkeys into this was my doing and was meant as a specific rebuttal to a general characterization. Over the years I've spent plenty of time afield in pursuit of a myriad of game. But I'm focusing on turkeys because the inherent interaction (usually*) is the best example that I can think of that refutes Grace's apparent claim that skill and knowledge aren't a factor in successful hunting.

*Every now and again I'll accidentally stagger onto a gang of turkeys in the fall and blast one out of the sky. And while this is extreemly "lucky", I'd say an impromptu wingshot like that is a skill unto itself as well. Still, calling those bastards back once you've staggered onto them and scattered them in every direction is where it's at.

Since you mention it, Iowa, I'll expound a little on what elk hunting is about for those who have never done it. They can then decide for themselves if it is just walking into the woods and getting lucky as the ill-informed Grace seems to imply, or if it is a challenge of skills and stamina. First off,hunting elk is extremely hard work. If you want to be a good elk hunter, you'd better be a good hiker, because you'll be doing lots of it, in rugged, mountainous terrain, at altitude, and in all kinds of weather. This is no casual stroll in the woods. It requires a lot of physical exertion. It is not uncommon to hike several miles in a day to find a herd. If you do bag one, your work starts all over again as it has to be gutted, and then quartered, as an elk can weigh between 600-800lbs. The meat then has to be packed out. Being a proficient field dresser requires effort and skill.
If you are going to be successful frequently, you are going to have to learn to call using a bull bugle and a cow grunt. Just like calling ducks or turkeys, calling elk is a skill that takes time to get good at. As any hunter knows, simply blowing into a call without knowing what you're doing doesn't cut it. Like other forms of hunting, it also requires marksmanship, also a skill. Hunting elk often requires longer shots than in other types of hunting. 200-yard cross-canyon shots are not uncommon. Making a shot like this requires skill, especially when you consider that your heart is usually racing when you take it, and that elk hunting often involves shooting hard-kicking, magnum caliber rifles. Try doing it in less-than-ideal circumstances such as in snow, or in the last rays of dusk ( both common ) and it requires even more skill. As XXmag pointed out, scouting is crucial to a successful hunt, and hunting elk is no exception. Scouting is also a skill. A good hunt scout knows exactly the kinds of habitat, cover, sign, movement corridors, food/water sources, etc. that he/she is looking for that could reveal a choice spot. A good hunter knows the land well. This kind of knowledge is not luck. It comes from experience, reading/research, and gathering and utilizing knowledge from other hunters.

And yeah, they can be tough to outsmart. Not as tough as turkeys though, in my experience.

And BTW Grace, concerning your bizarre little tangent into the realm of male genitalia, I assume you'll be providing ample scientific facts to prove this assertion? I'll be waiting on the edge of my seat.

true luck happens but it won't fill the freezer

Grizzly


Scientific facts? I said it's like you guys use those antlers..strictly an opinion.

So do you always form opinions without checking to see if they mesh with facts and reason? Your reasoning has all the depth of the kids' end of the swimming pool, Grace. I'll rephrase the question and give you another chance. What FACTS and evidence do you base your opinion on Grace? Or is it just an ignorant opinion that has no support?

What is your bag limit there, Frankie? Here, we're limited to purchasing only one deer tag and one elk tag a year, which kind of sucks. I may have to head down there one of these years. Living in CO all my life, where we predominately have mule deer, I've never bagged a whitetail, but want to sometime.

it has changed over the years from one buck a day , no does . then slowly the counties started having does days until all had them , buck limit the same we went to two a day , one buck and one doe or two does. now we can only kill three antlered deer a season all season combined ( gun season , bow season , black power ) season one must be a 8 point or better . the limits per day is two a day ( all seasons) one buck and one doe or two does .

all seasons combined run from Oct. 15 till Jan 31 . you can bow/cross bow hunt that entire time , gun season start about the third Saturday of Nov. and runs till Jan. 31

i don't want to seem as though i'm bragging but that number is no were near average for hunters here . spending a lot of time in the woods and not missing helped . knowing deer helps too . been a whole lot ah times i would shoot a doe from a group only to sit there and wait and one of the group would come back . or i would just kill two .

lol ,,, one place i hunted for years , the coyotes learned that a shot meant a gut pile . they would slip in after they thought the hunter was gone . bad for them i learned what they were up to by waiting .

Geez it's a pretty common analogy and overused phrase when a guy buys a muscle car and people say it's an extenstion of his manhood, an old guy buys a vet he's having a mid life crisis. Where's the scientific facts and evidence to support that?? Did I hit a nerve, Grizz?

Let's see. First it was "your opinion". Now, it is just an "overused phrase". Move the goalposts much when you're backed into a corner, Grace?

Phrases employed as opinions are some revelation? Do people recite phrases without any reference to what the phrase pertains to? Like their opinion? Touchdown!!!

You still have to make the point after, Grace.

My point was made when I made the statement. I don't have to prove it.