A couple of acquaintances took their pre hunting sons to the bush for opening day. Stayed with their dad's at close proximity and carried no gun. Game warden said it was a no no?
Printable View
A couple of acquaintances took their pre hunting sons to the bush for opening day. Stayed with their dad's at close proximity and carried no gun. Game warden said it was a no no?
Need more info. Were the kid's wearing the appropriate amount of blaze orange, were they active in the hunt ? pushing bush?
Sad!!
I Michigan they welcome the kids to hunt with a mentor or parent as early as 6 years old....
That is one stupid law if true. My first hunts ever when I was about 7 years old out with my dad during the gun hunt. I didn't carry a gun but I can still remember my dad shooting a nice 8 point buck. I think that experience made me the hunter I am today.....
They want new young hunters, But wont let them go out to hunt at a young age?
Need more info. But if it is as you state I would have asked for the ticket and gone to court over that.
I believe it and I bet the CO was in his right too but it's plenty retarded..... He might push the bush with his dad, and some in here will defined that as "poaching", but how are we supposed to get more young into hunting to buy tags and permits to support the MNR if they don't start by pushing the bush (with the appropriate equipment)?!?
I don't know if i understand where you're going with that. The OP said the kids were "pre hunting" which i read/assumed meant too young for the young hunters program.Quote:
Originally Posted by seabast
If they're that young, they shouldn't be pushing the bush at all, with or without "appropriate equipment" (what do you mean by that?).
If your kid is just sitting on watch with you, or walking along with you, no CO is going to care. But if you start using a child as another active body in a hunt... you're in deep doo-doo and should be.
Sorry, I meant that they should at least wear the appropriate amount of blaze orange.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddmott
And as I mentioned before, I understand that the CO is in his right but it doesn't make it right to me, IMO.
What does "close proximity" mean here? Unless they were attached at the hip, the CO would be right. This question was answered by Dave Critchlow, MNRF Enforcement Supervisor in an OOD issue. They can accompany, but take no active part in the hunt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ontdon
Remember, the Liberals has turn Ontario into a nanny state. The kids must hold a hunter apprenticeship safety card.