Hunter Orange 3

I understand that I am on a rant, sucks for you guys lol. No one to talk with about it.


I went through the hunting accidents in Oregon '98-'09 and came up with 68 incidences. 48 were two party events, 14 were fatal. Looking over the reports and making a judgement call, it looks like 3 deaths where no H.O. was worn most likely would have been prevented if H.O. was required. 7 fatal events where no H.O. was worn is debatable if H.O. would have helped. 1 fatal H.O was worn. 3 fatals involved no H.O. but would not have helped.Using an average hunter rate of 210,000 per year (I think this is low) the rate for accidents was .000032 which is significantly lower than the national average and .0000066 for deaths which is slightly higher than the national average of .000005.What is interesting is that 19% of the 48 two party hunting incidents the hunters were wearing hunter orange and were still shot, many times when they were visible to the shooter.


If the stats are telling us anything, it is that bird hunters need to wear flak jackets and helmets! Many bird hunters getting hit, even though they are wearing H.O. I suppose this goes with that territory, one shell produces a lot of opportunity to hit a non-target.It will be interesting to hear the arguments at the commision meeting(Wish I had the time and money to make it there). I guess the question that needs to be asked of the commisioners is, would they support the legislature mandating speed govenors on every vehicle driven in the state of Oregon and the speed is set at 45 mph and every occupant must wear helmets? Why not? It is the same logic they are applying to hunting, that we must understand.I am a little concerned that these so called brush shooters are going to catch a glimpes of H.O., just enough to draw their attention and then shoot at the first movement they see. Really sad reading the reports and the number of people that just shoot at movement. H.O. might make that scenario worse.

There is a big game rifle hunt going on 365 days a year statewide. Also known as "cougar season." There are numerous other rifle hunts taking place for most of the fall, starting in August and going through the end of the year and beyond. Even if they mandate this only for big game rifle hunts, it will be a complete mess.


Ok, i'm done for now.

More on hunter orange.

Did a little research and found a few stats (hard to find for Oregon).Nationally in 2002 the accident rate for hunters ran 52 per million. Fatalities ran 5 per million.Nationally in 2002 the stats for automobiles ran 22,000 accidents per million, 10,000 per million injuries and 150 deaths per million.As far as sports hunting ranked 29th for injuries, cheer leading was 9th.

chuck and grace bartlett

http://chuckandgracebartlett.com/index.html

They are really great at what they do, most are Oregon and a Washington.

December OSP news letter

http://www.oregon.gov/OSP/FW/docs/Newsletter/December2009.pdf

MANDATORY HUNTER ORANGE

The state of Oregon is working on this. I am very against this, it would be for rifle hunters durring rifle season. There are 33 other states that require a certain number of square inchs of hunter orange. This is brought on by the death of a 13 year old boy this last hunting season, he was mistaken for an elk and shot by his uncle. Although this is very sad mandating hunter orange is not the answer. If people would just follow the basic safety rules this could be avoided, like target identification, know your target and what is beyond.
And why would it just be required for rifle hunters? What about bow hunters since bear and cougar season are the same time as bow season and you can hunt them with a rifle? Hikers, Berry pickers, fishermen, basically anyone out of the city limits durring season. I can honestly say that I whear it myself most of the time and it does make me feel safer, but making it the law is stupid, and it singles out people that it shouldn't. The state of Washington requires 40% hunter orange, last year a lady was killed by a a 14 yo kid that should not have been hunting without an adult. She was wearing all black, she was bent over tying her shoe and thought she was a bear. She was not required to wear orange because she was not hunting. If the boy would have identified his target this would not have happened.

So why only hunters?

An average of 1.7 hunters a year are killed a year in Oregon, ODFW say's that if mandating hunter orange will save one life it is worth it, I think that requiring every person to complete a hunter safety class it would be a much better way to make the woods safer.

If they do mandate hunter orange, it needs to be for all people that are out doors out of city limits durring rifle season, private and public land.

I'll accept hunter orange requirements if they also require all upland bird hunters, their dogs, all county, state, and federal employees in the field during hunting seasons, and all non-hunters in the field during hunting seasons to wear it as well!I, as an unethical, uneducated, unsafe rifle hunter (those whom are being singled out) am just as likely to shoot anything(anyone) that moves...not just another hunter packing a rifle.I'll let land owners slide as they have every right to hunt naked on their own land as far as I'm concerned. But if they don't have that right...then I guess all land owners outside their homes, in and around where someone might be hunting should be required to wear it as well.1992-2006 stats show that a good number of the fatal and non-fatal accidents happen with a shotgun (which is close range), and/or happen when the other hunter is "out of sight". Not mistaken for game, but "out of sight". We are talking about 6.4 non-fatal accidents, and 1.7 fatal accidents per year (in Oregon). Throw out 1992, and even much less. Surprisingly, there have been many accidents where the victims were wearing orange or they don't know if they were. If you look at nationwide stats, it's even more surprising.And why shouldn't archers have to wear it? I am an avid archer, obviously, and I know that deer and elk don't see the color spectrum...we can't be hypocrits.You have the choice to wear it now....so wear it if you want! Do you really NEED me to wear it to make YOU a safer hunter? If you can't answer that question, then education is the answer.

If you want to save lives, how about lowering the speed limit on the highway to 45 mph. If it saves one life, (it would save hundreds, actually) it's worth it, right?

New binoculars

I Ordered some since my old ones got stolen out of my truck. I am very exited, they are far from top of the line(money is tight) but better than any I have ever owned. A guy from the company called me today and told me they were back ordered three weeks and he was very sorry and would refund my order if I wished. Well as bad as I want them I told him no problem I was in no hury and would leave my order placed, he thanked me and said they are sending me a nice flashlight for free, SWEET!!

Western Nomad

This is my new blog, it will track my outdoor and hunting interests and adventures through out the year.