CORE Course - what would you change?

[mike-juliet]

Like the title says, what would you do differently if YOU were the CORE instructor? I'm not asking only the few that I personally have had in my classes. So if you remember your course no matter who/where it was taken lets here your suggestions! I'm confident in my abilities as an instructor, but there is always room for improvement and that is what I strive for.

[Sitkaspruce]

When I was a instructor, it was mandatory to teach a min. of 21 hours. I would teach 3 hours a night on each subject, one night of review and questions and another night for the exam. Would like to see that brought back.

My wife did the CORE 3 years ago and she was down in 6 hours, start to finish. They only taught her what was on the exam....everyone passed....... 9 people took it, they charged $105/person plus book. Not a bad wage for one days work. I called the BCWF and they were not interested in what I had to say as they left it up to the instructors on how they want to teach it. That explained why we see new hunters who don't have much of a clue on what to do in the bush, ID of animals and understanding the regulations. CORE has now become a money making system as there is no checks and balances on instructors....at least that is my experience.

Would like to see more about conservation and what the HCTF does, more about how important habitat and creating more habitat does, ecosystems and wildlife dynamics, how predators play a role in wildlife mgmt. and how social media is creating myths about hunters and hunting.

Just some thoughts

Cheers

SS

[J_T]

Yup. More content. More time to ensure the information is consumed. Take it outside for a full day of skill development. Shooting, tracking, define hunting styles and ethics.

[Gateholio]

One thing I've found is that our regs are confusing. Well, we all know this. :)

But to a beginner they are baffling. So I do a few " hunt plans" where we pick a Region MU and an animal and go through any restrictions, legal antler configurations, sesson dates, legal weapons, and everything else that is part of the regulations that apply. I'm still a pretty new instructor but I'm learning with every course.

i find that students are most interested when we "get away" from the manual and get into stories and discussion of manual topics, if that makes sense.

I also try to tailor the content to the students if possible. Around here many people are very outdoors qualified, with wilderness guide, first aid, survival, Avalanche etc. courses under their belts. It's somewhat pointless to spend time on the survival chapter with guys like this, time is better spent on hunting topics. :)

[Mik]

I know this is not an answer to your question, but; What do you think of the new huntercoarse.com CORE coarse? And how is that now going to effect you ?

[dakoda62]

Definitely more time in the classroom. My core back many years ago was Fri night & full days on Sat. Sun. There was also an optional range afternoon the following weekend.

[mike-juliet]

I know this is not an answer to your question, but; What do you think of the new huntercoarse.com CORE coarse? And how is that now going to effect you ?

Although I still don't like the idea, however there isn't much of a difference between buying the manual to read and doing the online course as you need to see an examiner to challenge both of the tests. It actually works out to be cheaper to take the full course for $140 where I am.

The main concern myself and a few others have is not the financial impact, i could give a rats ass about that. Its how many uninformed people will be in the bush now, more so than we already have.

I do the course in about 14 hours, Mon-Thurs Nights. I spent about 2 hours going through the regs cover to cover since this can be a very confusing and intimidating book for those that have never used it before. Monday I cover the book, although I usually cover Animal/Big Game ID a different night as opposed to rushing through it Monday to fit it in. I'd love to add more practical instruction but it would be extremely difficult to effectively do inside the classroom. The First Aid/Survival Chapter is almost a joke, Its impossible to absorb anything to the point of being beneficial out of that chapter with the time given to teach it which is a shame. I encourage everyone to take a first aid course and ask who already has one during the class, usually 40-70% of students do.

[caddisguy]

I'd change the test a little. I vaguely recall some questions being poorly written and for someone who takes things very literally I had to choose between the answer that was technically correct versus the answer they were looking for. Some seemed like matter of opinion as well. And questions about what year certain regulations came into affect are kind of useless. Not a fan of duck or mouse ID questions either. More deer id, lawful versus unlawful questions would make good replacements.

Also wish you could get all your docs in one swoop... send test results to BCWF and recieve CORE cert and Hunter Number.

In regards to the course, it's a bummer to hear some instructors are just covering the bare minimum (answers to the questions) ... not sure what to do about that? It would be great if everyone had to read the entire core textbook. I read it multiple times and think I got a lot more out of it than those who just take a day course.

[Wagonmaster]

Sounds like as in every other endeavour, there are variations in the quality of the product delivered. I thought there would be a standard protocol on what is presented both in content and time involved. After reading Sitkaspruce's post, I guess that is not the case. I attempted to enrol my grandson in a Core course in the day before the course was to be given here in Victoria. The instructor advised me that my grandson needed more time to prepare and suggested he take the next course a month later. He also said that people do occasionally fail. Seemed to me that this instructor was dedicated to doing a good job and was very enthused. I went away feeling that my grandson was eventually going to spend two very valuable days learning about hunting.

[adriaticum]

I think CORE has to be more about hunting ethics and procedures, then about animal ID. For new hunters the best thing is actually the New hunter workshop weekend.
BCWF should provide all Fish and Game clubs with large posters of all species animals in BC and clubs should have a room with them all laid out.
I would even go as far as to suggest life sized mounts of most/all species would be even better.
Imagine a new hunter walking into a room full of animal mounts and going over all the species.
I guarantee you they would remember it much better.
I can't believe we don't have a Wildlife Museum here in BC. (not that I'm aware of one).
If we did, I think it would do well and a visit with an experienced hunter could be part of the class.
Observing life sized mounts in a museum and going over how to recognize each one and what can be legally harvested in terms of curls, horns, antlers etc.

CORE should mandate that every hunter is a member of the BCWF and a BC gun club.
Strong gun clubs and the Federation benefit the sport.

[brian]

The First Aid/Survival Chapter is almost a joke, Its impossible to absorb anything to the point of being beneficial out of that chapter with the time given to teach it which is a shame.
I totally agree which was going to be my main response. I would say take CORE out of the class room and spend a bit of time learning some very simple skills that can save your life like basic fire starting or basic map and compass use.

On the other hand devoting a lot of classroom time to animal ID for animals most people won't hunt is a waste of valuble classroom hours. There should be an emphasis on properly IDing your target this includes the animals you plan on hunting, but we don't need entire sections on the subject of IDing all of BC's commonly hunted animals. This is another area where field experience really trumps classroom time. After the CORE I could ID different deer by paper description but not by sight. It took a season of hunting before I could properly ID them in the field. So I would devote less time and energy on animal ID and more time to making hunters safe.

[Gateholio]

The animal ID and biology is either important (mule vs WT deer) or utterly unimportant to a new hunter. Do new hunters really care that a grouse is a gallinaceous bird ? :)

[GoatGuy]

Focused on animal identification and gun safety.

Used a bunch of pictures for counting points/id differences between wt and mulw deer.

Also a bit on how to hunt..... which is not covered at all in the text.

Lots of gun handling. Did a couple hours every class. Used to run 3 weekends.

[Twogunns]

I totally agree which was going to be my main response. I would say take CORE out of the class room and spend a bit of time learning some very simple skills that can save your life like basic fire starting or basic map and compass use.

On the other hand devoting a lot of classroom time to animal ID for animals most people won't hunt is a waste of valuble classroom hours. There should be an emphasis on properly IDing your target this includes the animals you plan on hunting, but we don't need entire sections on the subject of IDing all of BC's commonly hunted animals. This is another area where field experience really trumps classroom time. After the CORE I could ID different deer by paper description but not by sight. It took a season of hunting before I could properly ID them in the field. So I would devote less time and energy on animal ID and more time to making hunters safe.
I disagree. This is a conservation course, Not scouts., and not a first aid course. Teach methods of hunting, field dressing, and skinning. Tell hunting stories that relate to ethics, and teach about conservation, where our money goes, and sustainability.. Have a variety of mounts for the students to see, and by the end of the course you will have an excited new hunter, that is eager to learn more loaded with the basics to get started.

[ajeatoo]

I agree with I think it was caddisguy who posted earlier about the examination questions. Some of them are so poorly written I had debate back and forth between what seems like an obvious answer vs the one they wanted. When in actual fact there were two correct answers for many of the questions asked just simply by their poor wording.

Same goes for the PAL course, I remember one question in particular: Should you report it to the government if you are no longer in possession of an unrestricted firearm? It was a yes or no answer. Well... Gee unrestricted means the government doesn't know I have it to begin with, why would I tell them if I no longer posess it? If it fell overboard off my boat why on earth would I tell the government?? However the answer was Yes because they are assuming it was stolen. No where in the question does it hint at stolen... Seems like the government dumbed down the wording so much they lost the point of the questions to begin with.

Also so as to the number of hours to complete the courses, make it more mandatory in some way so there isn't so much variation ie: if it requires 21 hrs, they make that the legal requirement not a suggestion and don't allow people to challenge the exam. You can't have instructors telling people the course they took was illegal if it was done in less than 21 hours if it is not a requirement!

[finngun]

Somehow i like to include shooting practice with hunting course...shotgun wing shooting (clays) easy kind at least and rifle..maybe 22...target shooting..i know some people dont like it..cost or etc. But practice with live animals is not very humane thing anyways..:idea:

[Beachcomber]

I would spend some time putting hunting in the context of BC's history and heritage. I would discuss some of the controversies around the sport such as the grizzly hunt, the recent fakre up around GOABC. I would also touch on First Nations and how their rights and ours differ. I would highlight hunter contributions to conservation, where licence revenues go (and where they should go).

[Sitkaspruce]

For the guys who want the shooting, unless it has changed since I taught it, you will need very expensive insurance and the guns to use. BCWF will not help you there, although maybe the local club would if you are member.

I agree with the first aid training, I used to touch base with it and teach some basic stuff, but mainly encouraged students to attend a wilderness or level one FA course.

Some great ideas here!!

Cheers

SS

[Omenator]

I didn't take any courses, challenged all my tests, CORE, PAL and RPAL. As such, can't say much about the instructors as I just read the books, which were good if you read the whole thing, which I did.
For a new hunter I would cover safe gun handling thoroughly, hunting ethics and laws. I would also focus on the laws wrt firearms use and transport, hopefully that would cut down on the idots shooting in unsafe spots, but that's unlikely.
I think a slideshow/movie for animal identification would be great, do it for the animals that are easily confused ex. whitetail and muledeer, different grouse and duck species, ect.
Would be great to be able to show new hunters that hunting is not at all like it is on the hunting shows, real hunting is 99% waiting with 1% excitement, it's not fishing!

[brian]

I disagree. This is a conservation course, Not scouts., and not a first aid course. Teach methods of hunting, field dressing, and skinning.

The purpose of licensing hunters is to try and ensure that they are both lawful and safe hunters. It is an attempt to reduce hunting accidents. So I would focus on teaching the skills that enable new hunters to be lawful, safe, and ethical hunters. That is where the government mandate should end as far as I am concerned. I do not think it should be a "how to hunt" course, that should be outside the purview of government licensing requirements. So no I am not talking about Ray Mears boy scout shit, I am talking about a few simple skills that can keep people alive if they get lost or stranded while out there.

[sed8ed]

I don't know if this is included in the current course (did mine too long ago to remember) but there needs to be a focus on what to do after you pull the trigger. I was lucky enough to have my dad to show me what to do... but when I dropped my first deer I remember thinking *now what*

Twice I have had to walk new hunters through the steps... one of which, my neighbours kid brought the whole, ungutted deer home and came knocking on our door at 10pm asking for help... lucky it was a small spiker

[Foxtail]

I don't know if this is included in the current course (did mine too long ago to remember) but there needs to be a focus on what to do after you pull the trigger. I was lucky enough to have my dad to show me what to do... but when I dropped my first deer I remember thinking *now what*

Twice I have had to walk new hunters through the steps... one of which, my neighbours kid brought the whole, ungutted deer home and came knocking on our door at 10pm asking for help... lucky it was a small spiker

This is what I was just going to say. Most new hunters have no idea how ro gut, skin, or quarter an animal... The different methods and how to best not spoil the meat. This is or atleast it should be the main reason for hunting. Shot placement aswell.

[jeff341]

Totally agree. After the shot is some of the most important yet dumbfounding steps for new hunters (myself included).

Unfortunately the core course I took was brief.....and basically covered answers only.

I think ink a couple of well done documentary style videos with personal instruction of how to handle and field dress game would be great.

Also, more. Time on compass instruction. Getting lost is a real concern.....GPS's are only as good as the batteries.

Living here on the wetter coast.....fire starting skills would be good to.

[Island Idiots]

Focused on animal identification and gun safety.

Used a bunch of pictures for counting points/id differences between wt and mulw deer.

Also a bit on how to hunt..... which is not covered at all in the text.

Lots of gun handling. Did a couple hours every class. Used to run 3 weekends.

I agree with you. I was an instructor in the past and my partner and I always expressed that no one died because they didn't know one duck from another. Game animal ID is important, but there is material in the book that should be considered extra reading, and not be taught in place of other important stuff like gun safety. We had lots of disabled firearms and the students got to handle them and the dud ammo during all the breaks and lunch etc.

Unfortunatly there is insurance issues when it came to doing live fire, which was too bad because I think live range training should be taught.

[Phreddy]

I've found that by tailoring the schedule to the groups needs really helps. I intentionally give my groups and extra session or two if they need it, and keep my groups down to around 5 or 6 participants so there is lots of time for firearm handling throughout the course. I also offer the opportunity for those with learning disabilities to have some one on one time. Relating experiences, good and bad, also plays a large part in the program. I hunt in the same bush they're going to be hunting in and I want to make sure that at least one of us is going to know what they're doing. I spend most of my course time on ethics, conservation, laws, survival, and lots of hands on firearm safety. I emphasize from the start that there is no such thing as a shooting accident that can't be traced back to someone doing something "Stupid" around a firearm. The responsibility lies with the one that holds the gun.
Animal id I go through briefly and tell the group to do the reading at home. I agree with Gate that who really gives a crap about "galinacious" or whether speculum is or isn't the spit on a ducks tongue. "After the shot" material is covered in ethics in my course.

[hillman]

I was an instructor/examiner until the end of 2010 (for 25 years). No one that I know ever made more than pocket change as an instructor/examiner.

We did the complete course that I recall was 33 hours of instruction. We had to pay for a room for the 11 sessions and also paid to rent a club range for the practical exam portion along with an optional outdoor compass course and small bore shooting. I lost count, but I'm sure we had over 800 go through.

The #1 item I suggest is for ALL BCWF affiliated clubs to support the instructors/examiner who are their members. Promoting CORE and providing free use of facilities for instruction/examinations is a good start. Most instructors/examiners, that I know, get almost no support from the clubs. Most instructors seem to teach CORE independently and the result is usually some "short" version being offered.

PS - Keep in mind the CORE program is intentionally delivered for age 14+. It is a basic level course that can be successfully challenged without a lot of study.

[sparkes3]

when i did my core we had written test,hands on safety test of various guns and ammo then a trip to the range(the local highways pit ) with the wildlife officers for a shooting test.
if you failed any part you did it again.
the shooting test you could do it twice on the same day if you didnt get you three shots in the kill zone at 75-100 yards .
i was absolutely blown away that there was no actual shooting test involved in the core when i moved here .

[sparkes3]

when i did my core we had written test,hands on safety test of various guns and ammo then a trip to the range(the local highways pit ) with the wildlife officers for a shooting test.
if you failed any part you did it again.
the shooting test you could do it twice on the same day if you didnt get you three shots in the kill zone at 75-100 yards .
i was blown away that there was no actual shooting test involved in the core test when i moved here.

[Trigger Happy]

I found we did not learn enough about the law and regulations. When I was a new hunter I found it difficult to know or not if I was doing something wrong and was always hearing conflicting stories from CO's and hunters

[Barracuda]

As an instructor you have to offer something that a person cannot get online or by self study , after the shot is a big one .
There have been instructors that run it like a factory but hopefully those types will be gone with the online course as they probably offered less to the pupil then self study. I see the online as a great way to study if your a shift worker or time constraints etc.

back to Matts original question I would say after the shot and Planning and packing for the hunt .

[bigben]

The animal ID and biology is either important (mule vs WT deer) or utterly unimportant to a new hunter. Do new hunters really care that a grouse is a gallinaceous bird ? :)

Funny i would like the question to be if you shoot a grouse what has to be left on for species identification

[Phreddy]

I found we did not learn enough about the law and regulations. When I was a new hunter I found it difficult to know or not if I was doing something wrong and was always hearing conflicting stories from CO's and hunters
I try to ensure that each student on my courses looks up random information in the regs to ensure that, while there just isn't enough time to go through the whole regs page by page, they all know how to find the answers. That's a must.

[aggiehunter]

IBEP would be a mandatory and intergral part of the CORE program.

[jedimaster]

I would think it would be a great selling point for instructors to bundle a Legislation pass the test course with an actual hunting course that covers off more detailed things not "In the Book" like. 1) how the regulations impact your hunt 2) Safe and successful Tactics of hunting 3) Common and lesser common areas 4) Dangers to avoid 5) Game preparation 6) Gear choices (not neccasarily brands but more things like) Calibers appropriate for game, Types of materials to look for in clothing during what seasons, 7) navigation skills with and without GPS 8) some sort of survival aspect, fire starting etc...

I have been researching where to send my wife to go get her core course and if there was an option to pay 140 for the basic here are the answers to the test course and say and extra 100 bucks for some actual hunting information we would both take that one together as I already have my license but would love to sit down with a local hunter go through more detailed information.
JMHO

[Gateholio]

Funny i would like the question to be if you shoot a grouse what has to be left on for species identification

That would be great! :)

That is something I really like to cover, as the regs are very confusing to a new hunter

[albravo2]

Smart thread. Nice to know instructors are looking to improve their product.

1. I think it would be interesting to present a hunt scenario, then have the students pick through the regs to find all the relevant info. It isn't just what is in season. Lots of equipment, geographic and shooting restrictions lurk in the small print.

2. My buddy just took the course. He said they covered about an hour of material in each 3 hour class, the rest was hunting stories and rabbit hole topics like using a firearm for self defense in a home invasion. His suggestion was stick to the necessary material for the duration of the class, then invite people to stick around after for a BS session of stories and tangent topics.

[hare_assassin]

I have been researching where to send my wife to go get her core course and if there was an option to pay 140 for the basic here are the answers to the test course and say and extra 100 bucks for some actual hunting information we would both take that one together as I already have my license but would love to sit down with a local hunter go through more detailed information.
JMHO

I know this won't help you, but up here in the Loops you can get the "actual hunting info" course for $90. I sat in on it with one of my daughters and it was very well done. My wife, mother and other daughter just went to the same guy and they all got a lot from the course as well. It isn't 33 hours, but it is enough that they all feel comfortable to head out with a mentor (me).

Which brings us to a significant point; I think there is an assumption (by all interested) that the CORE is not intended to take total newbies and turn them into hardcore, bush-wacking, survivalist uber-hunters in a weekend. The course could be mandated to be 80 hours and it would still fail miserably if that was the goal.

Every new hunter needs to spend time hunting with someone who is experienced. Most people can rely on family and friends for this, but there is a certain percentage of new hunters who are coming into it blindly and have nobody to show them the finer points.

So this would be my number one suggestion to CORE instructors; ask each student who they have chosen (or who has offered) to be their mentor. For those who have no answer, try to point them in the right direction. Perhaps a referral system should/could be setup which links up newbies with veteran hunters. That often happens around here, right? At the very least, point those mentorless newbies to HBC or BigShots so they can join a community of helpful people.

[mike-juliet]

WOW Thank you all for the overwhelming feedback and responses, I’ll try to address most of the reoccurring points that I see come up.

When I teach I keep the course at about 14-16 hours over 4 evenings including the exam. The first night (3.5hrs) I go over the CORE book cover to cover with the exception of Chapter 5, which is firearm safety. As many have pointed out, most of this book should be “self study” with myself the instructor having to pick and choose what I cover due to the sheer volume of information that is found in the book.

Tuesday Evening I spend about 3 hours going over firearm safety using the same power point that I use when I teach the CFSC Pal Course as opposed to the CORE Manual. This evening ends with roughly an hour of hands on practice with decommissioned firearms and dummy ammo and then the practical exam, which is very similar to the PAL practical exam.

Wednesday I spent about 2 hours going through the Regs cover to cover, going over the Before/During/After your hunt sections in detail and then giving about half a dozen examples out of the Resource Management Regions Section so they are able to read and understand the Season Dates/Bag Limit/ Species type for specific areas.
Following the Regs I play roughly 90 minutes of Survival/Animal ID/Bear Safety/Firearm Safety DVD’s

Thursday Evening we have a forum to ask questions and clarify anything that was not clear to students from earlier in the week and also going over things that individuals may want instruction on that I did not have time to cover the first 3 evenings. Following this I give out the written exam and the course concludes when the student passes.

I wish that I had the facilities to add Live Fire “Hunter Marksmanship” training that would help establish a comfort zone for every student and show them practical shooting positions and skills that would benefit them in the field. I do not teach at a range, I do so in a classroom, thus this is not something that I am able to add, unfortunately I might add.

Animal ID, there are approximately 24 questions on the test that involve Animal/Bird ID, Yes this is a skill that is honed in the field, however I must cover the basics in the book to give a base set of skills to students that they can hone through practice on hunting trips. My classroom is very well equipped with over two dozen mounts on walls that I use extensively throughout the week to show the differences between legal/illegal Mule Deer in a 4 point season, differences between WT/Mule, Spike Fork Moose & Larger Bulls, different bird species as well can be found mounted in the room.

Examiners cannot alter exams, they are issued by BCWF on behalf of the Ministry of environment.

After the shot training; This is something I struggle with finding a way to teach effectively, the CORE manual goes over skinning/field dressing. However this is one of those skills that just has to be learned by getting bloody. Rather than go over this in class I give the “homework” of researching Youtube for field dressing/skinning/quartering videos as this is much more beneficial than written instructions in the text book that I can paraphrase. Short of bringing a carcass in to demonstrate in the classroom I can’t think of a better way to handle this. Hopefully I will be able to find some videos that I can acquire licensing for to show as part of the class rather than directing students to YouTube.

First Aid & Survival; there is a chapter in the CORE book dedicated to this, however I fail to see any practical benefit that this chapter will have in the field, I encourage every student to supplement this CORE course with a basic First aid and possibly a Wilderness Survival course. Again, this is a very difficult chapter to effectively instruct without practical examples and training.

Conservation & Ethics – I think hands down this is the most important subject I teach. I drill home the need to be a good ambassador for the hunting community anytime you are in the field, as you will come across people in the backcountry who are not hunters.


I think many people forget that the CORE course is not turning every student into a master hunter, quite the opposite. My goal is to teach the basics over a wide variety of topics that will spark the minds and encourage every student to build on the fundamentals that I do not have the ability to teach within the walls of the classroom. I learn something from students every week and always value the feedback and opinion of those I teach.

[Phreddy]

I know this won't help you, but up here in the Loops you can get the "actual hunting info" course for $90. I sat in on it with one of my daughters and it was very well done. My wife, mother and other daughter just went to the same guy and they all got a lot from the course as well. It isn't 33 hours, but it is enough that they all feel comfortable to head out with a mentor (me).

Which brings us to a significant point; I think there is an assumption (by all interested) that the CORE is not intended to take total newbies and turn them into hardcore, bush-wacking, survivalist uber-hunters in a weekend. The course could be mandated to be 80 hours and it would still fail miserably if that was the goal.

Every new hunter needs to spend time hunting with someone who is experienced. Most people can rely on family and friends for this, but there is a certain percentage of new hunters who are coming into it blindly and have nobody to show them the finer points.

So this would be my number one suggestion to CORE instructors; ask each student who they have chosen (or who has offered) to be their mentor. For those who have no answer, try to point them in the right direction. Perhaps a referral system should/could be setup which links up newbies with veteran hunters. That often happens around here, right? At the very least, point those mentorless newbies to HBC or BigShots so they can join a community of helpful people.
I try to add as much information about actual hunting scenarios, survival techniques, and hunting techniques as time permits. That's why I purposly keep my classes small, as it allows more time for questions and discussion. As was said in a couple of earlier comments, many of the instructors, myself included, are more interested in seeing new folks, especially women and kids get involved in the sport than in the money. So long as there's enough money to pay the rent for the space and help toward paying for the deactivated firearms and dummy ammunition, with a little bit of "jingle" for the pockets I'm happy. While I never needed to do it, I have a personal pollicy to offer up to 3 kicks at the exams if the participant needs it. I also will spend time outside class to provide an oral question and answer to those who have a reading problem. I pass out an anonymous course critique sheet after the exams have been completed and ask the participants to please fill it in with what was good and what wasn't so I can improve my course progressively. I've picked up a few good ideas in this thread and am looking at how I can fit them in so thanks for those who made suggestions.

[Phreddy]

"
I think many people forget that the CORE course is not turning every student into a master hunter, quite the opposite. My goal is to teach the basics over a wide variety of topics that will spark the minds and encourage every student to build on the fundamentals that I do not have the ability to teach within the walls of the classroom. I learn something from students every week and always value the feedback and opinion of those I teach."

Amen to that Matt Jenkins.

[hoochie]

Hey Matt,
1)Something that I don't think was ever brought up was calling. Calls can be used for almost anything, and I know that people are un-informed, and or down right confused when it comes to calls.
2) A common question: "what do you do with a predator once you shoot it?"

I might be alone on this one; But I think marksmanship and firearm handling should be removed from the course. This would allow more time to focus on other topics. The Firearms course doesn't teach people how to shoot, so why should the CORE?
There are some people that do not want firearms, and some people who cannot have firearms, but they can hunt with a bow. I recall a guy that was in the course my kids took, and he was only interested in shotguns and kept asking "why do I have to learn about the rifles? I don't own one, I don't want one.. I only want to hunt ducks and geese". And other people, for what ever circumstance in life; may not be legally allowed to have firearms. These people can still go hunting with a bow, yet the CORE insists on firearms safety.

When I was teaching people at the armoured car company, it was our job to have people qualify with pistols and shotguns. I can tell you that someone saying they have a RPAL, isn't worth a grain of salt. Some people couldn't handle the recoil of a shotgun, some people couldn't rack the slide on the pistol. Some people simply couldn't hit the target. we were able to weed these people out and say "thanks for coming out, but sorry.. you failed to qualify, therefore we cannot hire you".
To implement a shooting component in the CORE, then one could assume that this would then have to be graded, scored and recorded. This may have the potential to exclude someone from getting a hunter number??
we should be careful in what we ask for.

If people want to learn to shoot, this is unfortunately up to the individual; and they do have some options. Keeping CORE about " outdoor recreation and education" is what CORE should be.

[mike-juliet]

Hey Matt,
1)Something that I don't think was ever brought up was calling. Calls can be used for almost anything, and I know that people are un-informed, and or down right confused when it comes to calls.
2) A common question: "what do you do with a predator once you shoot it?"

I might be alone on this one; But I think marksmanship and firearm handling should be removed from the course. This would allow more time to focus on other topics. The Firearms course doesn't teach people how to shoot, so why should the CORE?
There are some people that do not want firearms, and some people who cannot have firearms, but they can hunt with a bow. I recall a guy that was in the course my kids took, and he was only interested in shotguns and kept asking "why do I have to learn about the rifles? I don't own one, I don't want one.. I only want to hunt ducks and geese". And other people, for what ever circumstance in life; may not be legally allowed to have firearms. These people can still go hunting with a bow, yet the CORE insists on firearms safety.

When I was teaching people at the armoured car company, it was our job to have people qualify with pistols and shotguns. I can tell you that someone saying they have a RPAL, isn't worth a grain of salt. Some people couldn't handle the recoil of a shotgun, some people couldn't rack the slide on the pistol. Some people simply couldn't hit the target. we were able to weed these people out and say "thanks for coming out, but sorry.. you failed to qualify, therefore we cannot hire you".
To implement a shooting component in the CORE, then one could assume that this would then have to be graded, scored and recorded. This may have the potential to exclude someone from getting a hunter number??
we should be careful in what we ask for.

If people want to learn to shoot, this is unfortunately up to the individual; and they do have some options. Keeping CORE about " outdoor recreation and education" is what CORE should be.


I go over calling briefly when talking about the animal ID when questions come up about specific species, I'd like to go more into about different hunting methods and what to look for when seeking out species, but alas not enough hours in 4 evenings.

Shooting skills would be a non tested optional portion of the course for students looking for more than the basics of safe handling that are covered in the classroom. I always tell people, you don't need to be a marksman to be hunter but you must spend time practicing to establish a comfort zone and be honest with yourself about what shots to take and what ones to pass up.

your absolutely right, some people don't care about firearms at all, but it is part of the mandatory curriculum that I must teach. I explain to bow hunters that should you come across a firearms hunter in distress you should know the basics of handling and proving his firearm safe after you provide assistance in the form of first aid to the individual you encounter.

[hoochie]

I explain to bow hunters that should you come across a firearms hunter in distress you should know the basics of handling and proving his firearm safe after you provide assistance in the form of first aid to the individual you encounter.

excellent point.

[hare_assassin]

Totally off-topic, Matt, but I just had a very odd experience when I looked at your avatar. I felt like I was looking at myself.

A few weeks ago my daughters were talking about this theory that there are so many people in the world that we all now have an exact duplicate somewhere. I said it was nonesense. Now I see your avatar and I am questioning myself. Right down to the facial hair growth pattern. Spooky.

Anyway... Sounds to me like you are doing your best to continue to learn and improve the service you offer. Kudos to you, and all the other current and ex- CORE instructors who are doing/did it for all the right reasons. I often think that I too would like to be an instructor, but a few more seasons of experience are in order. I guess I could cover a hare hunting course pretty well by now, though. :)

[Gateholio]

I struggle with the firearm part of the course, too. If they want a firearm, they ned ot take the PAL course anyway....But then again, there are kids that need firearm trianing even if they are not eligible to get a PAL. ANd I add in stuff about hunting with firearms

Plus it gives everyone the opportunity to get up, keep interested, get hands on.

I do tell them that if they are hunting in much of BC and they followed the course rules for crossing an obstacle, they will be putting their gun down every 10 minutes though. :) And I tell them to tape their barrel, rather than inspect it for snow and mud every time they put it down. :)

[Trapper]

Ive been teaching the core for over 20 years ,there was two of us that put the course on. but I don't agree with some here about the firearm section, My self I thing it is a very important part of the course, safe handle of all firearms cannot be stress enough, and just because someone says they only want to bird hunt or bow hunt they might change there minds a few years down the road. that being said the C.O.R.E course is designed to prepare the student to pass the exams. there isn't enough class room hours to teach them everything they need to know. Its going to be Dad, Granpa ,uncle, aunt or who ever to teach them to hunt . when we put class on we would charge around $65 and out of that money and we paid the administration fee , we also would take the students down to the range for a day of shooting,( our range was out in the boonies) we paid for every thing out of the money we charged. that was for ammo ,hotdogs, pop , coffee . and when we got to the trap shooting everyone would join in including parents. Then one day the BCWF said they would no longer cover us at the range that we would have to get our own insurance, well there wasn't enough money left over for that. But as you can see we were not in it to make money. Still to this day I do not charge for any of the exams when someone challenges the C.O.R.E and when parents insist on paying me I take the money and give it back to the kid and tell him or her that there first tag is on me. (maybe that's why we had so many students)

[hoochie]

Ive been teaching the core for over 20 years ,there was two of us that put the course on. but I don't agree with some here about the firearm section, My self I thing it is a very important part of the course, safe handle of all firearms cannot be stress enough, and just because someone says they only want to bird hunt or bow hunt they might change there minds a few years down the road.

Matt, sorry if I have started a bit of a derail here:

Trapper I hear what you are saying, but I honestly think that the Firearms handling is already covered by someone taking Canadian firearms course. Matt made an excellent point that I had not thought of ( bow hunters understanding how to PROVE a firearm in the event they need to).
I think that CORE should keep to instruction of the game animals identification, habitat, hunter ethics, how to track and stalk animals, Skinning, quartering,, getting the animal into your truck etc.
And there have been more "which gun for bear defense?" threads on the internet than ever before; that maybe people need to be aware that when a person is in the forest, it they are not freshly dropped fish food in the tank!

[hare_assassin]

Matt, sorry if I have started a bit of a derail here:

Trapper I hear what you are saying, but I honestly think that the Firearms handling is already covered by someone taking Canadian firearms course. Matt made an excellent point that I had not thought of ( bow hunters understanding how to PROVE a firearm in the event they need to).
I think that CORE should keep to instruction of the game animals identification, habitat, hunter ethics, how to track and stalk animals, Skinning, quartering,, getting the animal into your truck etc.
And there have been more "which gun for bear defense?" threads on the internet than ever before; that maybe people need to be aware that when a person is in the forest, it they are not freshly dropped fish food in the tank!

Not just bow hunters. What about all the other people who want to hunt but don't have a PAL? In particular, children, but also others who simply have no interest in purchasing or owning a firearm and have no need to do so, since they only plan to hunt with someone who will let them use their firearm. My daughters cannot get a PAL yet. My wife and my mother only want to hunt with me and use my firearms. Is it less important for all of these people to have firearms knowledge and safety training? Should that be skipped in the CORE and left up to the fireams owner? I'm not so sure that is in everyone's best interest.

[hoochie]

Is it less important for all of these people to have firearms knowledge and safety training? Should that be skipped in the CORE and left up to the fireams owner? I'm not so sure that is in everyone's best interest.

If the firearms component of the CORE was sufficient, then couldn't we do away with having the CFSC? Why do we have both?
And Even if a person goes through the CORE, their training is not recognized as being sufficient enough to get a PAL.
Back to something that Matt pointed out; the first aid component; I see the it very similarly.
Back when I did my CORE, during the first aid component... the instructor tried to explain what it means when a person goes into shock. " you know when a mother gaps when she sees her child hurt?.. that is shock"
I really hope nobody in the room believed that load of bologna.

[Barracuda]

Not just bow hunters. What about all the other people who want to hunt but don't have a PAL? In particular, children, but also others who simply have no interest in purchasing or owning a firearm and have no need to do so, since they only plan to hunt with someone who will let them use their firearm. My daughters cannot get a PAL yet. My wife and my mother only want to hunt with me and use my firearms. Is it less important for all of these people to have firearms knowledge and safety training? Should that be skipped in the CORE and left up to the fireams owner? I'm not so sure that is in everyone's best interest.

the basics in the core are just that basic . Anyone that wishes to hunt with a firearm and does not hold a valid PAL/POL must be under the direct supervision of the valid license holder . That means that they are within constant view and unamplified voice range (no radios or you walk this way I walk that way) . It is up to the license holder to ascertain the fitness of the individual and to ensure they have a proper understanding of the firearm and the safety aspects of its use. It is the license holder who is on the hook.

This also applies to plinking or target shooting . a person does not need to be a holder of a license to target shoot they do have to be under direct supervision and they are the full responsibility of the the license holder .

[GoatGuy]

The PAL is Federal, core is provincial. That is why there are two different courses. Hopefully we will be able to combine at some point.

Kids will be hunting with relatives, some of whom may/will have poor firearms handling. Peer taught firearms handling is not something you necessarily want. CORE wasn't mandatory until the 70s, still plenty of people out there who didn't take the course and pass on poor firearms handling practices to their kids/grandkids.

Wives/girlfriends often don't take their PAL as they are with their husband/boyfriend whenever they go hunting. Also see a lot of moms who take it with their kids so that they know how to handle firearms and a bit about hunting even if they have not intentions of getting their hunting license.

Personal experience is seeing people who have done both CORE/PAL who have poor firearms handling. Seems some people teach to pass, not to understand.

Bottom line is you don't want someone shooting themselves or someone else.



All 'good' reasons to focus on safe firearms handling.........

[Barracuda]

I don't think the firearms fed course should be combined with hunting . they are and should always be two separate entities.

If we want to go that direction simply make it illegal to allow someone that has not completed the Federal Firearms safety course to borrow use or handle a firearm while engaged in hunting . That is something the provincial govt could do but I believe it would be counter productive.

See the issue??



Personally I see ethics as a big issue as many people have their very own line in the sand and some are in front of it and others behind it .

Personal ethics (or lack of) do not trump the bc hunting laws. for instance some guys think its ok to block a road yet its illegal, some guys figure they can shoot on another persons tag yet its illegal etc

[mike-juliet]

Just to touch on the ongoing debate about teaching Firearms Safety in the CORE Course,

I HATE teaching the firearm safety aspect of the course, I really do. In the time I allow myself to teach the class I often find myself having to gloss over and skip lots of really beneficial information that is found in the PAL Course. It is very difficult to cram an entire lesson on firearm safety into 2.5 hours.

With that being said, I do take it very seriously. The goal of firearm safety when teaching the course is more to prevent firearm accidents than teach people the ins and outs of different firearm action types and shooting skills. I'd love to go deeper but again, that is where following up by taking the Canadian Firearm Safety Course comes in.

[hare_assassin]

the basics in the core are just that basic . Anyone that wishes to hunt with a firearm and does not hold a valid PAL/POL must be under the direct supervision of the valid license holder . That means that they are within constant view and unamplified voice range (no radios or you walk this way I walk that way) . It is up to the license holder to ascertain the fitness of the individual and to ensure they have a proper understanding of the firearm and the safety aspects of its use. It is the license holder who is on the hook.

This also applies to plinking or target shooting . a person does not need to be a holder of a license to target shoot they do have to be under direct supervision and they are the full responsibility of the the license holder .

Yes. I am fully aware of this. I still feel better that my wife, mother and daughters have all had to be tested to a basic level of firearms competency in order to get a hunting licence. There's no better way to emphasize the importance of firearms safety than to force one to learn about it and require a practical test before they can use one to hunt.

It was, by far, the most challenging part of the course for all of them. However, none of them complained or said they didn't want to do it.

[GoatGuy]

Just to touch on the ongoing debate about teaching Firearms Safety in the CORE Course,

I HATE teaching the firearm safety aspect of the course, I really do. In the time I allow myself to teach the class I often find myself having to gloss over and skip lots of really beneficial information that is found in the PAL Course. It is very difficult to cram an entire lesson on firearm safety into 2.5 hours.

With that being said, I do take it very seriously. The goal of firearm safety when teaching the course is more to prevent firearm accidents than teach people the ins and outs of different firearm action types and shooting skills. I'd love to go deeper but again, that is where following up by taking the Canadian Firearm Safety Course comes in.

If you're only putting 2.5 hours into firearm safety I would kindly suggest you are not allowing enough time to teach it properly.

Kids/wives/girlfriends often do not take the PAL and many 'moms' sit in on the course because they are supervising and want to learn about gun safety.

[GoatGuy]

I don't think the firearms fed course should be combined with hunting . they are and should always be two separate entities.

If we want to go that direction simply make it illegal to allow someone that has not completed the Federal Firearms safety course to borrow use or handle a firearm while engaged in hunting . That is something the provincial govt could do but I believe it would be counter productive.

See the issue??



Personally I see ethics as a big issue as many people have their very own line in the sand and some are in front of it and others behind it .

Personal ethics (or lack of) do not trump the bc hunting laws. for instance some guys think its ok to block a road yet its illegal, some guys figure they can shoot on another persons tag yet its illegal etc
I don't see the issue. Firearms safety is an integral part of the core course. If firearms safety is not taught properly the instructor could very well be the impetus to someone getting accidentally shot.

You could have the PAL as part of the CORE course and a test that covers both..... and also still offer the PAL on its own for the paper killers who only want the PAL.

[Barracuda]

I think you are missing what I am saying . the CORE teaches the bare bones of firearms safety as Matt mentioned previously(he hit the nail on the head) it should never be considered to be a replacement for the CFSC besides anyone hunting without a PAL is under direct supervision just like if you take out little Johnny to the shooting pit to do some plinking in the back forty you are there to supervise .
Now because the instructor is actually left up to their own discretion they could provide more instruction if they could afford to add more time to the course but at the end of the day the person still needs to take the CFSC .

The CORE and the CFSC course should be kept separate and not rolled into one as some potential hunters have only the intention, desire or ability to hunt without a firearm. Im not saying remove the firearms portion im just saying it is not a replacement for the CFSC and should only be considered the bare minimum

[mike-juliet]

If you're only putting 2.5 hours into firearm safety I would kindly suggest you are not allowing enough time to teach it properly.

Kids/wives/girlfriends often do not take the PAL and many 'moms' sit in on the course because they are supervising and want to learn about gun safety.


I put roughly two and a half hours of instruction verbally from the book, each student gets roughly an hour of hands on practice to supplement the book based instruction i give and then the practical exam following as much hands on practice time as the student needs to be comfortable for the practical exam.

[Gateholio]

It's interesting to note that there hasn't been any measurable drop in firearns accidents since the PAL course was introduced.

There was a drop after Hunter Education courses were introduced. I assume that the people that most benifit from the training are hunters, who are actively using firearms in a dynamic environment.

[cannotsin1]

Yes I totally agree with you on points as my wife just wrote the test and I reviewed the questions and answers. You did have to choose not the correct answer just the one they were looking for. I do not know why this is who ever writes the tests just makes things up. They make it confusing on purpose and you have to pick the answer they decide is the law not the right one. I think this is mostly a cash grab more and more inconsequential or redundant questions over the years and the books grow and grow with more crap ! When I took the course 20 plus years ago it was about hunting not about filling an ever growing price rising course meant to confuse. It is like any other government test they make up new words with different meanings for things that already have a meaning but if do not play their game and write what they want you to it`s the wrong answer.

[russm86]

I'd change pretty well everything. I know a few people who have taken it recently with next to no experience before hand and no mentors or anything to teach them or show them the ropes before or after and they are as clueless now as they were before they took the course. They really only teach a few basic safety things and that's it so if you don't have a ton of extra time to put into doing your own research on stuff or have a buddy to help you out till you get the hang of it you're SOL. All 3 of them after taking the CORE, PAL, and PAL Restricted, still had almost no idea about what calibres are what and the differences between them all aside from maybe bullet diameter, and they had no clue how to perform a basic strip on their rifles like how to take the bolt out or how to clean and take care of the rifles at all. They also have no idea how to deal with any kind of game after shooting it and animal identification skills are also pretty well nill. They also all have issues reading the regs. I asked them all if they were taught any of it and all said no and all told me the same for stuff they did cover and then I thought back to when I did my course a decade and a half ago and I don't think I was really taught any of this in the course either, it all came through either self-teaching or passed down from my dad. Like the only ID stuff I remember them going into detail on was waterfowl and nobody I know even hunts the damn things and I still don't think it's very common in the interior though I'd love to try it but again have no idea where to start. I really think it should be a longer, more in depth course. Oh, and the other thing I wasn't very pleased with was the instructor in the PAL course completely discouraged handloading/reloading saying it was "too dangerous". I can see where he's coming from in a way as it could be very dangerous if you have no idea what you are doing or aren't careful and don't pay attention but to spit out a general blanket idea like that and tell them all to stick with purchasing factory ammo is idiotic. Ironically, I have seen/heard of much more recalls and problems from factory ammo than I ever have with my own handloads or those of others I know personally that reload their own.

[hoochie]

. If firearms safety is not taught properly the instructor could very well be the impetus to someone getting accidentally shot.

I fully disagree. The responsibility of firearms safety is the person who is the registered person "in charge" of the firearm at the time. If I have a junior with me who does not have a firearms license, and they shoot me; Its more likely my fault than it is the CORE instructors fault.
And so what are you suggesting? that CORE instructors place all their time in to firearms safety, when its already covered somewhere else... and let important things go like caring for the meat? I for one would be pissed right off if I was in a class that was being held up or focused on something other than "teaching me to hunt"

[scoutlt1]

With all due respect to all the instructors out there, let's all give a brief thought to people of all ages who have passed their driver's tests and are allowed to be "in control" of 3000 lbs of steel and rubber at close to seventy miles an hour....

[GoatGuy]

I fully disagree. The responsibility of firearms safety is the person who is the registered person "in charge" of the firearm at the time. If I have a junior with me who does not have a firearms license, and they shoot me; Its more likely my fault than it is the CORE instructors fault.
And so what are you suggesting? that CORE instructors place all their time in to firearms safety, when its already covered somewhere else... and let important things go like caring for the meat? I for one would be pissed right off if I was in a class that was being held up or focused on something other than "teaching me to hunt"

Enough time that the person is safe with a firearm, whether supervised or not.

[GoatGuy]

I put roughly two and a half hours of instruction verbally from the book, each student gets roughly an hour of hands on practice to supplement the book based instruction i give and then the practical exam following as much hands on practice time as the student needs to be comfortable for the practical exam.

Guess the question is as a core instructor is your objective to teach a person to pass a test or teach a person to be able to handle a firearm safely. Those objectives are worlds apart.

[Red arch]

Funny when I took my CORE about 10 years ago I had to do the same firearms practical session for my test that was part of the PAL test I took 6 years later.

[FourOhs]

Hi all,

This is my first real post here. It's a doozy, so I hope no one minds too much the multiple quotes. I figured this was preferrable to spamming the thread with a dozen individual replies. If it's bad form that I overlooked in the rules let me know.

I've submitted paperwork for my PAL/RPAL, and am sourcing a CORE course as we speak. That said, I'm kibitzing below based on what I've read so far in the CORE manual. I haven't yet been through a CORE course, but it's a topic I'm keenly interested in right now.


CORE should mandate that every hunter is a member of the BCWF and a BC gun club.
Strong gun clubs and the Federation benefit the sport.With respect, I disagree (but am willing to be convinced otherwise.) If my wife comes with me on a hunting trip, I'd like her to have her CORE. But if she doesn't own her own gun(s) why should she be required to be a member of a gun club?


Somehow i like to include shooting practice with hunting course...shotgun wing shooting (clays) easy kind at least and rifle..maybe 22...target shooting..i know some people dont like it..cost or etc. But practice with live animals is not very humane thing anyways..I agree that practicing on live animals is not a good idea. I feel that's why you need to go to your club and shoot at the range for practice, not just sighting in once a year. The CORE course is a hunter education course about how to be a safe, legal hunter, not with so much emphasis on the mechanics of how to be a successful hunter. I don't want people who've never shot before "practicing" with live firearms with me during my CORE course. I'd rather see people getting their PAL and practicing at their chosen club. Heck, I'm trying to convince a friend of mine to take the CORE course for its ethics, conservation, trip preparedness skills and things like that. He'll never shoot with me though.


I disagree. This is a conservation course, Not scouts., and not a first aid course.Definitely. But learning elemental emergency first aid like first checking for hazards in the area around an unresponsive victim and then proceeding to your ABCD check is valuable, if incomplete. (We do all remember ABCD, right?)


Have a variety of mounts for the students to see, and by the end of the course you will have an excited new hunter, that is eager to learn more loaded with the basics to get started.I think actual photographs instead of b&w pictures, or even *gasp* YouTube videos, could be a reasonable replacement for hauling around a bunch of mounts. It would be nigh on impossible for Matt Jenkins to travel to Vernon to teach his course if he required actual mounts.

In the end, I sense the CORE course is trying to be two things at once: an outdoor recreation and preparedness course, and a hunting course. Those are two different goals. It explains why the manual is so thick. I agree that the CORE course should be a jumping off point for other, more in-depth training, like a New Hunter workshop, an emergency first aid course, ...


real hunting is 99% waiting with 1% excitement, it's not fishing!Haha, I must be doing it wrong because that's how fishing is for me most of the time. ;)


I would focus on teaching the skills that enable new hunters to be lawful, safe, and ethical hunters. That is where the government mandate should end as far as I am concerned. I do not think it should be a "how to hunt" course, that should be outside the purview of government licensing requirements.*ding* Get that man a prize. Expanding on scoutlt1's analogy, getting your driver's license (i.e. successfully piloting a 3,000lb bomb) requires taking a driving course nowadays. (Back when I got mine, it was Mom and Dad teaching me.) Your driving course doesn't teach you how to be a "good" driver (i.e. fast laps times, or any other metric you like). For that you take a performance driving course, but you must have your drivers license first. For people who want to become a good hunter, they either practice after becoming safe, legal hunters, or they can take purpose-built courses.


I emphasize from the start that there is no such thing as a shooting accident that can't be traced back to someone doing something "Stupid" around a firearm. The responsibility lies with the one that holds the gun.Absolutely. There are very few accidents that aren't negligence. I mean, just generally speaking. We talk routinely about car accidents, but they're not. Your insurance company will almost always find fault (negligence) on the part of one or both parties.


So this would be my number one suggestion to CORE instructors; ask each student who they have chosen (or who has offered) to be their mentor. For those who have no answer, try to point them in the right direction.That's brilliant. I have a mentor, but I have a friend who wants to take the CORE who seems not to have. I'll be asking my mentor if he's willing to bring my friend along on a hunt or two. My friend is the one who's been saying we need an experienced hunter to take us out. He got no argument from me.


If the firearms component of the CORE was sufficient, then couldn't we do away with having the CFSC? Why do we have both?
Hopefully we will be able to combine at some point.
I think we have both CORE and CFSC for good reason. CORE gives you enough instruction to make you a safe gun *handler*. The CFSC gives you instruction to make you a safe and legal gun owner and transporter, well beyond what the CORE course teaches.


Also see a lot of moms who take it with their kids so that they know how to handle firearms and a bit about hunting even if they have not intentions of getting their hunting license.That is my hope for my wife. In fact, this very sentence prompted me to ask if she's willing to sign up with me now. Fingers crossed she's interested.

UPDATE: She said yes, she'll take it with me. :)

There's lots of great discussion here, and I like how everyone is respectful and having a mature discussion, even about differing points of view. This is an online community I can respect.

Nice to meet you all,
~Jeff

[blacklab]

CORE became irrelevant when the PAL course became mandatory. If somebody doesn't know the difference between a crow and a duck there is lots of information available to figure it out. I dealt with a lot of hunters in my day that had no formal training, and they got along just fine.
Core is nothing more than an inconvenience and a way to keep hunter numbers down.
I've noticed it always seems to be the instructors that want to make it more involved and of course more expensive.