# NYS Safety Orange Law Being Considered Again



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

New York State currently does not have a mandatory safety orange law for any hunting season. Efforts are being rekindled. Below is a story on this new effort

http://www.stargazettenews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051205/COLUMNIST03/512050317

Be advised, those who hunt in NY, of this proposal. Current hunter safety record in NY without the mandatory orange law is pretty darned solid, indeed. In fact, the article references 22 accidental shootings from 1989 to 2000. One person was wearing safety orange. 

DOes this law do any good? Or, is this another unnecessary regulation geared at raising costs of law enforcement, and creation of a new revenue stream at the hunter's expense? Thoughts??


----------



## bow weevil (Oct 31, 2005)

does it do any good? well out of the 22 that were shot, only one was wearing hunters orange. it appears to make a difference.

I am not sure where I stand on passing a law that requires it though. Seems to me that if people weren't shooting at movement, instead of positive ID, the law really wouldn't be necessary, would it.


----------



## Tax Lawyer (Feb 5, 2003)

I am not a fan.

If I have to wear orange in order to prevent someone from mistaking me for game, I am not hunting there.

I wear an orange vest to and from the stand (unless it is dark). Once I am in place, it comes off. 

I don't care if you put antlers on your head. I can promise you that I am not going to mistake you for a deer. For gripes sake, I don't even shoot unless I see it is a mature deer (big rack, thick neck, gut, etc.).

A guy in Western NY just shot a donkey over bait. Obviously, some people have problems. I just don't believe that orange will help that much.


----------



## jaws (Dec 6, 2002)

.I'm for it.....it cant hurt!
I'm not so worried about being mistaken for game but what I am worried about is hunters concentrating to much on the animal and not whats behind it......thats where the blaze orange comes in handy.


----------



## Whitetail Al (Sep 22, 2004)

*Safety Orange*

I have lost a dear friend 8 years ago this hunting season in another State to the stupidty of someone not identify their target.Also just met a client that was shot by a muzzle loader last season here in NY, again careless identification of their target. We must try something.


----------



## tackscall (Jul 26, 2004)

I wouldn't be opposed to it. The last time they wrote this it applied to archery and turkey hunters and was soundly defeated.


----------



## Tax Lawyer (Feb 5, 2003)

jaws said:


> I'm not so worried about being mistaken for game but what I am worried about is hunters concentrating to much on the animal and not whats behind it......thats where the blaze orange comes in handy.


That is a good point.

I think about my shot and beyond - especially since I am using a 7mm Ultra Mag. I think the blaze orange may alert someone to what is past the target. However, I don't hunt in high density places. But, I can see that being useful with a lot of hunters.

If you want to talk about dangerous, how about some of these deer drives? You better believe I wear orange if I am going to participate in one of these.


----------



## jaws (Dec 6, 2002)

"If you want to talk about dangerous, how about some of these deer drives? You better believe I wear orange if I am going to participate in one of these"

Tax- I agree 100%


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Yes, deer drives can be dangerous, for sure. Especially when you have a couple guys whose reflexes upon hearing leaves crunch next to them is to point and shoot. YIKES! Going through heavy brush when you know at the other end is one of your hunting pals is certainly risky, but, will the hunter orange proposal as it is now make you safer? I think not, and here's why.

In thick brush, what is covered the most, your head and torso, or your legs? The answer is your head and torso. 

Many guys will often peer below the brush near the ground, where the veg is at its thinnest, looking for movement. Let's say they see some dark moving things. They see no orange, and then say, ok, its a deer, bam, you just bagged your buddy wearing a big orange hat. In some instances, the best place to wear safety orange is on your legs, not on your torso.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

I guess I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to a Blaze Orange law.

The fact that only 1 of 22 accidental shootings was ahunter in orange is pretty telling.

It seems to me that NY should have passed the Blaze law before they expanded rifles, not after.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

thesource said:


> I guess I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to a Blaze Orange law.
> 
> The fact that only 1 of 22 accidental shootings was ahunter in orange is pretty telling.
> 
> It seems to me that NY should have passed the Blaze law before they expanded rifles, not after.


True. However, some look at it another way. From 1989 to 2000, a total of 22 fatalities have occurred through shooting accidents in the woods. That's less than 2 incidents per season, on average, in a sport where 600,000+ have been participating over the past 11 years, per year (of the study). What isn't mentioned are comparison statistics for other accidents resulting in death in the woods, like falls from treestands, falls into ravines, etc., or the good old coronaries that do strike some older hunters in the woods. We also are not presented with the circumstances surrounding these 22 deaths. Were these sound hunter shootings (most probably are)? but do we have some "slugs with eyeballs" accidents as well (shot going over a hill and finding a hunter)?
How about the climbing the stand with loaded gun, dropping the gun and shooting one's self? The current rates of deaths per 100,000 is incredibly low (like .0006 per 100,000) which makes me wonder if this law will truly have any positive benefits at all?

On the flip-side, we do not have any woundings in this report. Is there a figure for that? If so, what is it?? Can we prevent accidental woundings with this law? Is that a significant number to address?? I would guess, since we do not have this number, the figure (if collected) is insignificant.

This season thus far I have heard very little about hunting accidents, which s strange, because the NY media loves to trumpet any shootings in teh woods during hunting season. Haven't heard much of nothing this year.

Finally, with the stats we have been presented with, I would question what the alterior motives lie behind this proposal. Are we really looking to make the woods safer (they seem pretty safe now, without the safety orange law) or is this a creative revenue stream for potential fines? Further, how would this law be enforced, and at what cost (additonal ECOs afield chekcing for violators.....

Also, I would say that with this law, makers of safety orange apparel would be the big winners. I haveno issues with expanding economy through choice (such as addition of rifle r crossbow) but I do have some issues with expanding economy though mandate. 

Just some food for thought. My persona preference would be to see a safety orange law, but I cannot support the bill without answering some of these questions first. Like I have stated on many occassions, change for the sake of change is something I am never for. Get some more information to the sportsmen so we can make an informed decision. The emotional "oh my God, 22 people died in 11 years" approach makes for a decision based on emotion, which never results in good law, IMO. I believe the sporting community deserves better informaton than what we have been presented before a decision is made.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

while I do not disagree with anything you wrote, 2 deaths a year due to accidental shooting is still 2 too many. Anything that would help seems reasonable.

I do not feel strongly enough about it to argue very passionately.

Most people have the common sense to wear some orange during gun season. Perhaps, for those who don't, its nature's way of weeding out the stupid.


----------



## MNmike (Dec 27, 2003)

*have another veiw*

On the 22 deaths, one wearing orange. Out of the # of hunters per year what percentage wears orange. You may find that the % of deaths is higher wearing orange vs. not.

I'm not a real fan of orange, but when I used to rifle hunt I wouldn't of left the house without it. Way too many iresponceable "hunters" out there.


----------



## Top Cat (Jun 22, 2002)

I don't like the manditory law. I wear an orange vest and hat walking to my stand(during gun season) but remove both and stuff in my backpack when I get there.


----------



## copterdoc (Oct 9, 2005)

I don't think it makes much of a difference either. If you can't tell a human from a deer you can't tell an orange human from a deer either.

I think it would help more if hunters were encouraged to shoot back. (j/k)


----------



## boojo35 (Jul 16, 2005)

You have to be freakin stupid to not wear orange when firearms are present. Deer and other game are colorblind. They see orange as another shade of grey. I think many people think game will spot them in orange. Why else would you object?


----------



## Meleagris1 (Jan 8, 2003)

boojo35 said:


> Why else would you object?


I don't like the fact Orange spooks other game, such as turkeys. Deer are in tune with their environment and if you spook a flock of birds that puts the deer on red alert, especially mature bucks and does. I've seen it many times. 

That said I always wear orange to and from the stand, or whenever I am still hunting or tracking. The big thing is that as tracts of land get smaller and smaller, it becomes more and more difficult to know what is happening on the other 10 acres next to you and at least with orange you can see someone hawking the property line (which we all know is everybodies favorite place to hunt ).

Another thing I do like about it is that it will make it harder for guys to sneak around posted land. I'm going out right now with the snow shoes to make sure nobody is on my property. Wish I didn't have to do it, but its a fact of life.

Overall I guess I support it, of course I hunt alot of other states where it has been mandatory for years so I am used to it.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

According to the NYS DEC press release, dated 3/28/2005, the big game season for 2004 was the "safest hunting season in NY on record." This statement was made on account of the low injuries and deaths caused by all factors. I believe something like a total of 22 accidents (i'll have to re-read it) occurred during 2004. 

If you live in a State where satefy orange is mandatory, check your hunting season's safety record. Also find out how many hunters are in the woods so we can make a proper comparison (# of accidents per 100,000).

ONe of the agruments I have heard against safety orange is that some will rely no looking for orange, not clerly identifying the target and beyond. That could hold some water...

The more I think about a mandatory law, the more I am starting to line up against it.

In terms of 22 deaths in 11 years, hey, I am with anyone who states 22 is too many... However, I am a realist, and no law ever written can prevent accidents. That's why they're called accidents.


----------



## boojo35 (Jul 16, 2005)

If their is one thing that sticks out in my mind about my sons hunter safety course he attended last year is that the instructor said over and over that there is no such thing as a "hunting accident." They are not accidents, they are pure stupidity. Unfortunately their seems to be some stupid people who hunt, therefore give me orange. I was almost shot while bowhunting by some small game hunters. One close call was all I needed to believe that you cannot always be sure of what is beyond your target, especially if it is wearing camo. Sure, camo is ok for bowhunting, but firearm season, give me orange.


----------



## Top Cat (Jun 22, 2002)

Quote boojo35; I was almost shot while bowhunting by some small game hunters. . Sure, camo is ok for bowhunting, but firearm season, give me orange.

That dosen't make sense does it?


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Is the answer to improve safety in the woods through education and reinforcement, or a new law? A law tells people what they can and cannot do, but only delves slightly into the whys. Education and reinforcement on the other hand teaches and reminds each individual what each person can and should do to increase safety for yourself and others. Kind of like wearing a safety harness while hunting from a treestand. All the laws in the world cannot make some ignorant hunter wear a safety harness. However, through education and reinforcement (like showing graphic photos or bringing a treestand accident survivor in as a speaker) the point of wearing a safety harness can be more effectively driven home.

The same thing applies with safety orange. I wear an orange vest during big game firearms season (including extended black powder). I wear the vest while on the move. I do not have to, but I have no idea who else may be in the part of the woods I am walking through, and therefore I find it the safe thing to do. When I get to my stand, I will remove the safety orange vest and hang it in a nearby tree, no more than 10 or 15 feet from my position. I want other hunters to know I am there, but not exactly where I am sitting. I learned this while attending a spring turkey hunting seminar quite a few years back. This method of being safe in the woods is also published in teh NYSDEC hunting regulations handbook, I do believe. 

In terms of the "no accidents" statement, this is a good position to teach each new hunter, but this by no means is reality. One cannot say that a shot that deflects and ends up striking another hunter a result of stupidity. These are what people call "freak accidents". Some of these you cannot prevent, no matter what. Nevertheless and irrespective of your own position and opinion, the sport of hunting is far safer today than it ever has been (especially here in NY) and when you compare this sport to other popular activities, such as soccer, baseball, football, hockey, etc., hunting proves to be the safest of the bunch.

Do we need another law, or should we work on improving education and reinforcement?


----------



## NYHUNTER (Oct 27, 2004)

*Return on investment*

Obviously the education and training are a great thing, I wont dispute that. I would question, however, the costs of such re-education and the return on this investment. When you consider the state needs to roll out the new study materials, train the certified instructors in the material, and if re-training you will then need the hunters to learn the material, test, and qualify for the licenses. DECALS would need to be updated, etc. I can see there being a great cost involved whenever you get the state to change something of this magnitude. 

However, the DEC (or the legislature, whomever) can say "You need to wear blaze orange during the firearms big game season," and you will end up with much the same short term results, with less fuss. Hunter Safety training already emphasizes target identification and careful shot selection. The DARTS system is becoming more widely used as a teaching tool and can be used to teach such things in a more useable format for young hunters. 

Regulations and rules have to be as generic and useable as possible, and the safety orange is a quick and user friendly idea that many think would increase the safety of the general population of hunters. 

I'm pretty much for it, since I wear it myself. The only thing that would make me feel worse than getting shot would be to shoot another hunter, and I mean that, in that order. I would hope to God that I never would take a shot like that, but both of my parents know someone who killed another hunter while hunting, one a girl killed her dad, they had been hunting for years together. Accidents do happen, and I cant tell you how often I am glad/pissed to see that orange coming thru the woods where moments before I had been hoping to see a deer walk..


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

*Preliminary INformation is in - NY 2005 Safest Season*

With the ongoing debate over whether safety orange should be mandated by law, New York STate continues to be one of the safest Hunting States in the Nation. Last year (2004) was considered the "safest" hunting season year for the State. Looks like 2005 is even better! Attached is an overview of preliminary results of the annual study. This is not limited to deer hunting, regular season. This includes all hunting during each calendar year (which includes Spring Turkey, small game, waterfowl, all big game seasons, etc.)

>>> Wayne Jones 12/23/05 2:08 PM >>> 
NOTE: Hunting related shooting incident numbers are all very general 
statistics, so they can be provided to anyone as long as it is understood 
that the count is preliminary, and only includes info we have in our files 
as of the date of the report. These general figures include no information 
about specific incidents or the people involved in them. 

*SAFEST DEER HUNTING SEASON IN HISTORY IN NEW YORK *
- 14 injuries in 2005. Previous low was 18 in 2004. The average for the 
previous five years is 27. 
- Three of the 14 deer hunting incidents were fatal. The five-year average 
is also three fatalities. 
- Small game hunting related shooting incidents to date number 9, which is 
also significantly below previous 5-year average of 19. One small game 
hunting incident was fatal -- during the spring turkey hunting season. 
- Barring an unusually large number of small game hunting related shooting 
incidents during the last days of December, 2005 will be the safest hunting 
year in the history of New York State. 

Tuesday, December 20th was the last day of the 2005 deer seasons. There 
were a total of 14 deer hunting related shooting incidents, including 3 
fatalities in big game seasons, plus 9 injuries (including one fatal spring 
turkey hunting incident) while pursuing other wildlife. This is 
significantly lower than any previous year (see table below). 

*NOTES ABOUT DEER HUNTING THIS YEAR:* 

There were no *RIFLES* involved in injury incidents in the new rifle areas to 
date. However, one property damage incident in Cattaraugus County involved 
a rifle. (Another report notes that a house was hit by a rifle bullet, but 
the homeowner indicated that the shooting was likely an attempt to 
deliberately shoot a dog from the road, and did not occur while someone was 
attemting to take wildlife.) 

There is one report of an injury in new rifle section of CHENANGO COUNTY, 
however, the incident involved a shotgun rather than a rifle 


*HISTORICAL INFORMATION *

HRSI BG-SG TABLE 1993-2005 
Preliminary Data as of December 14, 2005 

*TOTAL HUNTING INJURIES, 1993 - 2005 *
including both big game and small game hunting 
year big game + other = total 
1993 24 43 67 
1994 26 26 52 
1995 26 36 62 
1996 24 33 57 
1997 29 26 55 
1998 22 42 64 
1999 26 28 54 
2000 29 14 43 
2001 30 27 57 
2002 37 24 61 
2003 20 12 32 
2004 18 16 34 
2005 14 9 23 <== PARTIAL COUNT reported as of 
December 22, 2005 

FATALITIES IN 2005: 1 Sping Turkey Hunting + 3 deer hunting = 4 total 
(Annual average for past 4 years is also 4 fatalities) 

Wayne Jones 
NYSDEC Sportsman Education Administrator 
625 Broadway 
Albany, NY 12233-4800 

Phone Toll-Free 1-888-HUNT-ED2 ( 1-888-486-8332 ) 
Fax: 518-402-8925 
E-mail <[email protected]> 
Website: http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/sportsed/ 

With this information in mind, do you believe the mandatory safety orange law will do anything to improve on this, or will it simply become another headache for the already very safe and responsible hunting community?


----------



## Tax Lawyer (Feb 5, 2003)

That is awesome about the rifles.

Everybody was moaning and groaning in Tioga County regarding the rifles. They said it would kill somebody and all the big bucks would be shot.  To my knowledge, neither happened.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Tax Lawyer said:


> That is awesome about the rifles.
> 
> Everybody was moaning and groaning in Tioga County regarding the rifles. They said it would kill somebody and all the big bucks would be shot.  To my knowledge, neither happened.


That is correct. The harvest (from what I am hearing) is improved over 2004, but not by any means a wholesale slaughter with the rifles. No accidental shootings with rifles, either, showing that these firearms are indeed a safer implement than the shotgun, provided hunters realize that you do not need to empty the gun to harvest an animal, which I believe was the case for the most part in Southern Zone Counties permitting rifles in 2005.

I cannot wait to see the harvest information this year. The early returns I was receiving in Region 9 indicated a solid number of very mature bucks were taken this year (3 1/2 - 6 1/2 yr olds) Nice to see.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> That is correct. The harvest (from what I am hearing) is improved over 2004, but not by any means a wholesale slaughter with the rifles.


The DEC is suggesting the harvest is down from 2004, not up. We'll have to wait until Feb or Mar for the real numbers, but the preliminary results suggest other than what you are saying. With DMP way down, noone should be expecting the total harvest to be improved, anyway. We will have to wait for the buck numbers, which should give us a better feel for the herd numbers.


http://www.syracuse.com/search/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1135330569222900.xml?syrspdout#continue 






doctariAFC said:


> No accidental shootings with rifles, either, showing that these firearms are indeed a safer implement than the shotgun, provided hunters realize that you do not need to empty the gun to harvest an animal, which I believe was the case for the most part in Southern Zone Counties permitting rifles in 2005.


Actually, this is untrue. 2 of the 3 fatal shootings in NY were rifle inflicted. I am not sure if they were in the NEW rifle zones, but I know they were rifle inflicted.

By the way, last year there were only 2 "accidental shootings". I don't think an increase of 50% is something to be happy about.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

thesource said:


> The DEC is suggesting the harvest is down from 2004, not up. We'll have to wait until Feb or Mar for the real numbers, but the preliminary results suggest other than what you are saying. With DMP way down, noone should be expecting the total harvest to be improved, anyway. We will have to wait for the buck numbers, which should give us a better feel for the herd numbers.
> 
> 
> http://www.syracuse.com/search/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1135330569222900.xml?syrspdout#continue
> ...


This info came from the DEC. I think the incidents you may be referring to are categorized as self-inflicted gunshot wounds, but these were determined to be from shotguns, not rifles. I do not know whether a suicide in the woods counts in these stats or not.

Oh, and the harvest numbers I am referring to is Region 9, I should have qualified that. Returns in general are running about even with last years' buck harvest. ANtlerless will be donw, but the buck harvest is looking like on a par, but, I agree, we should wait for the final release of the figures before the guessing gets us crazy...


----------



## Adkhunter (Jan 11, 2005)

I've been silient here for some time. Life has me doing other thing but this did cross my desk most recently.

I am not for a manditory blaze bill. Should the state have to mandate the usage of it. Shooting someone is felony. You shoot someone, you get punished.
I am not for a law that takes responsibility out of someones hands such as this.

I think if this becomes law then it should also become law that a casual walker need to wear it as well. I would also be game for a law that make it manditory for those who have to wear glass when driving to also wear then hunting. Wouldn't this make hunting sfer as well?
What about this one. Get the right guy in office and you'll see it. Anyone who takes any prescription medication that can cause blurred vision, dizziness, lowered blood pressure be prohibited from hunting for it could impair their ability to make sound judgements.

Some of you may ask, do I then wear it? Sure I do but the law is unnecessary. 
Care to give your favorite hunting spot away? Wear blaze orange!
Want to keep others off your property? Use blaze orange cardboard cutouts!
Who's going to walk on your property with 10 other blaze orange hunters at 20 yd intervals?

How about making this a law for Southern Zone hunting only? There are so many problems this sort of law and other states have become nothing but yes people to this idea. Is it safer to wear blaze orange? Sure. Would it be safer to paint your car blaze orange? Absolutely!
What next? Making a law that everyone must have a scoped rifle or gun to offer better identifyability of game?



250 inches is better than 400 though!! 

I wonder if you have to wear orange while in a blind? How about while big game hunting from a tree 20ft up? The law needs to be much better defined and thought about.

The jurisprudence of this is odd.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> This info came from the DEC. I think the incidents you may be referring to are categorized as self-inflicted gunshot wounds, but these were determined to be from shotguns, not rifles. I do not know whether a suicide in .


Doctari -

Here's the info I have - none appear to be self inflicted. All are reported as accidental shootings.

_
(southern Zone Rifle) 
Saturday, November 26, 2005 10:15 AM 
Boy killed in hunting accident 
(Deerpark, NY - AP) — A 13-year-old boy was shot and killed this week while hunting in Deerpark. 
New York State Police say David Kingston of Huguenot, about 100 miles south of Albany, was hunting Thanksgiving morning with family members when he was shot in the back. Police say the gunshot came from a rifle. 
Kingston was pronounced dead at the hospital. 
State police are investigating the shooting and releasing few details. _

_
northern zone rifle) 
The Northern Zone recorded seven injuries and one fatality. Robert L. Jeffers, 53, of Orleans, was shot to death while hunting deer with friends Nov. 24 in Jefferson County, about 90 miles north of Syracuse, state police said. _

_
(southern zone shotgun) 
MILAN — State police in Rhinebeck are investigating a hunting accident that resulted in the death of 22-year-old man Saturday in the Town of Milan. 
State police officials gave no details Sunday about the accident, which took place at around noon. _


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

thesource said:


> Doctari -
> 
> Here's the info I have - none appear to be self inflicted. All are reported as accidental shootings.
> 
> ...


I saw the story about the boy being shot. This one turned out to be a shotgun, not a rifle, if those who relayed updated info to me are telling me the truth. Throw out the Northern Zone incident, as they have been using rifles in the Adirondacks for quite some time.

All in all, the 2005 hunting season shows tremendous safety, and the point of this is whether a mandatory Safety Orange Law is necessary. From the data, including the trends reported by the DEC, I would have to say it is an unnecessary law. ADKHunter brought forth some EXCELLENT questions regarding this law. Ultimately, safety is each hunter's responsibility, and no law, existing or proposed, would change this for the better. In fact, considering the history of "responsibility shifting" laws - away from individual and onto the government - we see the supposed beneficial affects go the other way, as people tend to relax their own personal rsponsibility, using the old "the government will take care of me" or "there ought to be another law."

We are all taught in firearms safety courses who is responsible for safety. The answer when asked this exact question is "I am!" I sat in the Teen Shooting Academy training course (one night at Hamburg R&G) where over a dozen boy scouts were taking marksmanship course, including extensive firearms safety, from several certified NYS instructors. This was one of the questions on the quiz they had to take (a quiz at the start of every session.) The course is an adaptation of the NRA firearms safety course. Instilling personal responsibility is critical, and must be maintained throughout the hunter's lifetime. A new regulation, albeit filled with "good intentions" will do just the opposite, IMO.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Hey Source,

Just reading up on some of the Safety reports from NYS, and John Major, DEC Chief Wildlife Biologist, is quoted in this article as saying, "From the data we've received at this point, none of the accidents can be attributed to rifle use." This appears in the latest editions of NY Outdoor News... Page 5.


----------



## Adkhunter (Jan 11, 2005)

I was shooting this preliminary blaze orange idea around home and we came up with this question.

Do archery hunters have to wear it in archery only areas during the "regular season"

How about a hunter in a treestand?

How about the hunter hunting small game during the big game season. Lots do it around here.
It's just a messed up thang......


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Adkhunter said:


> I was shooting this preliminary blaze orange idea around home and we came up with this question.
> 
> Do archery hunters have to wear it in archery only areas during the "regular season"
> 
> ...


Amen! I am of the mind that, bsides evidence clearly showing the law is unnecessary, BIG TIME, it would be a point of serious confusion for both hunters and ECOs alike.

Thanks much. When I see this proposal come up for public input on the DEC site, I will let everyone know.


----------

