I would like to see what the forum's feelings is on a recent incedent I had.

On a recent hunt, we stalked a herd of our prey to within 20 yards. The head of our intended quarry was clear of anything else, and I instructed the client to take the shot to the earhole. The client pulled the shot, and the bullet went about 2 feet more to the right, after which the bullet exited, deflected around 30 degrees to the right, and downwards, wounding another animal standing roughly 30 yards behind the intended one, which we then had to kill.

As it happened on a conservancy, we reported the mishap, and where told that the 2nd animal still needs to be paid in full.

Now as it was a non export animal, the hunter propably feels he did not get anything out of it, but I still need to pay it as part of my quota.

In all cases that I know of that something simmelar happened, it was on plains game, and the client / hunter just paid. In this case it was an elephant, and the hunter refuses to pay for it.

My take is that I did not pull the trigger, the hunter did, and he missed the spot that would have lessened the likelyhood that the bullet exits the animal, thus he is responsible.
What is your take?

Question:
Who is responsible for paying the trophy fee?

Choices:
Client, as he pulled the trigger, irrispective
PH as he told the client to take the shot
Client, as he missed the shot the PH told him to take, thus making a "double kill" a possibility
Should be shared between client and PH
Outfitter should just suck it up

 

I think the PH should take some of the responsibility. Probably no one, PH's included, can predict with any certainty the range of bullet deviation possibilities, but he certainly has more experience with it than a client. You are making the argument that the client didn't hit precisely the point you suggested. That is probably the case in 9 out 10 shots made by clients, so a PH probably knows the probability of the outcome as well.

But whatever my opinion, the person pulling the trigger is ultimately responsible for the results. The "he made me do it" argument is pretty weak. On the other hand, the PH is supposedly there to ensure that the client does not shoot the wrong animal(s). Perhaps the financial burden should be shared, rather than falling on only one of the two parties.

Well,

I have, on several occassions, had a similar thing happen on my hunts.

There was never any doubt in my mind that it was my responssibility.

It makes no difference whether the PH tells the client to shoot, it is the client's responssibility to know where his bullet is going.

And as demonstrated in the above example, and numerous occassions in my own experience, a bullet can change direction after it has hit an animal.

The client should pay but the PH should kick in a little also - his tip for example.

Karl:

1. To pull a shot 2 ft at 20 yds is one hell of a pull !
2. Shit happens, even in the most uncertain of circumstances but in this case I would exonerate the PH even if there exists doubt that the "bystanders" may not have realistically been 30 yards away and behind.

However, had the shooter not flinched/pulled the shot, the flight path of the exiting bullet would not have caused any further damage.

If the shot had killed a person rather than an elephant who would be held responsible?

I'm shocked, I guess my parents did raise me right.
I can't believe anyone would vote anything but the clients responsibilty.
If it had been me, and you told take it in the earhole, I would know my skills and way the decision and if I determined it was not possible or risky I would tell you NO.
I'm still shaking my head as I read these responses.
Can anyway say accountability.
I think you forgot to give another choice on your poll.
You forgot to give them the option of voting it's Bush's fault.

I agree that the tip is probably going to suffer but it is what it is. Clients bullet. I would leave it up to the PH to search his heart and conquensce.

"Your" rifle, "your" bullet, "your" pull, "YOUR RESPSPONSIBILITY !" Done, period.

Like most polls this one is misleading in choices. One choice PH another choice outfitter, but in this case as presented the PH and outfitter are apperently one and the same. Could this not change someone's choice. Also I would not call the area clear with another animal 30 yds behind the intended target, especially in this case where the client was probably using solids. I would not change my vote. Pony up Karl. "lessen the liklyhood that the bullet exits the animial" you knew the risk and should have known the hunter.

Here are some examples of what can happen.

1. I shot an impala, after the shot, we saw one running with his horn shot off. He ran into a bush, and dropped dead.

I was wondering how could I have missplaced my shot by so much.

As we get closer to him, we saw another one lying dead.

What happened was that there was another impala standing onlower ground, behind the one I shot.

The bullet broke the spine the one, came out and broke the horn of the other one behind him.

2. I shot a kudu, at the shot, the kudu took off, and we saw a zebra standing about 40 yards further, and to the side, drop.

We ran up and found the zebra struggling, so finished him off. The kudu ran a few yards and dropped dead.

3. We followed some buffalo, and caught up with them in very thick bush. I shot one bull, and they all took off. We ran after them, and a few yards we saw them. Or rather each of us saw something different.

Apparently, Roy and Alan could see one lying down, which I could not see. But immediately behind him, there was one standing, which I could see, but neither Roy or Alan could see.

Roy said "There, shoot him!"
I said "Are you sure this is the one?"
"Yes!"

I fired at the one I could see, at teh shot, the one lying down got up and ran off.

We then had a bit of a discussion, and discovered that we now have two wounded buffalo. Just what we need in very thick bush.

A few yards further, we found both dead.

To me that was a bonus buffalo.

Broken horn or brained? I didn't know a broken horn could kill an Impala.

Two years ago I shot an elephant cow with a side on heart shot and the bullet exited the cow and hit an unseen young bull standing behind her. We had to finish it off. It was my responsibility with out any doubt and there wasn't any discussion of any other alternative by me or the PH. As it turned out the National Parks Warden determined that it was an unintentional kill and no fine or trophy fees were assesed.

465H&H

If this happened to me, I would expect to pay for the price of the quota, not any profit for the outfitter or PH. The PH has to accept some of the responsibility.

Karl
Maybe it comes down to business. Yes it was the clients responsibility (his bullet, etc). But it was clearly a mishap that he did not forsee. Making him pay the full price seems a little opportunistic and wont result in a repeat customer. To my mind his flat-out refusal to pay is plain wrong, but maybe you need to soften the hit a little?
Just sayin....
JCHB.

I understand that I am responsible for my shots, but if the PROFESSIONAL Hunter that the average joe is paying potentially 10's of thousands of dollars says "its clear, take the shot", well a big chunk of any further problems lands square in his lap! He needs to evaluate all potential for problems and the experience/ability of the client/hunter before he says shoot. A lot more caution on the PH's part would be necessary for a first time hunter in a herd of elephants than would be for a guy taking his 10th bull.

It's why you need to always use softs and never shoot into a herd.

The PH should pay up for letting the client shoot into a herd.

For me, when it comes down to the time to shoot, the primary responsibility of the PH is to let me know which animal to shoot. I don't need him telling me when to shoot...if I have the right animal in my sights, I'll take the shot when I think its right. Once we are clear on which animal is legal or the most desirable trophy, all I want to here is "take it whenever you are ready". I'll gladly take advice from the PH with regard to whether there is game behind the one I am after, etc, but that is ultimately my responsibility the way I see it. I am not just there to put crosshairs on a target and pull the trigger!

BUT you do see on TV where PHs/Guides are telling the client to "shoot, shoot, shoot!!!", or "shoot now!". I think that in doing so, the PH is assuming some of the liability of the shot and if something does go awry, the PH needs to share some responsibility. It still ultimately boils down to the guy/gal that pulls the trigger, but by insisting on a particular shot being taken and when, the PH really should take some ownership over the outcome.

So, although I think its always the hunters responsibility, the poll answer I selected was that they should share the responsibility...just to cover off the scenario I described above.

I voted for the client to pay, but ... I would think that since all involved agree it was an accident to hit the other animal, the PH might soften the blow a bit by kicking in. I also hope the outfitter would have a good relationship with the government agency overseeing hunting in this area, and possibly get the Trophy Fee and or Fine reduced.

If you can't get the conservancy council to understand the situation, (and you probably can't, as they usually seem set on milking the "rich white hunters" for all they can get) then the client pays full rate.

But if it was a non-export or own use hunt, you probably don't have much leverage with him if he tells you to get stuffed.

Tough situation.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl S:
I would like to see what the forum's feelings is on a recent incedent I had.

On a recent hunt, we stalked a herd of our prey to within 20 yards. The head of our intended quarry was clear of anything else, and I instructed the client to take the shot to the earhole. The client pulled the shot, and the bullet went about 2 feet more to the right, after which the bullet exited, deflected around 30 degrees to the right, and downwards, wounding another animal standing roughly 30 yards behind the intended one , which we then had to kill.

As it happened on a conservancy, we reported the mishap, and where told that the 2nd animal still needs to be paid in full.

Now as it was a non export animal, the hunter propably feels he did not get anything out of it, but I still need to pay it as part of my quota.

In all cases that I know of that something simmelar happened, it was on plains game, and the client / hunter just paid. In this case it was an elephant, and the hunter refuses to pay for it.

My take is that I did not pull the trigger, the hunter did, and he missed the spot that would have lessened the likelyhood that the bullet exits the animal, thus he is responsible.
What is your take?

I'd be interested to hear more about how the animals were standing.
Never been elephant hunting. Curious to learn more and how its done. But the way I read it, the backstop was another elephant?

No dog in this situation, but, from the evidence given, there seems to have been a breakdown in communication between the client and the PH. The PH should have taken a little time to make sure the client was comfortable with the situation and the shot recommeneded. The client should have made ANY reservations he had about taking the shot, known to the PH. I think there is a fairly equal amount of resposibilty to be shared in this case. JMO.

Ultimately I guess that if the client KNEW it was a tight shot and tried it, then it falls back to him. If on the other hand the PH said that it looks good, go ahead and shoot, then it is ALL on the PRO who gave the green light.

Karl
I talked with my PH in Zim about this same situation. We did this before we started hunting so I was clear what I would be doing. I feel if I screwed up the shot it is my responsability. If the PH tells me to take a shot knowing it is risky he bears at least some responability. I feel that if I was the hunter you are speaking of I would be at fault and take the responsability. I know you probably feel bad about it but I don't think it should be all on your shoulders.

BTW he missed a 20 yard shot by 2 feet. Client needs to pay this one, then pay for shooting lessons.

Ultimately the shooter has to be responsible but I think many of us have had situations where a PH is yelling or telling you to shoot when no shot exists; at least not a shot with a high probability of a good outcome. I've turned down most but have taken some as well. It certainly doesn't feel right after taking those shots; even when the outcome is good.

JCS271:

Next time you go elephant hunting make sure your PH knows he has to find you a solitary bull.

With all the postings on practicing shots and varying scenarios before the hunt, shot placement; those that will only go frontal, others that will only opt for a side brain, the heart specialists, and on, and on it goes.

We have a hunter who at 20 yards pulls a shot 2ft to the right and the blame or part thereof gets chucked at the PH?

Hell chaps, 20 cms at 20 yards is already quite some pull but 2 ft?.........Give us break !!

Just to clear up some misunderstandings:
1) the accidental elephant was fully exposed behind the south end of the elephant that was to be shot, so not directly behind it.
2) I do think that this was a total accident, no intention from either me or the hunter, but the council still wants their money, and as I did not pull the trigger, and the hunter missed by a fair margin, he should be responsible
3) this was not the hunters first big game animal, and also not his first animal he shot on that trip with me, and up till then, he shot well enough to take a 20 yard shot at an elephant from maybe 10 degreesfacing away. (also on the shooting range)
4) he used a loaner gun from me, a .404 Jefferys with a 400gr bullet at a cronographed 2070 ft/ sec. North Fork FN.
5) I am not asking him any more than the cost to me on the elephant.
6) in this case, I was both the outfitter and the PH, but it could have been diffrent, that is why I asked the question as such.
7) my contract states that if any animal is shot intentionally or unintentionally and the government decides it has to be paid for, the client is responsible.

I just asked the question to find out what others think fair is, and it seems like most agree with me on what is fair.

Based on the facts as reported, IMHO, the hunter should pay for his mistake, end of story.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl S:

I just asked the question to find out what others think fair is, and it seems like most agree with me on what is fair.

Well, with all due respect and with the understanding that no one is suggesting you're misrepresenting anything, the voting is based only on the version we have from you. There's still the hunter's side of the story.

Even considering that we haven't heard anything from the hunter yet, I point out that the contrary (or at least compromise) position is very well represented.

Personally, I voted you guys should work it out and each carry some responsibility. Generally, there are fewer mistakes made when everyone has some skin in the game.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
JCS271:

Next time you go elephant hunting make sure your PH knows he has to find you a solitary bull.

I think you misunderstood my post, like I said earlier, I always hold myself responsible for MY shots. I was just trying to point out some scenarios where I believe a PH would have some accountability for a poor outcome. Nothing more.

P.S. If as you say in your second post, the contract states the hunter pays for unintentional animals, then it is a done deal. Your client needs to get out his checkbook.

we don't have the client's side of this. What are his justifications for not paying for the second elephant?


Assuming he knew where the elephant's earhole is located, the client bears most of the responsibility for the errant shot and its consequences. If didn't know because the PH did not educate him, well that is something else entirely.

The PH is partially responsible due to his putting his client in the position where an errant shot would have consequences.

I would put the ratio at 80% (client)-20%(PH).

I recommend that you speak with the conservancy and ask them to reconsider. Shit happens often enough in Africa that a reduced trophy fee is warranted.

If they stand fast, you know what will happen.

The client will either not pay for any animals shot and spend the next year or two bad-mouthing you to anyone who will listen and carpet bombing the internet forums with tales of how you and the conservancy tried to screw him, or he will pay, and spend the next year or two bad-mouthing you to anyone who will listen and carpet bombing the internet forums with tales of how you and the conservancy screwed him.

I would advise the conservancy that they will receive far more negative advertising than the $5000 trophy fee is worth.

George

You pull the trigger and it's yours. The client is totally on the hook for this one. That said it sure would be classy if the PH/outfitter were able to help a bit.

Brett

Karl, If all you are asking for is to cover your cost, not the los of another hunt. The client should pay.

Karl,

You must be lyeing. Don't you know that FN bullets never deflect? Seriously, please describe in detail where the bullet hit the elephant, what it hit while going through it, where it exited and the angle of entry and exit. Those of us interested in bullet performance will be very interested.

465H&H

i am for the client paying most of the cost anyway. fortunately, when i shot my lion between the eyes my shot did not deflect and hit the other lion lying right next to him. would you have charged me for the other lion, karl??

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Broken horn or brained? I didn't know a broken horn could kill an Impala.

Die Ou Jagter,
One could conceive of the bullet breaking off a horn and causing something like a skull fracture with a brisk epidural bleed inside the skull,
that yet did not render the animal unconscious immediately,
but killed it very soon, as it ran away ... just sayin'.

465H&H,
Those copper FN solids get mashed into round nose solids by elephant skull, sometimes.
If it had been a brass FN solid, at least it might have passed straight through, even if 2 feet flinched off target, might not have veered inside the elephant, so squirrely.
Lessee ... two feet from the ear hole ...did he shoot it in the facial cheek or the rump cheek ... ?


Karl S,
It is not like you told the client to shoot an impala in the ear hole at long range.
It is quite desirable to shoot an elephant in the ear hole at 20 yards, right?
You have done no wrong that I can tell.
I cannot say the same for the client.
You are only left with damage control ...
I am going to stop "just sayin'" now.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Broken horn or brained? I didn't know a broken horn could kill an Impala.

Die Ou Jagter,
One could conceive of the bullet breaking off a horn and causing something like a skull fracture with a brisk epidural bleed inside the skull,
that yet did not render the animal unconscious immediately,
but killed it very soon, as it ran away ... just sayin'.

465H&H,
Those copper FN solids get mashed into round nose solids by elephant skull, sometimes.
If it had been a brass FN solid, at least it might have passed straight through, even if 2 feet flinched off target, might not have veered inside the elephant, so squirrely.
Lessee ... two feet from the ear hole ...did he shoot it in the facial cheek or the rump cheek ... ?


Karl S,
It is not like you told the client to shoot an impala in the ear hole at long range.
It is quite desirable to shoot an elephant in the ear hole at 20 yards, right?
You have done no wrong that I can tell.
I cannot say the same for the client.
You are only left with damage control ...
I am going to stop "just sayin'" now.

RIP,

It has always been my position that any solid can and will veer under the right conditions. I was just jabing those that seem to think any FN solid is immune to veering. We don't know if this bullet was deformed or not. Hopefully, Karl will fill in some details.

465H&H

465H&H

465H&H,
OK, so I can't quit ... just sayin'.
You are right. Even the metallurgy of a brass FN solid could be flawed, and some of the nose might sheer off on a slant, and the bullet would veer ...
And you have pointed out that shooting elephants with solids in a herd situation is always risky for the PH to advise?
Karl is still left with only damage control.

It is unfortunate, but the client must pay.

My shot, my fault.