Let's say one really enjoys hunting a particular species but already has a good mount hanging.
Let's say one has tallied the post-hunt expenses required to place the mounts one has and that sum equates to enough money to finance an extra trip, every few years.
Let's say one feels the experience is what matters most and all else is secondary.
Let's say one maintains an open mind, in regard to bringing home trophies superior to those already hanging.
Let's say one ensures, always, the meat is put to good use.
Let's say one wants to take as many species as the next fellow but has not the resouces to do so, let alone, absorb the resultant shipping and taxidermy expenses.
Let's say one has exhausted all available or agreed upon allotment of space, for the hanging of trophy mounts.
Shall one cease to hunt?
Shall one enjoy fewer hunting experiences, in deference to paying homage to trophies? ... trophies which may already have representation within ones' collection?

Let' say we try to see the other man's perspective before imposing our own.
Our desires may be equal ... but little else.

Years ago, I read of Craig Boddington's leaving behind, a 46" cape buffalo, in the wake of a Zambia hunt with Russ Broome. At first, I thought him crazy ... I now understand.

I feel as though a quality photography makes for an outstanding trophy remembrance, even if you don't bring the cape and horns home. The animal is just as dead either way, his meat has been utilized in the same manner, and you can be sure that any outfitter you leave your trophies with upon your return home will find a market of some sort for them. They're scrounging for every buck possible, and you can bet that they'll sell the capes and horns to someone. Nothing is lost to anyone either way.

Nick, you're right about enjoying certain species but not necessarily wanting to put up every specimen on the wall that you'll ever take of these same animals. I especially like to hunt kudu and eland, but I'll be dipped if I'm going to invest in shoulder mounts of every one I have taken and will likely take in the future, and no, I won't stop hunting them.

Zebra rugs make outstanding gifts, and my wife and I often make gifts of these to special friends who don't hunt. One of our non-hunting friends in Arizona was thrilled when we presented a fine Burchell's zebra rug as a gift, and it looks outstanding in his office. It's a great use for "yet another" zebra after you're full up on them yourself.........

AD

There are a host of other reasons that might come into play, depending on the individual.
In way of example: I've got a 4x3 muledeer on the wall, only 24" wide. Quite average, really, but I've not filled his spot on the wall with any of a dozen bigger bucks because he was the result of one of my best efforts as a hunter. Another buck, my first good muledeer, stays, no matter what. I've taken mountain muledeer that were better trophies, including several 30"+ mainframes but mounted only one, which was taken in the company of a life-long friend and hunting partner. To me, the photos are priceless.

So there are now three types of hunters.

Traditionally there were meat hunters. They often regarded trophy hunters as lesser specimens.

Then there were trophy hunters. Who often did not care what happened to the meat, only the horns, antlers, ivory and headskins.

Now it seems there is the simple killing hunters. Don't harvest anything, just want to kill it.

I understand the rationale of not wanting to pay for multiple shoulder mounts, less so not even wanting a skullcap mount or a skin. In Africa the meat is rarely wasted.

I personally do have a bit of a problem is just hunting, killing and forgetting. Though of course will cull and feral extermination hunts here we do it all the time.

I don't know, somehow it "sticks" a little in the throat to do it with "finer" game animals. Just my personal opinion and not a judgement on other people.

What would you say of the "heroes" who killed off the best tuskers on the planet to make a buck. Oh yeah, I'm sure they worried about the meat. There are not three kinds of hunters, there are as many as there are those who hunt. We agree on nothing, 100%.

I consider myself a trophy hunter. I bring back most of what I shoot other than bait animals. I shared a camp a while back with a gentleman who shot a lion, two leopards, an elephant, and various plains game animals. He took nothing back that I am aware of. He said he had no trophies in his home. I assume he was there for just the love of the hunt. It took me a while to understand this. I guess there are different types of hunters.

quote:

---

don't know, somehow it "sticks" a little in the throat to do it with "finer" game animals. Just my personal opinion and not a judgement on other people.

---

As said it is my personal opinion.

You got the straight content of the that 4 word email and the explanation of it. I could care less what you think, let alone if you agree with me. straight enough? There are many points of view and even the same person's views can change, as circumstances dictate. Those who walk away may actually prefer to have the trophies mounted but chose to make the sacrifice in order to hunt again.

quote:

---

I could care less what you think, let alone if you agree with me. straight enough?

---

Why did you think my original comments were answering you??? They were on the thread as a whole.

***

Back to the topic.

If you do not want to take a trophy and have no use for the meat and the photo is the only trophy, why don't you just take a photo of a live animal?

It is far harder to photograph a live animal well in a hunting area than it is to shoot one. Photographs of live animals ALWAYS easily surpass a photo of a grinning hunter with a dead animal.

Again I'm not making personal attacks on any individuals, I'm just making a spirited discussion point of opinion on Allen's thread.

A number of the "heroes" or "heroines" in African hunting history ended up just doing that. After years of 'slaughter' (their words not mine) they decided it was much more noble to photograph or film wild African animals. An example was Karen Blixen. She still hunted game for meat but rarely hunted for trophies after a while. At least she claimed this in a literary dinner in New York. As for the truth of the statement ......

I find the hunters they sometimes kill the most change their opinions later in life and become quite hypocritical and preservationalist in attitude. I think the ethics were lacking which add up to longer term enjoyment. (Again no comments on ANYONE here I am talking about people I directly know.

John, I can see we are speaking of two totally different incidents, some years apart but that does not excuse the inference of your remark.

"We agree on nothing, 100%" referred to hunters, generally.

I'm done here.

Nick

I will retract the comments if I misunderstood. Maybe I did misunderstand, maybe I understood all too well. But now edited out. I prefer to carry on discussions in the open, directly and with good intentions.

If I have a problem, I go direct to the person either by email, PM or on a public board. I don't need to be "excused" for a true remark BTW.

BTW? O.K. ... BTW - It's been three years John.
Where are all the promised photos?

wow, a lot of different opinions and very strong beliefs going on this topic. As a Ph in Tanzania and hunting all of my life in Tanzania, I too have my own opinions and beliefs, but this is what it comes to and what I think if you guys do not care to here another thought.

I am a professional in my business and deal with many different types of hunters and I have to be able to accommodate different people all the time. I totally believe that when hunting animals and then killing an animal it should be respected in all ways and should be hunted ethically no matter what, which I think everyone does agree with.

As long as a client pays for a safari and our services to hunt in our areas, then it is not up to me to tell him whether to keep his trophies or not. I personally as a PH will do my very best to get my client the best trophies possible and hope that they are as proud of their trophy as I am when we do manage to take a trophy. A Ph is just as proud of the trophy as the client is, and as long as my client is happy and satisfied of his trophy, then I have done my job.

If a client does not want to take their trophies with them and it is just a matter of the extra expenses, then I am okay with it. I will ask the client if they would mind if I kept the trophies though, as I would then select a few and have them displayed in camp or the office for other clients to enjoy.

I understand where some of you think that the animal is not being respected if not taken by the client, BUT if the client has paid for the safari and paid the trophy fee for the animals, then that hunter has done just as much for conservation as any other hunter who does take their trophies.

The animals that we do hunt do need to be fully respected and enjoyed, but that is where the hunt itself and the joy of trying to out smart an animal is the real memory and the where the real respect happens for the animal.

Yes, I would prefer for a client to take their trophies home with them, as this lets me know that they are happy with their trophies. I have had several clients that do hunt with me that have already shot everything and do not want any more heads or skins. They just want to enjoy the hunt and the challenge of hunting and that is what they enjoy the most. I have no problem with this as they have hunted hard and have respected the animals that they have taken. The skin and horn is just another way of having the memory of the animal in your house, but a picture will also do the same to some.

If you do a lot of hunting, it is almost impossible to continue to have everything mounted. So, does this mean that clients should stop hunting because they have no more room for a mount? I do not think so as it is the actual hunt and being in Africa that matters the most.

The respect of any animal is the way it is hunted and not that it is on the wall. When you order a steak in a restaurant and pay for it, it is your decision whether you want to eat the steak or not! If you do not eat the steak, does that mean you are not respecting the cow?

My point here is that if a client pays for the safari and the trophy fees and does not want to take the skins and horns home, they are doing just as much for conservation than any other client that does want to mount their trophies home.

Well said Adam.

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nickudu:
BTW? O.K. ... BTW - It's been three years John.
Where are all the promised photos?

---

(ie boo hoo hoo)

Off topic but if the moderator of this forum wants it brought out fully in the open we can. I typed it all out here but decided to hold off for the moment.

At least here you are alluding to things I can see rather than the cowardly slanderous attack you made in an email behind my back. Then had the self-righteous gall to whine the slanderous email was supposed to be private!

As for the photos, who would trust you with any personal material with your history of copyright infringement?!

I think your attack on me was personal and nothing to do with this thread topic and I believe you have proved it.


(I have edited this several times, as I have a hell of lot more I could say but don't see the point. Continue if you like and we can provide a very entertaining off topic thread for AR browsers. But why on earth did I bother to go back and edit my previous posts to try to stop a fight with this character).

Safari 12, VERY well said indeed.
Ultimately what we are all talking about is individual morality. I can not impose my morals on another anymore than they could impose their beliefs on me.

Chuck,

It's not even a question of morality. The animals are not 'wasted'; in almost all cases, the meat is salvaged and eaten by someone.
The animals are almost always paid for (exceptions for some vermin species and animals taken for nyama aside).

While some people consider the mounted trophy to be a receipt/proof/memento or some such thing, others do not.

It's a matter of personal preference, and not subject to judgment by others.

Different strokes for different folks.

George

George, I think were saying the very same thing. In either event I wholeheartidly agree that its not subject to interpretation or judgement by others.

Yes, Chuck, we are in agreement. I just disagree that this has anything to do with morality.

I don't see this as anyone else's business but the client's, any more than someone's preference for skull mounts over shoulder mounts or shoulder mounts over full mounts.

George

safari 12

Very well put!

Me, I enjoy taking everything home that I shoot, maybe someday I'll say enuogh is enough! but for now I'll have plenty of shipping bills.

I can understand how some of you don't want the mounts any more, believe me, I've sold alot of mounts for clients. And they still hunt, they just enjoy "The Hunt" if they get something, it's a memory and a good one!

Gentlemen - Whatever happened to the container by sea option that was being researched by some regulars here?

Safari 12,

VERY well said!

There are three kinds of people whom scare me a lot in this world ...

1) The long standing hunter whom becomes an avid conservationist and thinks that all those who hunt have some problem

2) The reformed drinker whom sees the light and thinks all us whom enjoy a good couple of drinks or three are pricks just because he does not drink anymore

3) And FINALLY the BORN again Christian whom was a womaniser a piss head and a bullshitter and now has seen a flash of light and thinks all us people whom enjoy the fruits of life are heathens ..



The smallest violin in the world and it playing JUST FOR YOU ...

What a wondeful world it is when we have licence to be critical of others (-:

you can only mount so many of them and your out of room...

To me the circumstances of the chase and the hunt is my trophy, I see little beauty in a mounted head. An animal just never looks right in death to me. I usually view a kill as between me and the animal and think maybe some trophy rooms indicate a huge ego on the hunters part. Not always but sometimes, and the same for the record book. the only person that sees your name in the record book is you as a matter of fact.

I have a huge trophy room, but its mostly horns stacked up in the corners of my shop, garage or bleached skulls in my office. I can tell you the circumstances of every animal I have shot and what caliber and load I used and yet I can't remember what I did yesterday.

Photos are a nice options...and the lack of taxidermy bills will allow you to shoot a lot more game and do a lot more hunting as opposed to bragging.

Its a choice for each of us to determine. No one opinnion is right.

Let me put it this way.

I'd sure as hell rather pay my taxidermist, or even my building contractor, before NStar, Keyspan, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon & c., & c., & c.

At least for as long as Life-Form Taxidermy of White River, Mpumalanga, RSA, is sending the bills, I know I'm alive and I've had some real life fun!

Great post Allen--my thoughts exactly and it is great to compare notes with everyone on this topic.
I'm in my 60's, have a den and a 20x20 rec room full of stuff. My wife has been very understanding through all this and I know she takes heat from other women, even good friends, as how she can put up with the trophies. Or maybe they mean me.
The comments by Nickudu and others on the expense and hassle in getting the trophies back and paid for are right on.
Also, in a few years we will be moving. It looks like we are going to have a separate van for the trophies--so it doesn't make sense to collect more.
On my last hunt I shot video and even hired a professional to do a few days worth of filming, and this turned out to be a nice remembrance.
BUT NO MORE TROPHIES!
In the future I am signed up for Africa for non-trophy hunts. Also a PH in Australia, who I shot several SCI trophies with, informed me I could come back for a management hunt.

I still love big game hunting, big bore rifles, and can still hunt, but I am not going to stuff what I shoot or feel guilty about it.

Dak

Someone mentioned giving trophies away to schools. That is what I have done, and I take a deduction for it.

I had three caribou shoulder mounts and gave one away to my daughter's high school science room. Took a kilobuck deduction for it.

The other thing you can do is give stuff away to friends and family. I have two zebra skins, but my brother wants one and he doesn't need to shoot one, so on my next trip he buying my zebra skin for the TF.

Speaking of zebra skins, getting a rug made is a waste of money in my opinion. Just tan it and throw it over a sofa or on the floor. Skulls straight out of the crate are often good enough to display outright.

Thats a great idea for old trophys but unless I'm wrong it wouldn't be a very prudent financial move. Most caribou shoulder mounts are $1,000 ish. If you take that same amount as a deduction and multiply it by the actual percent you get off your taxes you will only be getting a net return of about $100 if your lucky. Personally I'll just keep my 10 C notes for my next hunt.

The expense on taxidermy and shipping is significant.
But why wasn`t this thread like:
"Who`s sick and tired of gunsmith-bills and gun safes?"
I`m not trying to be rude, but a lot of guys here seems to use a lot of money on guns and ammo. I have decided to use less money on new guns, and rather use them for hunting. Still I have a couple of guns I just need to get..
I`m also trying to quit reading all those gun magazines. They make me crazy, because the desire to own many guns really grow out of proportions..
Anyone agrees with me?

Anders
I can't quite agree with you on the guns. I think I buy them only when I can get a deal and don't think I should lose money on them. Besides my kids will want them someday and they probably won't want to mess with a bunch of dusty old heads and rugs.

I was doing a search in planning for an upcoming Safari when I found this. Normally I don't bring back old threads but this one really bothered me.

There seems to be some simple and fundamental points that are just not getting hit here.

If you are hunting for meat, a trophy, both then more power to you. If somebody takes a deer and doesn't want the horns but wants the meat I have no problem with that.

I do think it is extremely selfish and self centered to kill any animal and just walk away happy because you got your rocks off. You are not a hunter you are a photographer or a murder you just haven't admitted it to yourself yet.

If you like the photo and the chase, bring your camera. If you just like killing shit you are sick.

Native Africans and Native Americans think the white man who kills for just the horns is a fool so I guess the guy who kills for the hell of it would be an asshole.

I want to know in what world some of you guys live in where you think that you will get the same service as a client who really wants the trophy that you would just burn. Get real! Lets go to a restaurant and pay the same for a meal and you act like an asshole and I'm polite, think we'll get the same service? Please.

If you don't want the meat and you don't want the trophy then why on earth are you out there with a rifle? Buy a camera already and stop kidding youself.

I guess I shouldn't be too surprised by some of these comments since every book I have ever read by a PH shows you that the honorable, well mannered, respectable, and capable client is the exception.

quote:

If you just like killing shit you are sick.

Calling Dr. Fein, Calling Dr. Fein!!! Somebody help me because apparently I'm sick...

But ! I do like to have my trophies mounted and the meat all goes to a good cause so I guess there's an element of salvation left. But I DO love killing shit {sic}. Oh and that last line about good clients being the exception according to PHs IS a load of shit. jorge

I think it's all a matter of the personal philosophy of the individual hunter. To me, the reason the best hunters choose to hunt could be summed up best by either Sher Jung or Jose Ortega y Gasset.

Jung wrote: The jungle is the place to test one’s mettle and one’s skill. It is a place for personal and individual adventure. To tackle the adversary on the ground of it’s own choosing and to outwit it in it’s own game of woodcraft is the real joy and thrill of hunting. Always remember that hunting is not just killing animals, it is much more than killing; Killing is the least important part of it’.

Gasset wrote: One doesn't hunt to kill, one kills to have hunted.

Following that logic, one could argue that the retention and preservation of the trophy is irrelevant.

Following the logic of an inch hunter, one could argue that the object of the excercise is simply to get the hunters name into a record book and again, the retention and preservation of the trophy might be irrelevant.

Equally, one could argue that the trophy is a way, and probably the most important way for the hunter to retain the memory of the hunt in his mind. Every time he looks at the trophy, he's taken back in his mind to the excitement and thrill of the hunt.

I guess what I'm really trying to say, is that it's entirely up to the individual hunter to decide if he wants to keep the trophy or not.

In other words, none of us have the right to condemn a hunter for having a different opinion to ourselves for opting to keep the trophy or otherwise.......

Isn't it great that we all have the freedom of choice to make up our own minds!

And that's all without even considering the financial implications of such a decision.

quote:

Originally posted by GeoffM24:
I was doing a search in planning for an upcoming Safari when I found this. Normally I don't bring back old threads but this one really bothered me.

There seems to be some simple and fundamental points that are just not getting hit here.

If you are hunting for meat, a trophy, both then more power to you. If somebody takes a deer and doesn't want the horns but wants the meat I have no problem with that.

I do think it is extremely selfish and self centered to kill any animal and just walk away happy because you got your rocks off. You are not a hunter you are a photographer or a murder you just haven't admitted it to yourself yet.

If you like the photo and the chase, bring your camera. If you just like killing shit you are sick.

Native Africans and Native Americans think the white man who kills for just the horns is a fool so I guess the guy who kills for the hell of it would be an asshole.

I want to know in what world some of you guys live in where you think that you will get the same service as a client who really wants the trophy that you would just burn. Get real! Lets go to a restaurant and pay the same for a meal and you act like an asshole and I'm polite, think we'll get the same service? Please.

If you don't want the meat and you don't want the trophy then why on earth are you out there with a rifle? Buy a camera already and stop kidding youself.

I guess I shouldn't be too surprised by some of these comments since every book I have ever read by a PH shows you that the honorable, well mannered, respectable, and capable client is the exception.

Geoff,

Hunting and taking a trophy animal IS the trophy. The cape, the horns, and hide are only mementos, as is a photograph.

Whether someone can't or won't have the remains of the animal dipped, packed, shipped, and mounted doesn't change the fact that they hunted and took a trophy animal. The fees were paid and the meat was utilized.

You place far too much importance on the material evidence of the hunt. And accusing others of being 'sick' or 'murderers' is uncalled for and is the tactic of anti-hunters.

After four safaris and many thousands of dollars in taxidermy bills, a few nicely composed photos commemorating the event and the expression on the faces of the hunter, PH, and trackers would suffice for me.

George

quote:

Maybe it's time for some to take up the camera rather than the gun if "wasting" bothers ones
thoughts.

For some species it sure is a hcck of a lot harder to get a good picture (not counting unhunted park animals) than it is to shoot it.

That said, I'm in the "something has to come home" camp. I'd rather do a good hunt for one or two species of which I could take skull and or hides, than a bag of seven that I'd have to leave behind. So if I ever find the cash to go on guided hunts that will be my philospohy. ;-)

I've only had a few animals mounted: my biggest roebuck, first fox, eurasian jay, first (and only so far) bighorn ram, first antelope; but not the four red deer stags, a dozen smaller roe bucks; not the moose, not the whitetail and mule deer, and the bears just got dry-tanned. I'm saving the $$ for specialties. For example any ram above 180 runs the risk of spending the rest of his life as a pedestal mount.

Frans

quote:

Originally posted by GeoffM24:

I do think it is extremely selfish and self centered to kill any animal and just walk away happy because you got your rocks off. You are not a hunter you are a photographer or a murder you just haven't admitted it to yourself yet.

If you just like killing shit you are sick.

I want to know in what world some of you guys live in where you think that you will get the same service as a client who really wants the trophy that you would just burn. Get real! Lets go to a restaurant and pay the same for a meal and you act like an asshole and I'm polite, think we'll get the same service? Please.

I guess I shouldn't be too surprised by some of these comments since every book I have ever read by a PH shows you that the honorable, well mannered, respectable, and capable client is the exception.

So the fact that I have to save for a year to afford a decent safari and will only be able to afford to bring home some of the trophies makes me a "sick", murdering "asshole". The fact that I love to hunt but have to do so on a reasonable budget makes me somehow less of an outdoorsman/hunter?? Oh I suppose I could bring home all of them and put off my next hunt for the amount of time it takes me to save the additional thousands for taxidermy and shipping, but then I would probably just be an "asshole" stuck at home not hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by GeoffM24:
There seems to be some simple and fundamental points that are just not getting hit here.

If you are hunting for meat, a trophy, both then more power to you. If somebody takes a deer and doesn't want the horns but wants the meat I have no problem with that.

I do think it is extremely selfish and self centered to kill any animal and just walk away happy because you got your rocks off. You are not a hunter you are a photographer or a murder you just haven't admitted it to yourself yet.

If you like the photo and the chase, bring your camera. If you just like killing shit you are sick.

Geoff, yours is one of the most thoughtless posts I have ever read on this forum. Sorry, but you are way off base and way out of line.

quote:

Originally posted by GeorgeS:

Hunting and taking a trophy animal IS the trophy. The cape, the horns, and hide are only mementos, as is a photograph.

Well said, George.

Geoff, FYI, these are the "simple and fundamental points." Hunting is an activity - an experience - and not a mere result.

quote:

Hunting is an activity - an experience - and not a mere result.

MR

I concur!

quote:

GeoffM24
one of us
Posted 09 January 2008 07:07
Hey guys,
I have been driving myself insane trying to figure out where to go for my first safari. As much as I'd like to eventually hunt dangerous game, namely buffalo, I think plains game is a better choice.

Namibia seems great but it isn't quite the Africa I have dreamed of. Zimbabwe is more along the lines of what I imagine but probably a better spot for me to go when I want to take a buff.

I called Wendell Reich and he seemed to have the perfect choice for me, Botswana. I was under the impression that Botswana was very expensive and he said plains game was not but dangerous game was.

It seems like the perfect combination of what I'm looking for as far as I can tell. Kudu Eland, and Gemsbuck are high on my list along with a warthog.

I read that Botswana MAY close to hunting at some point in the future which is also a consideration.

Right now I'm thinking May 2009 in Botswana.

I'd appreciate any insight or recomendations you might have.

I guess I should point out that most of us don't become "experts" until after our first safari.

quote:

I do think it is extremely selfish and self centered to kill any animal and just walk away happy because you got your rocks off.

Please help me follow your logic, how am I less "selfish and self centered" if I bring the trophies home?

quote:

why on earth are you out there with a rifle? Buy a camera already and stop kidding youself.

I can't believe anyone who has hunted and experienced the emotional journey of a successful hunt could ask this question.

If you step back and look at this thread you will see that most(all?) of the posters who advocate leaving all, or most of, the trophies behind are experienced hunters who have come to this conclusion after bringing many, many trophies home on their early trips. After several safaris most of us begin to notice that the memories are the real trophies. The heads are nice but not mandatory. I wonder if you will also come to this conclusion once you have some experience.

Most of us started out just like you. Of course
most of us knew better than to come on a public forum and make an ass of ourself.

Jason

Nasty post Geoff. Maybe you should go back to collecting Reg Mags or something.

You can go down any number of rabbit trails with this kind of faulty logic. I know a lot of people who bring back trophies and store them at the taxidermists for YEARS because they continue hunting, buying guns, etc. Is it wrong for them to put the animal into the freezer for years instead of up on the wall? Does this invalidate their hunt experience in some way or mean that they disrespect the animal? I don't think so. What invalidates someone is hearing them say that I have to think and act the same way they do. Now that I have typed that...that sounds like Communist thinking...the fact that I need to come into compliance with the "State". Who gets to decide who the State is?