quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Mac,

May I remind you that those who do "hunt" with Mark Sullivan are terrible shots - his own words - and really have no business facing a charge by a wounded buffalo

You may be right about them standing a charge, but the coup de grace can be administered without generating a charge! The definition of COUP DE GRACE is A blow of mercy for the wounded animal! That belongs to the client!

quote:

Hence him taking charge, after all the cameras are set up properly, to give the buffalo the choice of how to die!

Also forgetting that the poor buffalo had no intention of dying in the first place

..............................................................

Good Grief!

Mark Sullivan:

SCI:


Is there anything new or interesting we can talk about here? This shit got old a long time ago.

Hey Todd,

You know the will not stop, nor will the silly and rude comments of some of the usual posters. That's why some of us rarely post anymore and refuse to participate in the contests any longer.

quote:

Originally posted by LionHunter:
Hey Todd,

You know the will not stop, nor will the silly and rude comments of some of the usual posters. That's why some of us rarely post anymore and refuse to participate in the contests any longer.

I hear ya Pardner!

"and there in lies the whole problem most find with Mark Sullivan! The problem is the downed animal is not the property of MS but belongs to the client! If the client wants to press a charge to be stopped by himself, that is one thing, if not the client should be instructed where to place the finishing shot. Some may find this entertaining, but are disregarding who actually owns the buffalo and the coup de grace! (Blow of mercy)

The final killing of the animal by Mark is a very selfish act to say the least, IMO!

I can assure you he would not pull that stunt on me!"

Mac, with respect, I dont understand your point.Are you saying that the client who hunts with Mark doesnt want himself and Mark to withstand a charge? Or court a charge? I really doubt that. After all his videos, anyone who hunts with Mark KNOWS or SHOULD KNOW that a charge is possibly on the menu.
And how many sport hunters want to face a charge ALONE and not have back up? you guessed it.. very few
So as I see it, marks clients want and expect his style of hunting. Including backup when there is a charge. It may not be for you or I, but that's what his clients want and pay for.

And I, for once, don't see anything wrong with "pushing the animal". Its a lot more sporting, IMO, than "letting the animal stiffen" while the PH smokes a cigarette. What about the agony that the animal is in? Shouldnt it be ended as soon as possible? And what is more sporting, the hunter taking added risk to end the animals suffering, or "letting it stiffen?'
In my opinion, if an animal is wounded, it should be followed up right away, and despatched despite added risk.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Good Grief!

Mark Sullivan:

SCI:


Is there anything new or interesting we can talk about here? This shit got old a long time ago.

I would love to talk about something USEFUL SCI has done - cannot hear much of that.

I would love to talk about the great hunters who hunt with Mark Sullivan, but he said it himself, no one who can actually shoot hunts with him

Here is Mark's own letter to AR members.

In his very own words.

Make your own judgment if this is a sane person writing such rubbish!



To members of AR, friends, and clients:

It gives me great pleasure to have this opportunity to write you. To the surprise of many, I have not purposely avoided this day. I am not as well versed in the computer arena as many of you, nor do I wish to be. I live a simple life. I have never tried or wanted to be a disruptive influence. I go about my business one day at a time. I infringe upon no one. I expect the same from others. I suppose this is why I am misunderstood. People believe I am aloof; and perhaps even arrogant. I am none of the above. My intentions are honorable, I assure you. For my critics on this forum I now answer your allegations against me.

I began my professional hunting career in Tanzania in 1990 at the age of 40. Then as now; I go about my business one day at a time. I offend no one. I am professional to everyone. I have no ax to grind and; no dog in the fight. As I did 20 years ago, I still, in my view, hunt for all of the right reasons and none of the bad as I have so often been accused. I do not hunt for the camera or to show off. I do not brag or boast. I instruct. I answer questions. I also write books. I make documentary hunting films that are responsible for thousands of hunters going on safari each year.

My movies evoke great emotion. Either you like them or you do not. Regardless of your emotions so invoked, they are true. The charges are real. If you watch them with an unbiased eye, you will notice no edits ever occur moments before or during a charge. In all cases, my clients shoot first. My shot always follows theirs. The footage is unaltered. It is authentic as it happens footage. Whether you like what you see or not is a different matter. The life and death events depicted on the screen cannot be denied. In the wild, everyday is kill or be killed, eat or be eaten. My films simply show this raw side of nature.

I suppose the reason why a great many people hate me and my movies, for lack of a better description, is I do what I do because it is who I am. Just as it may be your nature not to take chances, which makes you who and what you are. I love the confrontation. I seek it. I enjoy a fight to the death. I relish the idea that if I perform poorly I die a horrible death. I’m attracted to the cycle of life and death. I often try and get as close to death as I can, crossing the line if I choose, just to get a good whiff. Last season I enjoyed four outstanding life and death charges with as many clients. No cameraman was present. Each client came away with a life defining experience. Each one would do it again if given the opportunity.

I know my manner and method of hunting is controversial. Yet, in my opinion, it represents the finest hunting there is. I honor the life I am about to take by offering my life in return. I can offer no more and therefore give hunting my all. If I fail to kill, I die. It is as simple as that. If we are to believe in the sport we call “dangerous game hunting,” then why do so many do everything in their power to remove as much danger as possible? Why call it dangerous game? Why not call it “least dangerous” if the object is to remove all danger? Why criticize me for accepting the danger in our sport? I do not like killing. I do like hunting—there is a difference. Anyone can kill a wounded Cape buffalo standing his ground 40 yards away. In my opinion, to do so is killing. On the other hand, to walk up and let that magnificent animal decide how he is to die in battle is great hunting. If you lack courage that is something I cannot help you with. But to condemn me because I have the courage you lack is unfair and unjust.

For example, a client shoots and wounds a buffalo. Then the buffalo is allowed to run. The client and professional hunter sit down for 30 to 45 minutes to let the buffalo “stiffen.” Is the buffalo not suffering during this time? The buffalo is allowed to “stiffen” which is code word to die. Is that “dangerous game” hunting to you? I pursue my buffalo immediately, every time. I do not want to find him dead. I want him alive. I want him to charge to his death or mine should I fail to stop him. Killing is boring. Great hunting never is. This is who I am. While I am on this point of clients wounding dangerous game and how quickly I go after it, let me address the often-mentioned criticism that I not only risk my own life, but that of my client. Over the past 20 years I have been a professional hunter I have never had a client (or tracker) harmed by an animal being hunted. In every instance, I first obtain express permission from the client. More often than not, a client chooses me to hunt with because of the unique hunting experience I offer. A client knows I have the proven experience to close with dangerous game and correctly books his safari. If the truth be known, I make a pretty good insurance policy.

Mr. Kim Petersen posted a letter addressed to me. I wish to answer his allegations.

The first is I intentionally wound buffalo so as to prompt them into charging. This is not true. I instruct my clients to always make the best possible shot. The indisputable fact is clients shoot poorly and nothing will ever change that reality. Coupled with the fact buffalo are notoriously difficult to kill, these two conditions make hunting them a challenge. I know many of you have killed buffalo with one shot. That is not the norm. Buffalo take a great deal of killing. I know. I have the experience to prove it. The notion that I use a .22 to shoot buffalo in the balls is not worth the effort I am about to make to dispute it, but here it goes anyway. I do not know where you hunt your buffalo. Where I hunt my buffalo the grass, bush, trees, and every other obstacle God created obscures most parts of a buffalo anyhow. In 20 years I do not recall ever seeing the testicles of a buffalo before he was shot nor have I ever had any inclination to try and shoot them. What is the point? For those who have no penchant for ever doing what I do, I can only imagine their minds race wild with things that don’t matter. If you want a buffalo to charge, put yourself in front of him, let him see you, then walk directly at him. The notion that I would waste my time using a .22 should embarrass those spreading the rumor.

The second question is more of a statement than a question. After a client takes his shot on dangerous game, I determine whether or not a backup shot is necessary or even possible. The last thing I want is for a wounded animal to get away. Contrary to what I have been accused of, I do fire backup shots quickly. More often than not, I have been blamed for firing too quickly, too often. I shoot as a backup for a number of reasons. Clients demand that I do. I determine they need help by observing their skills or lack thereof. If I am filming I believe more gun shots are better than fewer gun shots. I remember purchasing a hunting movie where I waited 45 minutes to hear the first gun shot. That may be the kind of movie you like to watch, but not me.

The second part of this is I “taunt my prey…for the purpose of filming a charge.” While this statement seems logical to the inexperienced, it is precisely for that reason why it is not true. Let me explain. An inexperienced client, or equally inexperienced professional hunter, wrongly believes that in order to get a wounded buffalo to charge, you must first “taunt” him. The very fact that someone says this tells me he has limited dangerous game experience and does not know what he says. His knowledge of wounded buffalo behavior is incomplete or simply nonexistent. Let me set the record straight. There are two kinds of buffalo; those that run and those that charge. Ninety-five percent of all wounded buffalo fall into the first category. Those that run will never charge. They are cowards and no amount of campfire story telling will change that fact. The five percent that charge do not have to be taunted at all. The moment it sees you they charge. The idea that it must be taunted into charging is simply untrue. The mere fact that you have violated their personal space by being there is enough to set them off. What is not known beforehand is which kind of buffalo you are confronting. I have never had a buffalo that first runs away, later turn and charge. In my new book “Fear No Death” I go into great detail about this and much more. Anyone interested in knowing what I know should obtain a copy.

The third item, “my clients must sign a non-disclosure agreement” is a new one. I marvel at the creativity of the Mark Sullivan haters of the world. It reminds me when people say my cajones are the size of grapefruit. While I am sure they are trying to flatter me, I later set the record straight and confessed they are the size of watermelons. Directing a client not to talk about his safari with Mark Sullivan would be like trying to tell your wife she can’t go shopping. My clients are highly educated professional people and would never sign such a document. I could no more tell them what to do than they could tell me.

The fourth question conflicts with question #2. On the one hand I am accused of not “firing backup shots to kill a buffalo” at the first opportunity and now I am accused of firing shots “on top of my clients.” Let me tell you this story. In 1997 I did not have a cameraman. Sensitive to the criticism that I shoot clients game “on their dime” I decided to experiment. I would not help a single client shoot his buffalo, except if one charged, and none did. The next three clients wounded five buffalo and all were lost. Each bull had an outside horn measurement greater than 40 inches with one I was sure would exceed 45 inches. All shots were standing broadside shots under 100 yards. The animals seemingly there for the taking and yet they were lost to die a horrible death in the bush. I ask you, “Is that what you want?” Do you wish me not to shoot so the animal runs off never to be found? I cannot believe any hunter wants that. I certainly do not. I believe we have an obligation to kill the animal as quickly and as humanely as possible.

In my movie Death by the TON, the young man’s statement deserves an explanation. I was perturbed you may say, but not for the reasons you state. This is where the way I hunt differs from how you hunt. The reason why I was disappointed is because the charging hippo was too far away to be shot. He was 21 feet away. In my opinion that is too far for a certain killing shot. My instructions to my client (before we entered the arena) were to wait until the hippo breaks the 10 foot barrier before shooting. He did not do that. I do not believe in shooting early. Twenty one feet is much too far. Why is it too far? It goes to the core of how I hunt dangerous game. I believe 10 feet is the correct distance to begin shooting; not 21 feet. It is all about the hunt, not the kill. At 10 feet it is hunting. At 21 feet it is killing. This is how I hunt. By the way, for those of you who have never stood just ten feet in front of a charging animal, there is not a lot of time to shoot. This is why it appears I am shooting “on top of my client” to the inexperienced. If you disagree that is fine. However, your disagreeing with me does not make you right. Conversely, these are solely my views. They do not make me correct either. I prefer to let my clients determine if my hunting method is right for them.

Tomorrow, Saturday, I leave for Tanzania to begin my 21st season. I will not be present to respond to your comments. If I have insulted any of you, please accept my full and complete apology. My intention is not to irritate. My writing manner is direct much like my manner and method of hunting. This is how I am made. It is what makes me—me. I have no trouble with those who disagree. But until you hunt with me you will never know me. I have more clients this year than I have ever had. I do not hold a gun to their heads to get them to sign up. They come to me willingly and leave as life-long friends. I welcome each and everyone one of you to do the same. Remember, shoot straight and let them come close!

In closing, I wish to personally thank those in support of my SCI situation. I know many of you have written SCI on my behalf. I cannot begin to thank you enough. I am humbled by your generosity. I am honored with your friendship. Recently I renewed my membership for an additional three years. Regardless of their treatment of me, I will continue to support SCI at every opportunity.

Great Hunting and Best Wishes,

Mark Sullivan
Professional Hunter

Yes, yes. We've all heard it before.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Yes, yes. We've all heard it before.

I know.

Full of bullshit isn't it?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Yes, yes. We've all heard it before.

I know.

Full of bullshit isn't it?

Take a look at "Total Hours Usage" and "New Topics". See a trend? Wonder why?

http://forums.accuratereloadin...2101161/m/8201054112

http://forums.accuratereloadin...2101161/m/4871041102

http://forums.accuratereloadin...2101161/m/4811076981

http://forums.accuratereloadin...2101161/m/1421048571

http://forums.accuratereloadin...2101161/m/3091048651

quote:

The second part of this is I “taunt my prey…for the purpose of filming a charge.” While this statement seems logical to the inexperienced, it is precisely for that reason why it is not true. Let me explain. An inexperienced client, or equally inexperienced professional hunter, wrongly believes that in order to get a wounded buffalo to charge, you must first “taunt” him. The very fact that someone says this tells me he has limited dangerous game experience and does not know what he says. His knowledge of wounded buffalo behavior is incomplete or simply nonexistent.

Let us see now, this nut has more experience than professionals who have spent all their lives hunting dangerous game.

And have had only one or two charges from animals they did not even know were there!

Each time he opens his mouth, he puts his foot in it

With an attitude like that he may not come back from TZ in one piece . and he is a liecened PH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by bambazonke:
With an attitude like that he may not come back from TZ in one piece . and he is a liecened PH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nothing is going to happen to him, he takes no chances whatsoever.

He is the perfect Hollywood hero - where everything is laid out for a perfect show piece

He is a licensed PH, but I don't know that he knows the meaning of the word "professional"1

Everything he does, leads one to believe his only interest is to show himself as the hero of killing a dangerous game animal.

If you read his letter above, he actually states he offers his life to the buffalo!!??

With the buffalo lying ahead of him right in the open, with him holding a double barrel 600 Nitro Express???

quote:

Originally posted by emron:

Mac, with respect, I dont understand your point.Are you saying that the client who hunts with Mark doesnt want himself and Mark to withstand a charge? Or court a charge? I really doubt that. =

emron, I don't think anyone should force a charge! In every case the animal is already down, and the proper way to end this,IMO, is to simply finish it with a killing shot by the client!
Forcing a charge is not only not necessary but is ill conceived risk that has nothing to do with ethical hunting.

It is more than evident that the people who buy his films agree with MS and fail to see the stunt factor and disrespect of the wounded buffalo by letting him suffer while MS talks to the camera while the poor wounded and down buffalo struggles in the background.

Once more I have let myself be dragged into these stupid discussions, but I simply can't see how anyone here could think MS is entitled to shoot the clients animal unless it is to stop an unexpected charge decided by the buffalo, not by the PH.

....................It is plain that many disagree with me, and that is fine, so I will leave this to the MS worshippers!
..................................................................... BYE

Saw that skull in half and you will see that the brain is lower than the hole.