quote:

I was always under the impression that you do not shoot from the truck as you will promote a situation whereas and thereafter animals flee for the horizon on the slightest sound or appearance of your bakkie?

If you hit what you are shooting at, regardless of where the shot is taken, the rest of the herd is NOT, going to learn an object lesson.

It's been my experience that as long as the truck keeps moving, the animals will stand and watch ... as they've become accustomed to vehicles passing by. But when the truck stops, they'll take off after a few seconds ... as they've learned that that's when the shooting starts.

In Mozambique Kappie and I were driving our landcruiser with the Sable Trail Productions logo emblazoned on each door. I swear the sable herds followed us as we drove along the trails. Would that have been fair to have shot one, that seemed to have been (decoyed) lured to the vehicle by the giant logo we had on the truck? Not.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

I was always under the impression that you do not shoot from the truck as you will promote a situation whereas and thereafter animals flee for the horizon on the slightest sound or appearance of your bakkie?

If you hit what you are shooting at, regardless of where the shot is taken, the rest of the herd is NOT, going to learn an object lesson.

So why would game flee in terror at the mere sight of a truck in areas where shooting from the truck is common practice?

quote:

One shoots from a truck.

One hunts on foot.

and one shoots lion and leopard from a blind/over a bait,...real lion hunting is done by tracking on foot, correct?

and one is not truly a hunter/worthy of a trophy if they track and finish off a wounded cat[or buff] from a helicopter, but according to some doing same from the relative safety/advantage of a vehicle is OK.[compared to on foot]..others think using the land vehicle in pursuit of wounded DG is also a no-no, or discrediting choice of action.

Then again if its the PH who's actually required to find and finish off the beast, is it really the clients success/trophy?

When your hunting animals for personal pleasure or trophy you have the luxury of implementing all sort of ethical boundaries ideologies that you may choose operate from.
Put yourself in a situation where you were essentially required to regularly take animals for survival/food and I bet one would devise/implement methods to make ones task as easy as possible.

Trax:

quote:

Then again if its the PH who's actually required to find and finish off the beast, is it really the clients success/trophy?

There is a reason for this: to keep the client out of harms way and minimize the risk in recovering the animal.

If the PH gets chewed he will receive all the well wishes and prayers for a speedy recovery - if the client gets done over the PH will get his ass chewed in large chunks especially if the incident makes the AR headlines.
Why else is it mandatory to be accompanied by a PH on all DG hunts?

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

Is it the client's success/trophy if the PH recovers the animal? - In accordance with the established and accepted norms, it is.

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:

I live by what appears to be a much more strict ethical standard for hunting than most on here but in no way does that make me right and others wrong. I won't detail my standards here as I don't want anyone to think I am pushing my standards on them.

465h&H

Sometime this is not a bad thing. A bit like the young Lion thing. Information educates.

Shooting from a vehicle? For me, I just can't find pleasure in that. Perhaps that is due to the amount of Culling from a truck (not hunting) we get to do over here.
Sitting in a Blind is different for me as you still need to deceive your quarry through tactics, also with a combination patience or excitement and with your senses worked overtime in most cases .

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
Is it the client's success/trophy if the PH recovers the animal? - In accordance with the established and accepted norms, it is.

I suppose if I stuffed-up and crashed one of my teams race cars and my other other team driver won the race in the other car, you could say it was somewhat of a success....

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
Trax:

quote:

Then again if its the PH who's actually required to find and finish off the beast, is it really the clients success/trophy?

There is a reason for this: to keep the client out of harms way and minimize the risk in recovering the animal.

If the PH gets chewed he will receive all the well wishes and prayers for a speedy recovery - if the client gets done over the PH will get his ass chewed in large chunks especially if the incident makes the AR headlines.
Why else is it mandatory to be accompanied by a PH on all DG hunts?

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

Is it the client's success/trophy if the PH recovers the animal? - In accordance with the established and accepted norms, it is.

I would sign that waiver in less than a heart beat.
I would never ask someone else to risk their health or life for me if I have done a sh*t job with my shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by Norwegianwoods:

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
Trax:

quote:

Then again if its the PH who's actually required to find and finish off the beast, is it really the clients success/trophy?

There is a reason for this: to keep the client out of harms way and minimize the risk in recovering the animal.

If the PH gets chewed he will receive all the well wishes and prayers for a speedy recovery - if the client gets done over the PH will get his ass chewed in large chunks especially if the incident makes the AR headlines.
Why else is it mandatory to be accompanied by a PH on all DG hunts?

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

Is it the client's success/trophy if the PH recovers the animal? - In accordance with the established and accepted norms, it is.

I would sign that waiver in less than a heart beat.
I would never ask someone else to risk their health or life for me if I have done a sh*t job with my shooting.

Good man that.

quote:

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

How many trackers would do the job properly after seeing the same client mess up the shot ???

It is surprising how quickly the PH and trackers stop seeing game!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

I was always under the impression that you do not shoot from the truck as you will promote a situation whereas and thereafter animals flee for the horizon on the slightest sound or appearance of your bakkie?

If you hit what you are shooting at, regardless of where the shot is taken, the rest of the herd is NOT, going to learn an object lesson.

I beg to differ but that is not correct. Herds of herbivors will soon associate an approaching vehicle with loud noises (rifle shots) and will soon modify their behaviour accordingly!

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by Norwegianwoods:

I would sign that waiver in less than a heart beat.
I would never ask someone else to risk their health or life for me if I have done a sh*t job with my shooting.

Good man that.

I think that nothing would upset me more than to be told by a PH I was not welcome to go into the weeds with an animal I had just wounded and let get in the jesse! My mistake my responsibility!
................................................................................................ ............................

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by Norwegianwoods:

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
Trax:

quote:

Then again if its the PH who's actually required to find and finish off the beast, is it really the clients success/trophy?

There is a reason for this: to keep the client out of harms way and minimize the risk in recovering the animal.

If the PH gets chewed he will receive all the well wishes and prayers for a speedy recovery - if the client gets done over the PH will get his ass chewed in large chunks especially if the incident makes the AR headlines.
Why else is it mandatory to be accompanied by a PH on all DG hunts?

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

Is it the client's success/trophy if the PH recovers the animal? - In accordance with the established and accepted norms, it is.

I would sign that waiver in less than a heart beat.
I would never ask someone else to risk their health or life for me if I have done a sh*t job with my shooting.

Good man that.

Not every client has the knowledge to safely hunt a DG animal wounded or not in Africa with out a PH backing him up. In fact, the vast majority don't have that knowledge. It would be suicide for them to try.

465H&H

quote:

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

Fujo,

You'd be surprised how many people at least initially would tell you that they would be happy to sign the waiver. Heck! They would even go in alone. I speak to people so inclined frequently. I often have wondered if these guys when confronted with the actual situation where they had to go into the alders after a big brown bear or into the tall grass after a wounded buff or lion all alone would still feel the same. Interestingly I've never closed a booking on someone so inclined.

Mark

quote:

Not every client has the knowledge to safely hunt a DG animal wounded or not in Africa with out a PH backing him up. In fact, the vast majority don't have that knowledge. It would be suicide for them to try.

465H&H

A truthful answer 465H&H.

There are clients who have hunted Africa several or more times and have gained enough experience to handle unpleasant situations such as following a wounded cat in the densest undergrowth both during the day but mostly at night - the majority however would not and would be no more than a hindrance (if a relaxed shot got botched there is room for doubt that a snap shot at a very likely moving target is not going to produce desired results).
On those rare occasions I have always dutifully invited the client to join in the fray - most of whom politely declined. I have never thought of them as cowards, just sensible people who realize that a distasteful job needs to be done by someone who has done it countless times before and hope for the best.
I never use a vehicle and it has nothing to do with ethics or bravado or proving anything to anyone - I am just used to tracking it until I get it, just my style.

I've been meeting deadlines for a while, haven't had time for AR (with apologies), but clearly this subject has been beaten to death (and deserves to be). My thoughts, which you will not find altogether consistent:
1. It isn't a good experience to shoot from the truck, so should be avoided.
2. If it's illegal to shoot from the truck, then by all means it must be avoided.
3. Where legal, still not a good experience but, hey, if Mother Nature smiles and a world-record gazork is standing in the middle of the road, should you really kick sand in her face? Realistically, the idea should be to get away from the truck and hunt, or at least stalk, on foot. I don't see a huge moralistic difference between resting over the roll bar and stepping out and resting over the hood (or sticks)...the "one foot on the ground" rule seems a bit hypocritical.
4. Here's a funny thing. I hate shooting from the truck so badly that, if circumstances suggest that I must, I usually miss. I tell PHs this up front. Sometimes they don't believe me, so I have to prove it...
Cheers, Craig

Craig is 100% correct. If you shoot from the truck you are cheating yourself.

I am not ashamed to admit that I have done it, but I never would at this point unless I was shooting for the meat alone.

quote:

Originally posted by Safari-Hunt:

quote:

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

How many trackers would do the job properly after seeing the same client mess up the shot ???

The big question is how is the shooting messed up?
I would not trust someone managing to gut shoot a buff standing still on a broadside shot at 30 meters, but things can happen while hunting.

Animals can make sudden moves and you might hit a branch or something else you didn't see when you take the shot.
Or maybe something has gone wrong with your gun, mount or scope.

Hunters that have never wounded an animal or not needed follow up shots while hunting, has not been hunting much I think.

I think I have a decent low % when it comes to wounding animals.
I have shot 400+ big game animals and have wounded 7-8 animals and I have found and finished off all of them but 2.

quote:

Originally posted by Norwegianwoods:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari-Hunt:

quote:

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

How many trackers would do the job properly after seeing the same client mess up the shot ???

The big question is how is the shooting messed up?
I would not trust someone managing to gut shoot a buff standing still on a broadside shot at 30 meters, but things can happen while hunting.

Animals can make sudden moves and you might hit a branch or something else you didn't see when you take the shot.
Or maybe something has gone wrong with your gun, mount or scope.

Hunters that have never wounded an animal or not needed follow up shots while hunting, has not been hunting much I think.

I think I have a decent low % when it comes to wounding animals.
I have shot 400+ big game animals and have wounded 7-8 animals and I have found and finished off all of them but 2.

Then you rank among those in the lower bracket that have gained enough experience and wisdom on how to handle wounded DG.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Originally posted by Norwegianwoods:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari-Hunt:

quote:

Alternatively, how many clients would be willingly sign a waiver accepting responsibility/liability and walk in solo + 2 trackers after the wounded cat/buff in place of the PH ?

How many trackers would do the job properly after seeing the same client mess up the shot ???

The big question is how is the shooting messed up?
I would not trust someone managing to gut shoot a buff standing still on a broadside shot at 30 meters, but things can happen while hunting.

Animals can make sudden moves and you might hit a branch or something else you didn't see when you take the shot.
Or maybe something has gone wrong with your gun, mount or scope.

Hunters that have never wounded an animal or not needed follow up shots while hunting, has not been hunting much I think.

I think I have a decent low % when it comes to wounding animals.
I have shot 400+ big game animals and have wounded 7-8 animals and I have found and finished off all of them but 2.

Then you rank among those in the lower bracket that have gained enough experience and wisdom on how to handle wounded DG.

I disagree with your assessment. We don't know if any of those animals killed were dangerous game animals. If some were how many and what species. You may have a lot of experience in hunting elphants but never killed a lion. Does that make one qualified in following up a wounded lion alone? A lot more to it than that!

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by craig boddington:
I've been meeting deadlines for a while, haven't had time for AR (with apologies), but clearly this subject has been beaten to death (and deserves to be). My thoughts, which you will not find altogether consistent:
1. It isn't a good experience to shoot from the truck, so should be avoided.
2. If it's illegal to shoot from the truck, then by all means it must be avoided.
3. Where legal, still not a good experience but, hey, if Mother Nature smiles and a world-record gazork is standing in the middle of the road, should you really kick sand in her face? Realistically, the idea should be to get away from the truck and hunt, or at least stalk, on foot. I don't see a huge moralistic difference between resting over the roll bar and stepping out and resting over the hood (or sticks)...the "one foot on the ground" rule seems a bit hypocritical.
4. Here's a funny thing. I hate shooting from the truck so badly that, if circumstances suggest that I must, I usually miss. I tell PHs this up front. Sometimes they don't believe me, so I have to prove it...
Cheers, Craig

I don't shoot animals from trucks (except when culling) or from over the hood. I have passed up some awesome trophies including a huge eland, a leopard and a 43 inch buff because of it but I don't regret it one bit. If I see an animal that I am interested in from a Cruiser, we wait 30 minutes for it to wander off and then begin the track. Not to say that anyone that chooses a different path is wrong.

465H&H

Let us take time to bring some reality into this disscussion, which has managed to stay reasonably on course without name calling and the associated degredation that brings too so many discussions.

It does not matter whether a person shoots from a vehicle or wants to be miles away from same when the shot is taken. It is all a matter of personal ethics, however, in this day and time, I feel that our goal should be to make sure what we are doing is Legal.

Having civil discussions about Personal ethics is fine, until the discussions turn nasty which does have a habit of happening. The anti's use those less than civil discussions about personal ethics among hunters against us.

If we are following the legalities of a hunt, the anti's are going to have to fight the state/province/country concerning their game laws. Ethics pits hunter against hunter. The anti's use that to their advantage, because they do not give a Dammn about ANY hunters personal ethics.

If it is legal and you can live with it, by all means, go for it because it is your hunt. If it is legal and you can't live with it, tell the guide/PH that you won't take the shot and tale the time to explain the conditions you will take a shot under. In fact as some have already stated, have that discussion the first night in camp, before a gun is ever taken out of its case. JAO.

The personal ethics "contest" rolls on and on. Still, the end result is the killing of an animal, bringing the prey to bag. The animal doesn't care if it was shot from a truck, 2 feet from a truck, or 2 miles from a truck. Statements of "I live by a more strict code of hunting ethics than do others" is really saying "I kill my animals in a morally superior manner than you do" or "I can pick up a turd by the clean end", when in fact, the choosing of how far away from the truck you are willing to shoot has no effect on anything other than how you personally feel about the event.

I know several guys who will only eat a steak dinner or have a beer in the evening if they have put in a good workout that day. Kind of a reward for an effort well exerted. I view the tracking of a game animal prior to shooting as the same. I'll feel it was earned if I put forth more effort to bring the animal to bag. But there is nothing superior about the process of tracking first, the animal is still in the bag either way.

Ultimately, what matters to the survival of the species as a whole and the conservation effort that hunting supports is whether or not the hunting of the animal was done within the boundaries of the law. This is the important aspect of the hunt because as stated before, hopefully the game laws, both local, regional, and federal if applicable, were written with the intent of maximizing the conservation efforts and managing the local techniques necessary to bring game to bag. We often develop "our way" of hunting because "our" techniques work in "our" locale. Those same techniques may or may not work in other locales due to a variety of reasons. Why we continue to divide and separate what are or are not acceptable methods of hunting based on regional expectations just escapes me. We should embrace all methods that are legal. One of the great aspects of hunting in different and far away places is the variety of game available and the experience of doing things in a new manner. If we have a strong enough objection to what the law allows, let's change the law.

I just get a chuckle each time someone indicates that their method of killing is morally superior to another's. Does the fellow who rides a horse 8 hours to get into prime Elk country hunt with moral superiority over the guy who uses an ATV. What about the fellow who backpacks in to the same area for 2 days prior to hunting. Does he hunt with moral superiority over the horse back rider? Where does this stuff end?

Rifle, Black Powder, Iron Sights, Compound Bow, Recurve, Longbow, Spear with steel blade, Spear with Flint Blade, Just a sharp stick, Throwing stones with a slingshot, Throwing stones by hand? Really, where does it end? For me and this discussion, it ends here! Knock yourselves out!

Todd,

I don't see any personal ethics contest going on here at all at least not on the last page or so. For sure no one has said that their ethics are better than any one elses. Whether I or any one else choses to shoot from a truck or not has nothing to do with game conservation, how the animal feels about being shot or survival of the species. In my opinion the whole idea of hunting is the enjoyment of the chase and the sense of accomplishment in doing it. If you can walk away from a hunt that uses whatever legal means and feel that you accomplished something than it was a good hunt. Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive. Others are more interested in having a mounted animal on the wall to brag about and that becomes more important than how it is taken. As you said as long as it is legal than it is OK. There is a high fenced 100 acre farm here in Idaho where you can come and shoot an elk. It would be legal to shoot it from a truck also. Few would get much satisfaction in that kind of hunt.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by Bakkentaxidermy.com:
Maybe this topic has been beat to death....if it has tell me where to read about it as I am fairly new here. I was watching one of the hunting shows(northwest hunter???) they were hunting in the cape somewhere and on this show they shot a springbok and a black wildebeest...both from the truck...they showed them chasing them around in the truck trying to get close enough for a shot!!! I am going to be hunting the east cape in 2013 and I am curious if this common practice or not????? Please chime in Leopards Vally and you other PH's from the cape of RSA....Thanks for your input!!!!!! Shawn

It's really simple, just tell the PH ahead of time you do not want to shoot from the truck. In some places like the kalahari in Namibia it is difficult to avoid because there is very little cover in the dunes but in the EC should be enough cover to stalk.

TR

quote:

In my opinion the whole idea of hunting is the enjoyment of the chase and the sense of accomplishment in doing it. If you can walk away from a hunt that uses whatever legal means and feel that you accomplished something than it was a good hunt. Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive.

465, not stirring the pot, but just take second to look at the wording you just used in the above statement. Maybe I am taking it wrong, but the last sentence in the above quote could lead a person to interpret that you feel your way of doing things is more sportsman like.

Had that last sentence been omitted it would not appear quite so damning. JAO.

Why, oh why, does the issue of "higher" ethics, or a "morally superior" method of hunting, keep on arising here? Aside from one poster making it clear that he feels most people are lying about their standards, and allow those standards to drop away like a snake shedding its skin at the first sign of trouble or hardship, it seems pretty clear that everyone is saying the same thing. Stay legal, do what feels right to you, and let others do the same. Make sure that you comport yourself in such a way that, when you remember the hunt a day, a week, or a decade later, you still feel good about it.

And never, ever, EVER...post a hunt report about it here!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

In my opinion the whole idea of hunting is the enjoyment of the chase and the sense of accomplishment in doing it. If you can walk away from a hunt that uses whatever legal means and feel that you accomplished something than it was a good hunt. Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive.

465, not stirring the pot, but just take second to look at the wording you just used in the above statement. Maybe I am taking it wrong, but the last sentence in the above quote could lead a person to interpret that you feel your way of doing things is more sportsman like.

Had that last sentence been omitted it would not appear quite so damning. JAO.

Crazy,

Not sure why you think that, since I have no wish to condemn any ones legal hunting methods. It is a simple fact that if you drive up and see animal standing on the side of the road, it has a better chance of survival if you give it 30 minutes to wonder off and then begin to use its natural wariness as you track it. It is a matter of personal satisfaction in the hunt not sportsmanship.

I do wonder why those that have said that they would shoot an animal from the road or vehicle aren't accused of saying that those of us that wouldn't are unsportman like. Think about that.

465H&H

quote:

It is a simple fact that if you drive up and see animal standing on the side of the road, it has a better chance of survival if you give it 30 minutes to wonder off and then begin to use its natural wariness as you track it. It is a matter of personal satisfaction in the hunt not sportsmanship.

I have hunted many areas where a noisy vehicle scares game a lot more than slipping quietly through the woods does- it is EASIER to take many animals afoot rather than from a vehicle.

SSR

How about this statement right here:

quote:

I don't see any personal ethics contest going on here at all at least not on the last page or so. For sure no one has said that their ethics are better than any one elses.quote]

In one post you say this and then you turn right around with this:[QUOTE]Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive.

Now maybe I am just a simple minded hick, but to me, those two statements totally contradict each other. In one you are claiming that no one is claiming their ethics are better and then you turn and talk about giving an animal a "Fairer Chance To Survive".

None of what you said matters to anti hunters. If you want to give the animal a fairer chance to survive, strip off buck naked and chase the animal down and either gnaw its throat out with your teeth or choke it to death with your bare hands.

Whether someone/anyone believes in creationism or evolution, does not matter, either way, humans have a brain and are able to figure out how to kill animals. If things had not happened that way, we would not have became the dominant species on the planet. But we DID, and because we did, there is no such thing as "Fair Chase" hunting.

To claim that someone/anyone is giving an animal a better chance to survive while carrying a modern high powered rifle in their hand is only kidding themself. Are you going to wear a pedometer and unless the animal gets a set distance from the vehicle your going to keep flushing it till you reach yourself imposed goal?

Something tells me those self imposed limits/rule operate on a sliding scale depending on the size of the trophy. In the overall scheme of things however, the anti's do not care if you or anyone else treks all the way across Africa trying to get a shot, or shoots something from the opening of their tent/hut/bungalow in camp, the anti's want all of it stopped.

Until you have actually hunted with someone, looking down on them because they are willing to take advantage of circumstances seems to be a poor way of judging someone. JAO

quote:

I do wonder why those that have said that they would shoot an animal from the road or vehicle aren't accused of saying that those of us that wouldn't are unsportman like. Think about that.

No thinking involved, because they do not care what you or anyone else does, they only concern themselves with what They Do.

We are really going into Lala land now!
Giving the animal a chance of survival is not very high on the list of priorities when I am hunting.

In fact, it is the exact opposite!

Funny thing.

Once upon a time a hunting car was a vehicle modified with no doors, allowing easy and quiet access and exit to hunt the game on foot.

Now every PH has a ute with a big shooting frame with rifle rests for shooting game for the trophy records .... noisy and easily sighted to get off from ....

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:
Funny thing.

Once upon a time a hunting car was a vehicle modified with no doors, allowing easy and quiet access and exit to hunt the game on foot.

Now every PH has a ute with a big shooting frame with rifle rests for shooting game for the trophy records .... noisy and easily sighted to get off from ....

Oh no! Not all! Only bugger to shoot off my truck was a flabby, loud mouth titty baby with a boorish attitude and an ankle that was broken some previously, probably years before. Man, could that vehicle wobble in the wind.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

In my opinion the whole idea of hunting is the enjoyment of the chase and the sense of accomplishment in doing it. If you can walk away from a hunt that uses whatever legal means and feel that you accomplished something than it was a good hunt. Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive.

465, not stirring the pot, but just take second to look at the wording you just used in the above statement. Maybe I am taking it wrong, but the last sentence in the above quote could lead a person to interpret that you feel your way of doing things is more sportsman like.

Had that last sentence been omitted it would not appear quite so damning. JAO.

Crazy,

You sure tend to put meaning to words that have no basis in fact. I don't know what to say but to repeat that I in no way condemn anyone that doesn't do what I do. I don't know how many times I have to say that. If you are getting some meaning from my words that I don't intend then it is your problem. Is it possible you are a little tender in this regard and possibly harboring some guilt feelings?

Let me reword that last sentence that you high lighted to make my point.

Old words - "Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive".

New words - "Some of us opt to to get more of sense of accomplishment from increasing our chances of success by taking an animal as soon as possible."

Now does that second statement in anyway say that one who goes by the first statement is being unsportsman like?

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
We are really going into Lala land now!
Giving the animal a chance of survival is not very high on the list of priorities when I am hunting.

In fact, it is the exact opposite!

Saeed,

I have no problem with your philosophy if it provides you with satisfaction. It just isn't one that makes my hunting experience satisfying which is what I think hunting should provide us. The harder I have to work for a trophy the more satisfying it is to me.

465H&H

quote:

Crazy,

You sure tend to put meaning to words that have no basis in fact. I don't know what to say but to repeat that I in no way condemn anyone that doesn't do what I do. I don't know how many times I have to say that. If you are getting some meaning from my words that I don't intend then it is your problem. Is it possible you are a little tender in this regard and possibly harboring some guilt feelings?

Let me reword that last sentence that you high lighted to make my point.

Old words - "Some of us opt to get more of a sense of accomplishment from giving the animal more of a chance to survive".

New words - "Some of us opt to to get more of sense of accomplishment from increasing our chances of success by taking an animal as soon as possible."

Now does that second statement in anyway say that one who goes by the first statement is being unsportsman like?

How about instead of trying to analyse things, just work under the premise that everyone views things differently and responds to situations differently.

Just to clarify things for you, I have hunted and killed game miles from any vehicle or road and I have killed animals from a vehicle, and one was not anymore special to me than the other. I was out hunting with the purpose of killing something. I believe and work under the concept of taking advantage of the situation.

I really do not understand what is wrong with that, evidently you think there is something wrong with that in some way. Also, from experience as both a client and a guide I have seen personal higher road ethics take a nose dive as the hunt is winding down and folks get a lot more willing to take a shot, any shot to keep from ending up being the only hunter in camp to not kill something.

Your hunting methods and ethics are yours and you are welcome to them, I just feel it might serve you better to not look down on someone that does not share your high ideals, JMO.

What is the difference between shooting off the back of a horse and shooting off the back of the truck?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
What is the difference between shooting off the back of a horse and shooting off the back of the truck?

Thats an easy one. Your less likely to get bucked off of the truck!

465H&H