I am wondering why the full price is generally charged for wounded and lost game. I certainly understand why they would charge something for wounded and lost game but it does not make sense to me that they are charging 100%. Quite a bit of work goes into processing a dead animal. This work is not done on a wounded and lost animal so it makes sense to me that the hunter would not be charged for butchering and fleshing and salting the hide. I presume the value of the meat far outways the labor involved in processing the dead animal. Is that why? Thanks, Rufous.

I think it's more that they're assuming it's dead, and they lost a tropy fee from someone on it. Not sure it makes sense, but I think that's the line of reasoning. I'm sure it cuts down on 400 yard shots.

rufous,

If you wound but do not recover an animal chances are that animal will die. If the animal dies he is not available to be harvested so the full trophy fee is lost to the safari operator or land owner.Someone has to pay for the animal. I also think that charging the full trophy fee for lost game may make some of us a little more careful with our shooting.

Regards,

Mark

The game animal is either contracted for by your PH from another supplier (e.g., the owner of the ranch where it was hunted), or is a capital asset that your PH owns (i.e., part of the game herd on his/her own ranch). A wounded and lost animal is a consumed asset that is no longer productive. In the first case, your PH has to pay the supplier for the loss of his asset. In the second case, the PH has to replace the destroyed asset on his own ranch.

The processing of trophies is covered by your daily rate, not the trophy fee, which represents the cost of the asset, so in either of the two cases above, you are paying for the cost of the asset, not the services associated with processing the trophy.

The general rule is - if it bleeds, you pay.

Thanks all for the replies. I better understand the issue. Rufous.

I think it's a fare fee. True they have less work to do for a downed animal, but if they have a tracker looking 4-5 days & the fact the animal can not be taken by someone else, I can see the validity. I wish states here would do the same for nonres. hunters instead of charging you a fee up front whether you collect the animal or not. I'ld much rather pay couple hundred bucks for a nonres. lic. & then a reasonable trophy fee if I am succesful.

Find an operator that takes lots of hunters who can't shoot worth a lick and then book for a week, agreeing to track and finish kills. Let's you shoot alot, while not paying a nickle!!

Also, you could be the resident "culler" to take game that has twisted legs in holes or been injured in some other way. We were offered the opportunity to take some zebra and blesbok this trip that had leg problems at a reduced rate, 25-50% off.

Rufous



In general terms a wounded animal will most likely die some time later, dependant upon the wound, therefore not be available to another hunter resulting in a loss to the Outfitter. This is the standard policy for Africa hunting that wounded or lost animals are paid for in full ...



The policy also should be a warning to hunters to select the correct caliber rifle, appropriate quality ammunition, and most important to be well versed in the use of his rifle and be as accurate as poosible with his first up shot generally into the vital area being the hart lung triangle region. I cannot stress how important it is to practice a lot before heading out to hunt and for the PH to do his utmost to get the hunter into a suitable postion for an open shot that will result in a kill ...



The PH will in most instances be the sole judge of wounding as he is in the best position to glass during the shot and in most instances blood will be found @ the scene ... A client will rely on the PH's expertice in this regard



Regards, Peter

Balla Balla, you are correct. When hunting in Namibia recently, both the PH and the tracker had their binos on the animal while I was shooting. Both knew where I had hit the animal once the shot was taken. I was absolutely amazed! I, of course, only had a general idea ie. I knew where I had aimed, and knew whether or not the animal had moved, but in all cases, the recovered animal was hit exactly where the PH or tracker had told me it was hit immediately after the shot! Having said that, there is nothing like the sinking feeling one gets when it looks like the animal might not be found! I have to say, that in my case, this feeling was in part due to the "lost" trophy fee! So, I say, keep it that way. You try harder!
Peter.

I also agree with fredj338 about making a similar stipulation in the USA--problem being, of course, there is no one there to enforce it most of the time.

On the trip I just returned from, I shot a Red Hartebeest at 430 yards. Think I wasn't thinking about this? Better believe I was! But I felt I could make it work, and indeed, it was a one shot kill. By this point my PH had already establihed his confidence in me, otherwise I'm sure he wouldn't have allowed it. Fact is, he told me so after the fact.

I think some of it is also at the discretion of the Outfitter, P.H., or rancher. I've been involved, over the years in two wounded and not found animals in Africa. It Namibia a few years ago, my hunting partner shot a Gemsbok that was standing broadside at @ 125 yards. At the shot, it dropped like it was struck by lightning. Our P.H. told my friend to put another shot in it right away. My friend ignored the request, and the next instant the Gemsbok was off and running. It was hit too high, and was just shocked by the bullet. We chased it for two days and never got another shot at it. On the 3rd day, the rancher told us he had seen the bull and felt it would be alright. He said to just go ahead and shoot another, in fact shoot 2 or 3 more, as he needed to feed his staff. He never charged us for the wounded one.
On another hunt in RSA, I hit a Blue Wildebeest rather poorly, and after 50-75 yards there was no more blood spoor. We searched all the next day, and couldn't locate it. On this one, the rancher charged me 1/2 the regular price.

If you are hunting on private ranch land then it is soley up to the ranch owner or outfitter what the policy is and how they will stick by it, or if they will give any breaks etc....

But in countries like Tanzania it is not up to anyone or any outfitters what the they will do or what the policy is. It is strictly a government policy that any animal wounded the full trophy fee will be paid to the government, and there are no exceptions to this. If an animal is wounded and lost, the PH and government game scout should list the animal as wounded and lost, but the full trophy will be paid to the government by the outfitter. The only way around this would be if the outfitter decided not to charge you for the wounded animal for some reason, but that outfitter will pay the government the full trophy fee regardless. A lot of PH's and outfitters do try and bribe the game scout to look the other way, but for any outfitter or PH that does this does not care about the game laws and does not care about the mangement of that area and should not be hunting in Tanzania. These laws whether we like them or not are for the better of conservation and our future of hunting. If full trophy fees were not paid for wounded and lost game in Tanzania it would be a free for all! People would be shooting animals first, and if they did not like the trophy, would count it as wounded and go shoot another one!

So, whether you like it or not, you should accept it as something that is for the better for the animals and hunters alike. We as hunters will want to hunt harder and make sure that we make good shots, as we know that our hard earned money will be spent on that trophy if hit, and we will take things more seriously.

Whether it is the governments or private land owners, they have to put a value on each animal, and each hunter should be responsible enough to pay for the value of that animal even if they messed up and wounded the animal. "For every action there is a reaction!" If you are willing to take the action to pull the trigger at an animal, then you should also be willing to pay the trophy fee and take responsibility for your action even if the animal is not found. If you kill the trophy, you want to take full credit! Well, if you wound the animal, then also take the full credit and pay for it.

I wounded a wildebeest which required a lengthy follow-up. At one point we could have shot it and saved many kilometres but could not spot any wound and did not want to shoot a second one.

A second time the same thing happened with a zebra. We had a great deal of trouble working out which animal it was even though we tracked up to them several times over a couple of days. Eventually we had to abandon the follow-up as they had moved into a herd of buffalo lying up in the thorns and were on the far side and we did not want to disturb the buff. Returning that afternoon to hunt the buff what do we find but the zebra on our side of the buff herd. One acted funny and was swishing flies away so I elected to shoot it and see if it was the wounded one. Luckily it was.

In both cases I would have had to pay for a full trophy fee and if I shot a second animal by mistake would have paid for two. Both worked out well in the end.

I agree with having to pay for a fee for a lost and wounded animal. It should encourage us to shoot better and also ensure any wounded animal is followed-up and put out of its misery.

I agree with paying. It is unfortunate that we have to force ethics in such a way, but there are several unscrupulous people out there who would just shoot another animal because the first one made it more than 200 yds. Our first responsibility should be to the animal we hunt, not to our trophy room. As far as the States goes, we do need more regulation here. I was in Wally World one day and overheard two guys looking at the rifles. One was saying something to the effect of "look-it's already boresighted, we won't even have to go to the range first" speaking of a Savage or Remington combo. I've also seen very wealthy clients on our trips with an oh well attitude as well. Last year we had a millionaire hunt with us (who couldn't shoot worth a damn and took every opportunity to let us know he was a millionaire). If he shot an animal poorly, he would just shoot another. It did not matter to him that I generally stayed out to hunt down his bad shots while my partner took him back to camp with his replacement kill. In the end, I ended up with some good trophies, because he argued paying for what he did not kill, but we did come to an agreement (a seven foot Zulu in camp got tired of us arguing and told the man very calmly that he should pay, because his family won't eat if the man doesn't, and that would upset him).

Well since I am one of the two major investors in a property I suppose I need to have a rule like this just to stay in business. For instance I had a hunter this season who shot and wounded 5 of his six animals. He also cleanly missed an equal or greater amount. At one point during the hunt I actually sat him down and had a man to man conversation with him saying we have a few marksmanship issues to resolve. I shot his rifle and it was perfect, He even used mine, which he took the only animal he cleanly killed, a big kudu.

When I said he would have to limit shooting to broadside animals 50 meters or less and then only from a solid rest he was angry with me. However every shot he took up to that point was under 100 and as I recall the longest was 88 with the leica RF. His reply to me was " I gotta a pretty good eye on me, I'm hitten what I'm aiming at"

I don't know why I would have to explain that the object is to actually kill the animals not just hit them. We used a tracking dog to find several that ran with minimal wounds. however most were never recovered. A gut shot impala, a Blesbok with a broken back leg, he shot the tail clean off an impala, bone and all. A gemsbok whom I tracked for two days and found the beds where he was lying and saw the blood from a high back shot in the sandy imprint. At 60 yards he shot a broadside blue wildebeast in the pelvis. and a warthog which was hit and never found.

People like this would just continue shooting as if it were a video game and they can restart the game when they don't like the score they are getting. Fortunately he was out of money to continue hunting/wounding game.

The sad part of this was when I found the Impalas tail bone. It was the entire tail, bone all..... right from the root of the body! I said to him he could shoot another impala if by some miracle we found one, out of the thousands here with no tail. He asked what I was talking about. I replied that he had hit this one and that was paid for. He replied that I found no blood when I was tracking, and the deal was if you draw blood you pay. Why was this conversation even needed? I told him if you blow off whole body parts how can you deny that the animal was not hit? He was holding the tail in his hand when he was arguing this with me!

I told the other PH's in camp about this in Afrikaans that night. Everyone was in a roar of laughter when my partners wife turns to him and says in english He should shoot another impala on her! So much for speaking in Afrikaans to keep that story from embarassing the hunter in front of everyone!

In any case the paying for wounded game and the cost of the staff are in no way related. They are not on Piece work, they get a monthly salary. Their costs have no bearing on the expense of the trip you are on based on what labor they provide. It would be very much like a guy who buys a medium size shirt wanting to pay less then the guy buying a large shirt because there is less material. The business costs are not relevent or well understood by the consumer.

There have been and may still be camps with a per shot charge. This on top of the trophy fee's. I knew of a couple of these a few years ago, but have been working in my own business for so long now I don't know what the others are doing now as a matter of standard practice.

I think this Per shot charge was started because of some spanish hunters who shot every living thing from Hornbills to vervet monkeys and mongooses. We were nearing a situation where we were going to take their ammunition away. We struggled to actually hunt big game because they would always be shooting something small and screwing up the hunt for the target animals we were after.

It's still cheaper then North America where you must buy a tag and are not even guaranteed you will see an animal much less get a shot. With me you only pay for the "tags" or trophy fees after you hit an animal which is entirely your choice and responsibility.

That just reminded me of a story my PH in Zimbabwe told me..

He had a guy from Spain in the back of the truck on the first morning, and as he was driving, he stopped to let the new arrival get a look at a very young duiker walking through the brush.

BANG!

PH: WHAT THE #$%#$ ARE YOU DOING?

Client: You stop, I shoot!

He actually had to take his ammo away from him before the hunt was over.


Rick.

There are instances where one pays as soon as one shoots. Even if the animal is missed.

That is the rule for shooting hippo and crocodile in Zimbabwe, as these animals are normally shot in the water, and no one knows if it was a miss or a hit once the shot is fired.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with this system.

I had a friend who hunted Elk on an Indian Res in MN or AZ not sure which, but when the bull hit the ground the guide turned to him and said $5000 please and this was before any (phoney) congradulations, eh.

Or just tell the story in English, Spanish or whatever the hunters speak. Why say anything behind someones back you wouldnt say to their face? Paying clients or not if they are shooting or behaving poorly why pretend otherwise? Tell the story, maybe a little humility would do them good.

If we have a good hunter with a good attitude and he is a good shot and he wounds an animal, and it can happen to anyone, we'll track it a good ways and if he hangs in there, we will probably overlook it and go find another one for him...but its OUR option not his what action we take...

If he is a lousy shot,and has not gone to the trouble to learn to shoot then he is going to pay for wounded game that escapes..Fortunatly we very seldom lose a wounded animal as we get on the track and kill it...

We have the rule, but we take each wounding on a case by case basis and make a decision...Its seldom a problem and actually most of our hunters are good shots and good sportsman and even if they have to pay they usually say "it's nobodys fault but mine" and I don't mind paying.
A good PH can size up a shooter pretty quick and knows what the client can or cannot do, so ideally its his job to get that client in a position to make a clean shot...

Point being its not written in stone, at least with us its not...

Well let me better explain this. It was when returning to the lodge before dinner and My partner also a PH in the lodge asked how we did. I did not feel it polite or maybe proper to tell him what I really felt in English with the other hunters who did not know this fella standing around.

By the end of the ten days I wanted to shoot the guy myself but that was due to many factors. I think at least half the hunters in the camp wanted to also shoot him. Lets just say he was not the most fun guy to be around and he was beyond rude and disrespectful of the other hunters and to the property.

How many times should a hunter be told not to throw his still burning cigerette butts into the grass as we drive along? How many times should a hunter be told not to throw empty soda cans out the window or out the back of the truck? How many times should a PH have to tell a guy not to throw his empty cigerette packs out of the truck?

This is just the tip of the iceburg with this fella!

Let's focus on the good, not the bad.



I once went hunting with a fellow who had 2 doe antelope licenses. It took him 43 shots to get 2 antelope on the ground, and all but a couple of the shots were under 200 yards (and only 1 shot was at a moving animal). Although it would be easy to criticize this person for not developing his skill to a sufficient level, he was actually a very experienced shooter who does quite well from the bench. But he had back surgery a few months before the hunt and the lingering pain and pinched nerves led to him developing a flinch. Since then he has worked hard to overcome the flinch, and now hits his game with consistency.

Gents,

In Ethiopia it is all licenses which are purchased before the safari rather than trophy fees. There are two scouts on every safari. One is Federal. The other is Provincial. If you hit an animal with a bullet chances are very good that one of them will declare it to be wounded (this includes if it's hit on horns, feet, etc.) If the animal is nopt recovered the license is canceled. I've noticed lately that some western outfitters in the USA that are huting on private property apply that same regulation.

Rich Elliott

Rich, I like that, it makes sense. I am of the opinion that we as the PH's have the job of getting the client the shot according to their skill level. We must first establish that level, as is part of our jobs. I always do this by hunting the easiest animal on the client's list and watching the client. I note how well he keeps up and how steady his shot is. After the shot, I feel my responsibility is no longer to the client, but the animal. I discuss back up shots for poorly hit game ahead of time, and explain that my ultimate responsibility as a concientous hunter and conservationist is a good clean kill. If I see a shot placed in the neighborhood of the vitals and the animal runs, I know that the animal will not get far. If I watch a bullet impact the gut, hip, etc., I prefer to give lead. In RSA it's not much of a problem on small to medium fenced concessions, but a farm we hunt in the Kalahari is around 300,000ha with no fences. Most of clients understand this.

A Texas hunter last year told me up front if I shot one of his animals, he would not pay. I did not tell him that the laws governing me set down by Northwest Nature and Conservation said he would pay, I just let him have his way. The third animal he shot at was Gemsbok. The first two animals were, in my opinion lucky shots, since the gentleman had a habbit of shouldering and firing without forethought. The shot on the gemsbok at 10:00am was high and far back, and I knew we were in for a chase. By seven that night he was exausted from tracking. There was not much in the way of a blood spoor, so we relied heavily on Veloun, my San tracker.

Not much was said in camp that night, we were tired and he was frustrated. In the morning, he asked what we were hunting that day. I told him Gemsbok and we drove to where we lost the spoor the evening before. Twelve hours later, we caught up with the animal, but couldn't get within about 400m or so. He was not comfortable with the shot and asked if we could chase it down in the bakkie. Not wanting to hunt that way, I loaned him the use of my 338 Lapua with 6-24x NFX scope.

The next day was blue wildebeest. He asked me to back up his shot if it looked as if he would hit poorly. The important thing was that I never belittled him, but I showed him where the responsibility of a true hunter should lie. I wish all of my more stubborn clients would learn that lesson as well. That hunter has booked again this year and is booking Buff and leopard next year with me.

I think you make very good points, but would expand a bit. I agree that it is a big part of the good PH to learn, as quickly as possible, the shooting (and other) abilities of the hunter, and a good PH will intervene if necessary regarding whether or not a shot should be taken, BUT, I feel strongly that it is equally important, indeed imposed, upon the hunter to know his own capabilities. The good PH should not find it necessary to tell the hunter not to shoot at distance/condition X; the hunter should know, and be wise enough to stay within his abilities. The hunter should not impose on the PH to have to make those decisions for him, even though the PH knows. Christ, you guys aren't really hired to be babysitters, though I realize sometimes it must seem like it. I believe that Mr. Atkinson was basically suggesting as much. And Mr. Elliott, of course I'll be hunting with you before too long, and feel just fine with the Ethiopian approach, which I understand fully.

Rufous..
if one decides to pull the trigger on a trophy FEE animal, one has decided to pay for that animal. If it is hit (the shooter doesn't make this call) then it is paid for... if the scouts THINK it's hit, it's paid for.... in fact, in my opinion, if the gun goes off, it should be paid for

why? it's the shooter's choice to take the animal, and the shooters job to do that... if there's a failure (I miss too) it's not the PH, the landowners, or the scouts' fault, once the shooter decided to pull the trigger.

I'll gladly pay,if I pulled the trigger...

Now, if we can talk and disCUSS "discounts" for 2x1 hunting while we are on the subject of lost/wounded animals...

If you go 2x1, and one of the hunters cases a long track, how is that that a good thing for the other hunter?

It's far better to book you and a buddy on a pair of 1x1, "savings" on the charter are then the same...

If one was on a buff hunt, with 700 a day rate 2x1 and 750 1x1, for a week, you would be "up" 350 bucks.. EXACTLY what you are "out" a day, should the other hunter make a long tracking situation...

net, NO savings.

jeffe