Seems after all that non-residents haven't got a chance to hunt without PH's and all the rest that goes with it simply due to rules, regulations and laws applicable here in the RSA as probably elsewhere as well.

PH's seems to be a 'protected species' due to all these may and may-not's - always in demand as long as there are foreign hunters.
History has learned that such 'protected profession practitioners' tend to become less efficient over time!

See this as an early warning bell and I think a first step to prevent that happening some time in future would be to immediately stop the "12 day-course" PH training and insist on far better PH training.

"Stop the 12 day course".

Second that.

Regarding nonresidents hunting only with PH, this rule is also found in Canada and Alaska. Supposedly for safety and out of respect for local hunting laws, of which nonresidents are ignorant. But let's face it, it's also a way to create jobs and bring in extra foreign currency.

A lot of folks can't handle themselves in the bush, but that applies to locals as well. In Africa, the safety issue is a bit more pronounced than elsewere due to the presence of more dangerous species, but this does not really apply to typical ranch hunts.

In my opinion, private property should be exempt. What goes on on private property is between the owner and his guests. Governments keep your noses OUT.

Just a side note here, in Canada, your guide/PH, isn't allowed to carry a firearm. If you mess up, you have to sort it out.

Back in '77 I was hunting with a very well known PH (John Coleman) in the Northern Transvaal. We had to stop at one landowner's place for some reason and when John came back out he was livid !!! The landowner's son was putting out a dead wildebeest for bait. The young guy (who had never shot a lion personally) was prebaiting as an American was coming over to hunt for a lion. Coleman said that they had to get some of this hunting regulated or someone was going to get hurt .. I hunted lions twice with Coleman (25 days in total) and I knew that he could back me up ... Lots of difference between hunting a big cat and a kudu or impala ..

Firstly my thanks to Jagter, shakari, kayaker, 500grains, JJ Hack and all the others for the solid information and views. I think that TJ may, despite all the efforts, still be a bit confused.

There were a lot of truths [and a few half-truths] reported in response to the question by TJ. It is sure, as many have stated that a foreign hunter who hunts on any commercial basis has to have an Outfitter and PH in all provinces and on all types of farm. It is equally true that a landowner may invite any friend [even a foreigner] to hunt on his farm. Have absolutely no legal training, but I think we are trying to read something in the Regulations that is simply not there. While the definition of “a client†purports to words like payment, compensation of any sort and the like, we are now reading that if there is no payment of any sort or nature the foreigner suddenly is not “a clientâ€. We then argue [rightly or wrongly] that he therefore does not have to have his hunt arranged by a HO and supervised by a PH. I could go further and say that he should be welcome to hunt on his own, unaccompanied by his farmer friend. Although I’m not sure what the legal position is on this. If you ask me I would say that I personally agree with the view that a foreign hunter may indeed hunt without a HO or PH on invitation of a landowner, provided that there is absolutely no compensation of any nature paid. I may be wrong in this: It might not be correct to read what is not specifically stated in the Regulations as being allowed. However, as I [as a HO and PH] will personally not ever be doing it, or be directly involved, so I don’t really care to find out if I’m wrong or not.

What I’m quite sure of is that the Provincial Nature Conservation Act and Regulations and policy [let’s just call these the “lawsâ€] will apply to such a hunter in every other way, just as if he was a local South African. What I’m also quite sure of is that not more than 1 in a 1000 landowners, even 5th to 7th generation South Africans, have any real understanding of the laws that apply in the province where they live. This will then translate to a fact that such a visiting hunter is 999 to 1 going to be breaking some laws somewhere, as his host, on whom he would be dependent to advise him, simply does not know the laws. The regulations pertaining to having a hunt arranged by a HO and supervised by a PH were, amongst other, promulgated to protect the foreign hunter from inadvertently getting into trouble by breaking hunting laws through ignorance, just like WILK said!

Just note that if some HO or PH hears of such a foreigner hunting on a farm without a PH, he may feel that his livelihood is threatened and report the case to an organization like the Professional Hunters Association of South Africa (PHASA). In such a case I think that PHASA might just try to establish the bona fides of a claim to the “non commercial†nature of a hunt. ALF said the following: “To the letter of the law and per definition it states that a " hunt by a foreign hunter" is a hunt conducted with the provision that money or some form of compensation (my emphasis) takes place between hunter, outfitter, PH and or the lawful curator of the game at the time of the hunt in lieu of the hunt and or services surrounding the hunt.†Let us for the sake of the argument accept that this is quite correct.

Just what types of deal or payment, other than money, would be included in the term “some form of compensation� Let me give an example: A farm owner friend invites a foreigner to hunt on his farm. There is absolutely no payment whatsoever for any of the services rendered. So the hunting without a PH would be considered legal? What if the farm owner regularly visits the foreign hunter in his own country as a houseguest, and takes a holiday with him, just like friends do. The farm owner naturally does not pay his foreign friend a dime for the accommodation, food and entertainment he receives in that country. The farm owner then in a reciprocal manner invites his foreign friend to hunt a few animals on his farm. PHASA will likely argue that the “free†holiday and accommodation should be seen as “some form of compensation†for the “free†holiday and hunting, and that payment of some sort was therefore indeed made, and the hunt is therefore illegal.

The firearm importation procedure as published on the PHASA web site is specific to hunts arranged hunting outfitters. It makes clear reference to a “Letter of invitation from a Hunting Outfitterâ€. Are we correct in “reading†in this that it MUST be a letter from a Hunting Outfitter? I’m not sure of it, but think that SAPS will approve the temporary import if the visiting hunter produces a letter of invitation from a farm owner stating all that is required: His names, farm name, residential and business address, status of exemption of his farm etc., and also stating clearly that he invites a hunter to come and hunt for no commercial gain. Surely such a letter would assist SAPS to establish that the man has indeed a purpose for which he wants to get a temporary import permit for his rifle? I have not read the new Firearms Control Act or the Regulations, or even discussed the matter with a knowledgeable SAPS official, but logic has it that the visiting hunter must basically provide proof that he is in fact invited to hunt. Again, I may be wrong in this, but again as I would personally never get involved, I couldn’t really care if I’m wrong or not.

Let us now examine the “export of trophies†by a foreign hunter who had hunted for trophies, real “trophies†and not the animal for the pot mentioned in some posts, for free on invitation of a farmer friend. Where a hunt is arranged by a HO and supervised by a PH, the HO/PH would normally deliver trophies to a taxidermist with all the required documentation to enable the taxidermist to prove that the trophies were legally hunted. This might include, depending on circumstances, a letter of permission of the accommodation facilities owner that the Hunting Outfitter may use his facilities, a Letter of Consent in which the land owner gives permission to the Hunting Outfitter to offer the species for hunting, the blue copy of the PH register and a copy of a Provincial Hunting License. If the foreign hunter’s farmer friend delivers the trophies [let us for the sake of the argument stick to non-CITES species] to a taxidermist with a letter of permission, the relevant hunting license in the name of the foreign hunter, or a copy of his “Exemption Certificateâ€, would that not be enough documentation for the taxidermist to obtain the required export permits? As in the cases of the actual hunting and the importation of firearms, I may be wrong in this, but again as I would personally never get involved, I couldn’t really care if I’m wrong or not.

I’ve said a few times that I don’t really care if I’m wrong or not. It does not concern me directly. As a HO and PH I certainly do not feel that my earning of a livelihood is threatened if a few farmers invite foreigner friends to hunt for no compensation on their farms. I am pleased that any commercial hunt has to be arranged by a HO and supervised by a PH. This not because it protects me as a HO or PH, but because I agree with Wink that any free-for-all hunting by foreigners is a recipe for disaster.

I have read the posting by shakari after he had spoken to PHASA, and I’m sure of the correctness of the facts that he posts. I agree that to import a rifle you have to have the correct paperwork. Yet my question remains: Does the letter of invitation have to come from a registered HO? Where in the FCA or Regulations is this stated? Will SAPS not consider a properly written letter giving all the required information and motivation from an inviting farmer as sufficient motivation for them to issue a temporary firearm import permit?

Then a statement is made about what hunting is NOT allowed. But the question remains: If there is really absolutely no financial or in kind compensation, may a foreign hunter then hunt on the for free invitation of a landowner without a PH? Or, for that matter without his host being present?

I know that to get an export permit for trophies you need the correct papers. The papers have to prove that the trophies were legally hunted. In which Provinces are there either regulations, or written policy, by the Nature Conservation officials that the only form of proof of legal hunting is a copy of a registered PH’s register?

Maybe there is someone prepared to take the trouble of finding out exactly what is the true position on the three, or actually 4, issues discussed here: (i)(a) Can a foreigner to hunt on a invitation of a farmer for absolutely free without a PH being present? (i)(b) Can such a hunter go into the veldt unguided, and not even accompanied by his farmer friend? If not, why not? [This question is not asking about the wisdom of actually doing it, it just relates to the legality thereof.] (ii) Can a properly worded farmer’s letter of invitation serve to have a temporary SAPS Import Permit issued? On what grounds would SAPS refuse such an application? (iii) Can the proper documentation provided by such a farmer serve to allow the taxidermist to get the required export permits? On what grounds would such a Provincial Nature Conservation office refuse to issue an export permit if the answer to question (i) is positive?

Maybe the work will be less if TJ states in which Province his farmer friend wants him to hunt?

Any takers?

Rifle import requires a letter of invitation from the licenced outfitter and his licence number and also details of the PH and his licence number..... without that, it's no rifle import and no trophy export.

As I said, frankly I reckon anyone that tries it is crazy. The Balla Balla offer is cheap as chips and it's a good area and camp - what more could you want..... compare that to the comforts of an African jail and the penalties & confiscations if you get caught and you have you're answer.

Steve,

I read what you say. Can you substantiate the requirement for a HO license number on the "Letter of Invitation" from an official SAPS source, rather than from a PHASA source?

I quite agree the offer by Balla Balla is good. Very good, indeed! But it is simply not as good as the invitation for TJ to hunt for absolutely free!

In good hunting.

Andrew McLaren

Yes I can. I was told it by Insp Conroy who as I'm sure you know, until recently was top cop in charge of firearm import at Joburg Airport - then it was confirmed by PHASA.......

The piece about trophy export was confirmed by 2 taxidermists, the head of hunting at KZN Wildlife and PHASA.....

Just to stir up the waters even more, could a rilfe be legally imported into RSA for target shooting/competion?
Assuming it could be imported that way, would it be legal to use the rifle for a little hunting as a guest afterwards?

No idea, sorry mate!

Pete E,

According to shakari: No if you want toi bring in your special Olympic EWvent target rifle for a competition in South Africa You will have to wortk through a licensed and registered Hunting Outfitter. Presumably the purpose would be to shoot at "bacteria" [make that trophjy quality bacteria] on the bull's eye of an Olympic Event target.

I really think that it is high time some telephone calls are made and e-mails sent to SAPS about this. I simply, at this point in time, refuse to believe that ONLY a registered and licensed Hunting Outfitter can write a letter of invitation to allow someone to get a temporary firearm import permit.

Same with the requirement for a taxidermist to proove that the trophies he wants to export was legally hunted. I refuse to believe that ONLY q PH hunters register can serve as proof that a trophy was legally hunted.

As I said before: I may be wrong, but that is how I feel right now.

In good hunting.

Andrew McLaren.

Sorry, my posting above was meant to be e-mailed to the two provincial "Professional Hunters" officials, but my cut and paste got a bit screwed up.

Here is what I wanted to say:
I have tried in vain to get hold of a SAPS officer with enough seniority to trust his statement on the issuing of a Temporary Import Permit, other than to a client of a licensed Hunting Outfitter.

I have spoken by telephone to provincial nature conservation officials of two different provinces, who are specifically in charge of matters pertaining to Professional Hunting. The situation pertaining specifically to TJ, being just a friend of a land owner and him being invited to hunt at no charge whatsoever and where it would be a bona fide “free huntâ€. The same question was basically posed to both.

In one province to view is held that, if and only if, the hunt is a bona fide free hunt donated as a gift of friendship with no compensation or reward whatsoever, the foreign hunter may indeed hunt without a PH or the involvement of a Hunting Outfitter. If the foreign hunter hunts a trophy and wants to export it after the required taxidermy work has been done [either dip and prepare of completed taxidermy mounting] the taxidermist should in the normal manner apply for an export permit. In this case the landowner on whose property the hunt took place should provide the taxidermist with all the relevant documents, like a provincial hunting license or special permit, and he must make a statement in which the facts that (i) he had arranged the hunt (ii) that he is NOT a HO (iii) and that absolutely no reward or compensation of any nature was paid. The provincial officer would then, given the satisfactory documents were provided to convince him that the trophy was indeed legally hunted, issue an export permit.

The view of the relevant officer in another province is quite different. Here the official view is that ANY FOREIGN HUNTER IS A CLIENT, AND HAS TO HAVE ANY HUNT ARRANGED THROUGH A REGISTERED HUNTING OUTFITTER AND A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL HUNTER HAS TO SUPOERVISE THE HUNT AT ALL TIMES. This simply means that in this particular province (where TJ’s friend actually lives) TJ may not hunt without the involvement of a HO and a PH.

The Nature conservation regulations about what is a HO and PH, and that a “client†may only hunt with the involvement of both are quite clear is not in dispute at all. Where there is a difference of opinion is on what is a “clientâ€. I quote below the Definition of a client from this particular Provincial Regulations;

“client†means any person not normally resident in the Republic and who pays or rewards any other person for or in connection with the hunting of a wild animal or an exotic animal†[note my emphasis placed on the word “andâ€]

Let us now test if TJ would be classified as a “client†or not: (i) TJ is not normally resident in the Republic (of South Africa). On this point he would qualify to be classed as a “Clientâ€. (ii) TJ does not and will not pay or reward or compensate any other person in any manner for or in connection with the hunt. On this test he cannot be classified as a “client†at all.

Now the reason that I placed emphasis on the word “and†in the definition is that BOTH conditions must apply before TJ could be called a “clientâ€. If TJ is not a “clientâ€, then Regulation 42, which is also quoted in full below, cannot apply to him, as he is NOT A CLIENT!

“42. Hunting of wild animals or exotic animals by clients.
(1) A client shall not hunt a wild animal or an exotic animal, unless –
(a) the hunt has been organized by a hunting-outfitter; and
(b) the client is escorted by a professional hunter.

(2) A professional hunter shall see to it that his or her client shall not hunt contrary to the provisions of this Act and in order to do so, he or she may give his or her client any lawful instruction.
(3) The client shall obey any instruction given in terms of subsection(2).
(4) Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with subsection (1), (2) or (3) shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 2 years or to both a fine and such imprisonment.â€

Now my logic, or lack thereof (?) , and with no legal training whatsoever tells me that: When tested against the conditions that a person must meet to make him or her a client the word “and†between the two basic conditions imply that BOTH SHOULD APPLY before a person can be classified as a client. In TJ’s case one, but not both applies, and he is therefore not a client. Then, if he is not a client, the whole of Regulation 42, which pertains to hunting by a “client†cannot be imposed upon him.

But this is only my view. The guy in this particular province who wears the uniform and has authority to arrest and powers to institute prosecution holds a quite different view. He with the biggest gun wins the argument? Sorry TJ you may have to do something. I’ll send you a PM.

In good hunting.

Andrew McLaren

Namibia is a little better in that respects. They have a biltong hunting set-up, for south africans to come in and hunt on farms. No PH needed, letter of invatation is for firearms import, and no skins horns ect are allowed out of the country. The meat is with a form signed by the farmer/landowner. I dont remember if the nature conservancy has to sign something or not, I dont think so on private land as the amount of animals and which species to be culled is given to the farmer by them.

Oh, forgot to mention, it doesnt directly state SA hunters only may do this.

Verewaaier took a lot of trouble to get more clarification on all the issues involved in, let's say unpaid for hunts in SA by foreigners.
Thank you for all that.

However, the following are just a few extracts from the Environmental Affairs and Tourism Minister Mr Mathinus van Schalkwyk's announcements made today re new hunting regulations in South Africa:

quote:

According to Mr Van Schalkwayk, these new drafts would ensure the country cleared up the current confusion and close the loopholes that had allowed "environmental thugs" to get away with immoral activities like canned hunting, illegal trade, and unethical breeding.

"No longer will 'province hopping' allow them to escape the law. No longer will there be any excuses for their abuse of our natural heritage and hunting will now be permitted only to hunters registered with recognised hunting bodies." he said.

Also:

quote:

On hunting, he said this would now be permitted only by humane methods, in accordance with strict fair chase principles, by hunters registered with recognised hunting bodies, and in terms of carefully monitored and reviewed off-take limits at both national and provincial level.

There will be no hunting on private land that borders national or provincial protected areas where fences have been dropped, unless the landowner and the management authority allow this - and then personally approved by the MEC or the Minister.

There we go again and how will all this affect both foreign and local hunters?

Wait and see untill all is finalised I suppose is what follows now. Trust there will be opportunities for hunters and hunting organisations to comment on all the proposed changes before they are finally accepted as new laws and regulations.

It opens for public comment on the 5th of this month and you can view the proposals and make your comments at www.deat.gov.za

FWIW, one of the panel of experts who advised on this was Stewart Dorrington who is the president of PHASA - and a VERY good man.....

Hope that helps.

Great, thanks for the info shakari.

How can one get all SA hunters, HO's, PH's and hunting organisations to take part in all this?

Would the views of foreign hunters and hunting organisations also be allowed and taken into account?

PHs & Outfitters already have a voice in it via Stewart Dorrington. - I'm not sure but believe most (or at least some) of the other shooting/hunting/gun owner organisations also had representatives on the panel.......

Personally, I beleive it's about time we did something about cleaning up the hunting scene here. We had a thread on the forum not long ago where a company was offering Lions they guaranteed had been roaming free for about 90 hours before the "hunters" arrival. - If we don't put bastards like that out of the business we won't have a business to put them out of.

As to overseas hunters having an input - I wouldn't have thought so but I'm not a fundi on what's going on and only read the PHASA briefings etc.

Jagter, and others,
what would unethical breeding be?

I think you'll find their definition on the proposals......

TSJ:

Follow this link, then click on the heading
"REGULATIONS FOR THREATENED AND PROTECTED SPECIES & NORMS & STANDARSDS FOR HUNTING" and you will be able to download all the proposals.

Just to add some more mud into the water, here are the proposed definitions as contained in the proposed DEAT regulation of hunting doc referred to in other posts here;

Persons restricted from obtaining hunting authorisations and permits
13. (1) An issuing authority may issue a provincial hunting authorisation or national hunting permit to hunt a listed animal only to –
(a) a natural person; and
(b) who is a member of a recognised hunting organisation.

(2) Subclause (1) (b) does not apply to a hunting client, if the hunting
client is to be accompanied on the hunt by a professional hunter.
“hunting client†means a natural person who –
(a) is not resident in the Republic; and
(b) pays or rewards any other person for or in connection with the hunting of alisted animal;
“amateur hunter†means a person who hunts or intends to hunt a listed animal, but excludes –
(a) a professional hunter; and
(b) a hunting client;
“national hunting permit†means a permit issued in terms of the Biodiversity Act authorising a person to hunt a nationally listed threatened or protected animal;
“provincial hunting authorisationâ€, in relation to a provincially listed animal, means –
(a) a permit, permission, consent, license, registration or other document issued in terms of provincial legislation authorising a person to hunt a provincially listed animal; or
(b) an exemption or exclusion from a provision of provincial legislation regulating or prohibiting the hunting of a provincially listed animal;

"hunting will now be permitted only to hunters registered with recognised hunting bodies."
I assume a "hunting body" would be a Agent/Outfitter/PH? Would that restriction also include all the locals folks?
What in the hell does that sentence have to do with raising the standards of hunting in RSA?
They are now going to use "canned hunting' as an excuse to restrict hunting, because they can make more money by doing it.

I think you'll find it refers to local hunters being a member of a hunting orginasation such as the Lowveld Hunters Association etc......

Steve,
the interesting thing is I cannot see anywhere in the draft where it states categorically that a foreign hunter will need to be guided by a PH.
In one of the sections under conditions for granting a permit/authorisation there is a section asking for clarification as to the status of the applicant.
Here it asks about whether the person is being guided/outfitted, is a trophy hunter, biltong/meat hunter etc.

Maybe they'll leave that to individual provinces? - I'm sure they won't do away with provincial regulation entirely as it'd put too many people out of work.....