I recently watched a hunting show & it made me think about my own hunting experiences.
A seemingly normal, healthy young man was allowed to shoot 2 game animals from the truck.
I do not wish to take anything away from this young mans experience, I just thought he was denied the wonderful experience of actually getting to hunt these animals instead of just shooting them.
In all fairness, I shot my steenbuck from the truck & one of my gemsbok within 15ft of the truck.
While I am not ashamed of it, it certainly was no where near as memorable as just about any of the other animals I have taken.
I think in the future I will make it a personal rule not to shoot anywhere near the vehicle. Not sure how far off I will require it to be at this time, but I think it should at least be out of sight.
Not trying to influence anyone else, just wanting to set some personal goals.

Cecil,

Interesting topic. I think a lot more game and particularly PG is taken from or close by the Cruiser than some folks would believe. Most ethical PH's would rather you not shoot from the truck but a lot of PG is spotted from the vehicle on most safaris and a stalk is mounted from that spotting. I also think a few PH's are very happy to have you shoot from the truck. It's much less work for them. I try to steer away from PH's that do that except in the case of having a physically impaired client. I think a hunter has to set his own personal standards as to what is ethical and share that with their PH at the start of the safari.

Personally I was told on my first safari that this animal and that animals were not approachable on foot. I didn't know the difference although I felt it was probably BS. Since then I've set my own standards and they do not include shooting from the truck unless an animal is wounded and we can put it down more quickly by using the vehicle. To me spotting an animals from the vehicle and then making a stalk be it 20 feet or 2 miles is fine with me. I think hunting often gives you a gift as such and I think nothing is wrong with taking advantage of that.

I have a hard time believing the outdoor shows that show a perfectly healthy client taking the initial shot on some PG animal right from the high seat on the Cruiser. I agree with Cecil that these guys have cheated themselves as in all likelihood the whole safari was conducted like that.

Mark

Where is the line drawn between Personal Standards and Legal Methods and their impact on hunting as a whole?

Hunters seem hell bent on drawing lines about what is and is not hunting.

Anti-hunters do not care, they want it all stopped, regardless of method/equipment or Personal ethics/beliefs.

If PH's do not want clients shooting from or with in "X" distance of a vehicle or a waterhole, that is something they need to inform the client of, Before, a deposit is accepted.

They also need to work with the game depts. or countries under whose jurisdiction they are operating under to get the laws changed.

These are the issues concerning hunting that continue to form ever widening lines of division.

After all, it is the client that is paying for the hunt and keeping the industry in business, not the PH, not other clients that have a differing point of view.

If it is legal and the client has no problem with it, it really isn't anyone else's business. If it is legal and the PH has a problem, they need to discuss that with the client before booking the hunt.

I am not asking for agreement, just voicing an opinion. Times have changed and people have changed in their thoughts on such issues. Trying to hold others to our own personal/individual standards is not working.

Good day, gents. I'd like to chime in here if I may.
I've had PHs cover the entire spectrum--from walking one's butt off all day to encouraging their client to shoot from the truck. After many trips overseas to hunt I can't fault the PH for this. A friend and PH in South Africa summed it up for me and made sense: the PH will do what the client wants. Most clients want a successful hunt and the PH's job is to see to that success. If a client wants to walk all day the PH will agree and if the client wants to shoot from the truck most PHs will agree to that, too. After all it is the client who is paying for the experience. That said, I have never met a hunter who details his shooting from the truck and/or waterhole. The same for the huge white tails I've seen mounted--it was a great hunt and I shot a huge deer but they forget to say it was behind a high fence in Michigan.

I guess we all set our standards on how we like to hunt. My game bag is vey small for the amount of times I've hunted but it was my choice to use double rifles. If I used a .300 Weatherby my ratio of hunts to kills would be far greater. But, it was (and is) my choice. I do agree the entire hunt experience is lessened by not stalking and tracking. But what ever is legal…..
Cheers,
Cal

quote:

Trying to hold others to our own personal/individual standards is not working.

I truly hope you do not believe that is what I am trying to do.
It is not illegal to shoot from the truck & if anyone wants to do that, it's their business.
I have simply set a different set of rules upon myself & no one else.

Well why stop at shooting off the truck, I think any hunting done with the aid of a truck is disgusting! What chance does the animal have? And let's not forget scopes...or modern weaponry, hell, let's ban "driven over cliff hunting" as well. I won't be happy till people start swimming to Africa and hunt game the old fashion way, jedi mind tricks!


There's no difference shooting off sticks 20 ft from the truck, or leaning on the truck, or next to the ladder on the truck...it's all shooting, with incredible technology, and the animal certainly is disadvantaged in every situation.

Funny, I've spent quite a bit of time with different people, some I knew, some I didnt, on safari but every single one of them in the "I don't ever shoot off the truck, no matter what camp," damn near broke their hand trying to load their gun when a 60" kudu jumped in the road!

Are some of ya'll just set on GO to jump on someone?
All I did was use an example & stated that I was setting my own standards for ME.
I don't care what you do & don't think I have any right to set the standards for you or anybody else.
With my knees failing me I may someday only be able to hunt from the truck, but as long as I can, I'll try to avoid it in the future.

TRUE.Africa is not a place that you would want to shoot anything from a truck.If it happens it happens but it is just so much better when you are in the bush and carrying your own rifle.
That said,for any reason if I could not walk in the bush I would accept shooting from a truck and make the best of it.Trucks are nice too you could get into them!

I have taken animals from the hunting car in Africa! However they were camp meat animals, or bait animals not trophies! I have no problem with using a vehicle to go into the high grass to sort out a wounded buffalo, and certainly wounded cats. That is simply the smart way of finishing things without getting someone scratched, or gored!

I like to spot animals from the car, and move on down the track, out of sight, and stalk back. Or slide out od the car, and let the driver drive on out of sight, then crawl toward the animal or take a long shot from as close as I can get.

In the USA I have taken huge numbers of Jack rabbits and Prairie Dogs long range from a vehicle, and coyotes called in at night with artificial light on my grandfather’s ranch. In Texas that is legal and is used mostly as crop and stock protection.

I apologize to nobody for any of that and I couldn’t care less what others do as long as it is legal.
...................................................................

I'm with you bwana
Each to their own, I also think 50" kudu on foot is better than 60" from the truck any day of the week

I think we need to remember that most hunters progress through 5 stages in their hunting career....In the first couple stages hunting off the truck or on foot likely wouldn't make a bit of difference to the hunter. As we age and gain hunting experience...method and experience become far more important. Good to let people progress naturally and not think they should be at the same stage the same as us.

quote:

I truly hope you do not believe that is what I am trying to do.

No Sir, not at all, that does not change the concept that many hunters can and do expect others to view things from their stand point.

There have been hunters, members of this site, that have openly stated on the site, that people shooting game from a truck or at a waterhole or inside high fenced property to mention just a very few, have no right to refer to themselves as a hunter.

I personally am a member of the "if it is legal and the person doing the shooting has no problem with it", it is their business, not mine.

There are some hunters however that don't feel that way, and it is okay to not feel that way, but I don't find it okay when they expect others to acquiesce to their concept of hunting ethics.

I personally live and operate under the concept of situational ethics. When I am on a guided hunt, I enjoy the whole experience and while doing a lot of walking is fine and working for the trophy is part of the game, I have no real problem with a gimmie from the truck if it is legal.

I have a problem that afflicts very many of us - I am just plain lazy.

Good answers.

I hunted Zimbabwe for many years, where one has to walk his rear end off to be able to shoot anything, and can be miles away from the truck.

They also had some silly rule where one cannot shoot any animal that is below the high watermark by Lake Kariba - but you are allowed to shoot hippo and croc against that rule.

We were shooting impala for bait once by Lake Kariba. The impala were feeding by the lake shore, and our game scout was absolutely adamant that was below the high water mark.

We waited as the impala fed towards the forest. They were feeding away from us, and getting further and further.

Anyway, as they got to the edge of the tree line, he agreed that they were legal to shoot - with a big smile on his face, as they were quite a distance by then.

I rested against a tree, and dropped one of the rams.

His smile got bigger, and he said "you are a sniper!"

I told him the impala was going to be dead, no matter where he is standing.
Then we went to South Africa on safari.

We drove around, and each time we found an animal to shoot, I jumped out of the truck and shot it.

My PH and his staff never stopped laughing at me, as it was customary to shoot from the truck.

A few days into the hunt, I stopped jumping out of the truck, and shot from the back.

It made absolutely no difference to the animal - and when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Then came Walter, who has a medical problem where he cannot walk too far.

He shot everything from the truck.

And you know what he said?

It was the BEST hunt he has ever had!

As already mentioned above, where does one draw the line?

For me, if it is legal, and I am comfortable with it, I will do it, and could not careless about the opinion of others.

On my first hunt in South Africa, the PH explained that most of the clients came with a "shopping list" of animals that they wanted to take. Said to Spot and Stalk would not make them any money, not enough time for spot and stalk. I shot 3 animals from the cruiser.(out of 11) When it is legal, face it, the top of the truck is more steady, stable than the sticks. Quick, Humane kills.

quote:

I have no problem with using a vehicle to go into the high grass to sort out a wounded buffalo, and certainly wounded cats.

If shooting from the truck is robbing/denying the hunter of the experience of a successful stalk then following up on wounded DG eliminates the whole concept of hunting dangerous game.

I am not suggesting one should emulate those portrayed by some celebrities though at this point, would respect them more than those who would use a truck.

Don't you think that in the example that was given (two guys in a hunting show) that the most likely reason for shooting from the truck was TV footage?

There are some cameramen that can stalk quietly, but I suspect quite a few can't.

Having a not so quiet hunter, a really not so quiet cameraman, and the rest of the TV "entourage" probably made it impossible for them to do it via spot and stalk and get what they want/need for their holy TV show.

Don't get me wrong- I have seen how it can be done (Ivan Carter) and then the weak link is usually the client hunter, not the staff- but even so, with the extra folks, you will likely have less success than just you, the PH and the tracker.

And for the self justifying, yes, I have shot an animal or two from the truck, or close enough it made no difference. I would rather go on foot, but as Saeed says, when in Rome....

My PH in Botswana told me over half the kudu were shot from the truck. He was surprised when he realized I was serious I would go home without one if I had to shoot from the truck. I did spot and stalk one the last afternoon. One of my most memorable trophies.


That said, to each his own. Everyone has to look at their own trophies on the wall or the pictures in their album. Not for me to say what someone else can or will enjoy. As long as its legal, I don't care.

Cecil:
PM sent.
George

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

I have no problem with using a vehicle to go into the high grass to sort out a wounded buffalo, and certainly wounded cats.

If shooting from the truck is robbing/denying the hunter of the experience of a successful stalk then following up on wounded DG eliminates the whole concept of hunting dangerous game.

I am not suggesting one should emulate those portrayed by some celebrities though at this point, would respect them more than those who would use a truck.

those that don't desperately seek the safety of a truck, might then instead desperately seek the safety & comfort of a .600Nitro...

I'm guilty of shooting PG from the truck. It happened. Done. Did I enjoy spot and stalk better, yes. Will I judge myself or others, no.

I see nothing wrong with shooting from a truck as long as you use a hubcap to mount the head on.

There are "hunters" and there are "shooters" !!!

The whole truck shooting thing is really interesting to me, as I am actually surprised at how happy many people I take to Africa are happy to shoot from the truck. I do however try and press clients to get off occasionally (often contrary to the PH's view) and stalk their animals. This has resulted in some great success in the last few years and more memorable trophies.

We shoot a lot of management animals each year from the truck, mostly Blesbuck, its a culling exercise and shooting, not hunting. However it is no less enjoyable, just different.

Most people don't want to take their trophies from the truck but are happy to spot and stalk. others insist on walking all day and others want to shoot from the vehicle more often, usually due to some medical reason.

Over all I tend to let most clients be governed by their own rule book as long as it is legal.

What I don't like is a PH that encourages the client to shoot from the truck because it is an easier option for him, and results in more animals at the end of the week. Most PH's that say that the animals can't be approached (in my experience) don't know how to approach them. Here we stalk all of our animals on foot with occasional use of a stand, so I have found abilities on the part of the PH's varies dramatically in this respect.

The other problem is that when animals are habitually shot from the truck the minute the engine is stopped they bolt and so the whole endeavour becomes an exercise in rushing about and pressured shots. That is no fun for anyone.

K

quote:

We shoot a lot of management animals each year from the truck, mostly Blesbuck, its a culling exercise and shooting, not hunting.

A culling exercise is just what it is - shooting to reduce the numbers and preferably in the most humane way possible.

Performing this exercise from the back of a truck accelerates the process and if you want to get the job done even quicker, do it at night.

Indeed night time is good for a lot of that type of stuff, but adds another layer of pressure to a client that has not done it before. It is also more difficult to be sure the guide and the shooter are looking at the same animal in a herd!!

Like you say culling is shooting not hunting, or at least not in the purest sense, but still has the same welfare concerns attached to it.

K

Let's drop the use of the word "standards" as it applies to one's preference in how to hunt. "Standards" implies a moral superiority, as if killing a condemned man with pharmaceuticals is somehow morally superior to killing him with an electric shock.

If you prefer only to shoot your game when stalking on foot, fine; if you prefer to shoot it from the high seat of a truck, fine; neither is a "standard", both are preferences.

Saeed and Stonecreek: +1

In norway and rest of scandinavia it is ilegal to shot from a car.

it is cheating hehehe

quote:

Let's drop the use of the word "standards" as it applies to one's preference in how to hunt. "Standards" implies a moral superiority,

Can you back this claim up?
I thought maybe I had used the word standard incorrectly, so I got my Webster's Concise Dictionary out & checked, no where does it even imply anything about "moral superiority".
I certainly would not intentionally say such a thing.
As for my use of the word, I have been setting standards for myself most of my adult life. Never once thinking I had any right to impose them on anyone other than myself.
When a runner sets a certain time frame in which to complete a race, are they not setting a standard for themselves?
When a hunters sets a certain size for horns, antlers or body size, are they not setting a standard for themselves to meet?
If I have used the word incorrectly, I humbly apologize to everyone.
All this started over ME wanting to do things different for MYSELF than I have done in the past.

When you set a "standard", then there are practices or products which are either at, above, or below that standard. When you express a preference other preferences are simply different, not inferior or superior.

I haven't seen anything in your posts which indicates that you regard one preference as superior to another, or would wish to impose such preference on someone else, but when the word "standard" is used it infers that practices which don't meet that standard are inferior.

quote:

Originally posted by Nitro_Andreas:
In norway and rest of scandinavia it is ilegal to shot from a car.

it is cheating hehehe

Laws vary a great deal from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and sometimes those laws are based on what a particular society, or at least its legislating body, perceives as moral standards.

In my home state it is illegal to shoot from a vehicle if the vehicle is "on, along, or across" a public road. This restriction is not based on a moral standard or hunting ethic, but rather on public safety. Conversely, it is illegal in all of the U.S. to shoot migratory birds where grain or other "bait" has been spread. This is a moral (or ethical) regulation, not one based on public safety, or even game management needs.

Some jurisdictions restrict hunting on Sundays, just as some restrict retail sales on Sundays. Again, these are "standards" (historically) based on certain moral holdings.

Some of us may find shooting from a vehicle ethically lacking. Others may regard shooting from an offhand position unethical due to the greater chance of wounding rather than killing. Some may regard it as unethical to shoot at running game for the same reason. Any of these may violate our personal "standards".
And while most of us have an opinion -- a preference -- on such issues, thankfully, most of us regard our opinion as binding only on ourselves, or perhaps also those with whom we choose to hunt and who have similar preferences.

None of this is to say that there should be no standards or ethics in hunting. It is only to say that people have different ways of regarding various practices and may very well hold in poor regard a practice which others find perfectly alright.

I'm not much for shooting an animal out of a tree which has been brought to bay by dogs. I don't understand why others take pleasure in it, but I don't regard my preference as any kind of standard or that the practice should be disallowed. But I suppose my "standards" are flexible in that regard: If pigs could climb trees I'd gladly shoot them out of the branches all day long with a grin on my face.

In order to not offend, & I truly do not wish to offend, I changed my original post.
I removed "standard" & replaced it with goals.

Standard is a fine word. And very appropriate to use in this context.

If my standards are different than yours and that makes you feel bad, maybe you should reevaluate your standards and possibly set them higher.

If I am touting my standards, on something such as this, as morally superior, well, that just makes me a jerk.

I assume this discussion is all about Africa.

I like to hunt on foot. However , there are those odd time when the hunting gods provide you quarry where it can likely only be shot from the truck. If the odd critter is taken this way, I see no problem with it. On the other hand, constantly attempting to hunt for the truck is not for me.

As an example of what I am talking about , one one safari, I wanted a warthog . The only male I saw was when we came around a corner and there was a giant boar not 30 yards away getting ready to depart. I shot him from the truck.

bwana cecil, I apologize for getting your post blown out of proportion. There is no reason for you to change your OP. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

That folks disagree is simply part of life.

The majority of folks from what I have read tend to go with if it is legal and the hunter has no problem, that is all that matters.

Your hunts are your hunts. If you want them all to be spot and stalk, that is your decision.

Another hunter may or will view thing differently and be more inclined to "Go with the Flow, as long as it is Legal".

At this point in the discussion I have not noticed any of the rhetoric about it either has to be done in a certain manner or it is not hunting and the person participating in doing it in that manner should not consider themselves a "True Hunter".

Each of us view a hunt differently, some want to do nothing but spot and stalk while others do not really care as long as what they are doing is legal.

To me, and this is just my opinion, nothing more as long as we all can agree on the premise that what we are doing is Legal, that is really all that matters.

Thank you.

Cecil's original post was thoughtful, sober, and entirely reasonable. It baffles me how insecure some on AR are when 'one of us' posits what they set for themselves as a personal standard. Guilt perhaps?

Cecil was speaking for himself and relaying a personal standard he has chosen to apply on hunts in the future. I admire his honesty, self-examination, and thoughtful resolve. Nowhere did he assert that his ethical choices should be imposed upon anyone else.

That said, let me then go one step further: In my opinion, if it's not Fair Chase, it's not ethical hunting for me or you. It may be shooting game for the pot, or culling, or in the case of the Green Mile video, animal cruelty with firearms - but it's not ethical hunting.

If we adhere to the mindless presumption that to judge other hunters gives succor to the antis, we condemn all of us to be judged by the public for not taking a stand against even the most odious hunting behavior. If you disagree with that, then you disagree with President Theodore Roosevelt, who helped to popularize the adoption of Fair Chase. Far from being doctrinaire or overly proscriptive, the concept of Fair Chase is nothing less than the application of ethics and principles in hunting, and is both simple and straight forward. Simply put, Fair Chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild game animals in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.

No shrinking violet was Teddy; he had no qualms about labeling a hunter unethical. Indeed, he forewarned of the risk to hunting should we fail to self-regulate the sport. In recent times, a good example of an attempt at self-regulation would be when those opposed to canned hunting raise the issue of ethics, doing so out of respect for the tradition of Fair Chase and a desire to protect the sport from those who oppose all hunting. Canned hunts are the definition of a hunter employing an "improper advantage" in pursuit of animals that are not "free ranging".

As a community that loathes government interference with our sport – preferring instead self-regulation – I think it dangerous to simply wave as our banner, 'If it's legal it's okay'. How many of you watching the Green Mile video managed to mutter, "well it's legal", between spasms of retching? I say it's is up to each of us to voice our objections when we witness hunting behavior that violates even the most elastic of ethical standards as embodied in Fair Chase.

So long as we recognize that there are limits to the laissez faire ideal of 'to each his own' when it comes to hunting, and accept that the principles of Fair Chase are both reasonable and in our self-interest, we help to protect ourselves, our sport, as well as the animals we hunt.

Saeed's point is spot on. I would venture to say that significantly more than 50% of the hunters that have hunted in Africa have seen an animal from the vehicle and (generally while being urged by the PH to do so) have gotten out of the vehicle and shot the animal within 50 yards of the vehicle. So shooting the animal within sight of the vehicle having just gotten out or off of the vehicle is an accepted practice that does not seem to offend the ethical standards of many. On the other hand, shooting the same animal without getting off the vehicle is somehow viewed as warranting the throwing of an ethical yellow flag. Really? Is getting out of the vehicle and shooting somehow more fair chase than being on the vehicle when you shoot? Is there a set distance someone must walk away from the vehicle before they cross the imaginary line between fair chase and ethical scorn? If so, what is that distance? So 99 yards is verboten, but 101 yards is cricket? I think we are drawing lines that way too fine.

Good posts, Saeed, CHC and MJines.

I remember an argument between two hunters in a camp in Namibia: the German was having a go at an American who shot an Oryx out of the truck; the American retorted with "and you sit over a waterhole in a blind!"

My funniest shot ever taken on PG was out of a truck, the PH spotted a Mountain Reedbuck at 460 yards and said, "bet you can't hit that from here you bloody roo shooter" I said....."care for a wager"? And with $100USD at even money, I made the shot with a custom 257WBY......I still laugh when I look at that mount in my office..

I like to shoot over sticks at longish range in Namibia for some species of PG; I do this by sitting down behind the spread sticks and you can get almost benchrest steady. I use a big, flat shooting calibre, 338RUM or 30-378 with a custom Kenton turret on the scope. It has enabled me to take animals that would have been almost to take otherwise.

Is it "hunting"......no, but it works. And the PH loves watching the shots....