This doesn't just apply to African hunting, but hunting as an activity World Wide. Due to various "Discussions" that have taken place on AR, and a few concepts that keep creeping into and all too often dominating what started out as a good hunt report.

Question:
Who should be the final authority on what constitutes a "REAL" hunt and who should be able to classify someone as a "REAL" hunter or not.

Choices:
Should the labels of Hunting/Hunter be decided by the hunting community in general.
Should the labels of Hunting/Hunter be left up to the Individual.

 

If I leave the house with the intentions of killing an animal, whether it's a "trophy" or a "cull". I'm hunting regardless of what the community says. IMO

If the animal has a chance to get away its hunting.
Just about everything else is personal preference and local tradition.

F!@#k labels! Labels divide us and we cannot afford the division no matter how self righteous one may feel in his opinion about what is or is not hunting.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
F!@#k labels! Labels divide us and we cannot afford the division no matter how self righteous one may feel in his opinion about what is or is not hunting.

Mark

Hear! Hear!

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
If the animal has a chance to get away its hunting.
Just about everything else is personal preference and local tradition.

No matter where you hunt or what you hunt if the animal has enough cover to avoid the hunter, I consider myself as being hunting. Others may do as it suits their conscience as long as the game laws are followed!

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
F!@#k labels! Labels divide us and we cannot afford the division no matter how self righteous one may feel in his opinion about what is or is not hunting.

Mark

Today's winner of this website!

quote:

Others may do as it suits their conscience as long as the game laws are followed!

To me, Mac is the winner. Thank You for expressing your opinion on the subject.

I think it is a combo of what you gave as choices. As a group we should stick together and just realize all hunting out there is not for everyone. But a legal hunt with in the laws should be ok as a group. You may not like it just dont put it down and make hunters look bad. This fighting back and forth does not help any of us.

The facts are hunting is changing and we must grow with it if we want to keep hunting around. Less public land a fewer animals in some places means raised animals are not going away. The sooner we get on broad with the guys doing it in the right way the better we all will be. We need to stop worrying about how the antis look at this practice. Raised or wild they dont want animals hunted and killed. We stick together we can save are sport. We keep fighting about proper or this or that we will all lose the sport we love.

Good response bcap. The one main thought ALL of us that hunt MUST keep in their mind, is that the Anti's Do Not care, how it is done or how we as individuals feel about it, They Want It ALL Stopped.

I agree, hunting is hunting and we hunters are all in this together.
Poisoned arrows and darts by pygmies and others, ground traps, ganging up on one animals by three, five or more CroMagnons or Neanderthals, Indians running whole herds over cliff to slaughter, you name it, it's there.
Still hunting
So, bottom line, United we stand , divided we fall

Lets bump this back up the ladder and see how people actually feel about hunting.

If you go out and kill something, it is hunting.

The point is say what and how you hunted.

You cannot buy a captured elk and held in an enclosure, go and shoot it, and claim you have hiked all over the mountain to kill it.

And worse still enter it in a record book

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If you go out and kill something, it is hunting.

So if you go out and kill some buffalo - it is buffalo hunting?

Looks like it's all been fun and games for the last month!!

I don't believe anyone should tell me how I should hunt or if I am worthy to do so so for sure the community rule book is not for me.

The problem is that we are dealing with shades of grey and drawing the line is subject to many many parameters that then make up the overall picture of the hunt.

Does shooting an elk in a pen constitute hunting in my book? Not in a month of Sundays.

Others say that an RSA ranch buffalo hunt is not a hunt. I've just come back from one myself with a client. Whilst I would agree that it is not going to be like a wilderness experience in Zambia, Tanz, Zim etc, it was a valid hunt and we shot a nice bull. In this instance the client was carrying a knee injury that restricted his ability to hike for miles. He has a Moz hunt booked for next year but is not sure if he can cut the miles without incapacitating himself for a week afterwards.

All I'm saying is that there are a lot of variables that go into the equations rather than just species, and location.

K

quote:

Originally posted by boarkiller:
I agree, hunting is hunting and we hunters are all in this together.
Poisoned arrows and darts by pygmies and others, ground traps, ganging up on one animals by three, five or more CroMagnons or Neanderthals, Indians running whole herds over cliff to slaughter, you name it, it's there.
Still hunting
So, bottom line, United we stand , divided we fall

quote:

Results (44 votes counted so far):

Who should be the final authority on what constitutes a "REAL" hunt and who should be able to classify someone as a "REAL" hunter or not.

4 (9%) Should the labels of Hunting/Hunter be decided by the hunting community in general.

40 (91%) Should the labels of Hunting/Hunter be left up to the Individual.

It looks like the poll results point to the idea that people in general, have a more open stance on what hunting is and is not.

The point I find interesting, is that many folks, and maybe it is an age thing, have accepted the idea that times and attitudes change about issues such as hunting and maybe for hunting to remain a viable activity, people have to understand that numbers of participants is what helps keep hunting alive.

Continually attacking other hunters because they don't prescribe to how things were in the past, is not helping the Hunting community in any way.

Our choice for the future, if we intend on trying to keep hunting a viable activity, is to accept the FACTS that not all hunters view hunting the same as those of us that have been hunting for 4 or 5 decades or more.

Times and attitudes have changed. We either change with them and accept the idea that those following us want to hunt, but simply view hunting and how they partake in it differently than what we grew up believing.

My vote is the OP should confine himself to diatribing at ARPF and leave the rest of us alone. Saeed and Don own the site...

Thank You for your input, but you can put me on ignore really easy.

If I bother you so much with my comments, why not simply put me on ignore or simply skip over my responses and move along to something else.

I believe as a hunter I have just as much right to express my opinions on the future of hunting and on concepts/beliefs/actions that I believe endanger the future of hunting as any other hunter does.

I am open for anyone to explain to me why I do not have as much right to express my opinions or concerns as everyone else.

I hunt for myself

Anyone who doesn't like it can GFT

I don't recall ever seeing Crazyhorse post something non-sensical. I've PM'd him about a possible hunt and was honest and straightforward with me. Seems like a good guy to me.

I'd value his input as much or more than anyone on this site.

Of course, you'd likely feel the same about me. lol.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If you go out and kill something, it is hunting.

So if you go out and kill some buffalo - it is buffalo hunting?

Hell YES!!!!!!

Stupid ass proper elitist bull shit

I can't wait for early teal season to open.... Will that be proper hunting? I'm so confused. I can't figure out when I'm hunting properly anymore. Everything I learned growing up has all been wiped clean by the great big game hunters of the Inet

On September 8th I wil be doing whatever I can...helping a good friend fill his very long awaited Colorado Bighorn tag above the tree line

DIY.....proper?

Elitist...please and thank you....just cram it!!

Randall, no offense but you're a bit of a hall monitor at times. I usually log-in for the reasons you've suggested...

I will be posting a "Hunting" report in the Hog Hunting topic area about a little outing me and a fellow AR member did this past weekend.

The only point I am trying to make is that we have more than enough outside influences trying to take hunting away from, is it really necessary for us, as individuals or a group to divide ourselves into Purists/Elitists versus those believed to be less dedicated/mature/committed?

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
This doesn't just apply to African hunting

+1!

Hunting today is different from what it was 100 years ago or for cave men. Today we follow strict seasons, limits, quotas and protected species. Such rules did not exist in the old days.

An individual cannot just hunt as he pleases. He has tp follow the rules or he is deemed a poacher & a criminal. So we do follow the rules set by others - whether we like them or not. If we do not follow those rules we cannot be called hunters.

As has been pointed out several times on the various discussions, this has nothing to do with rules/regulations = Legally Sanctioned/Regulated hunting methods.

Above ALL else, all hunters should be vocal against anyone not hunting in a Legally regulated manner.

It is when hunters begin finding fault with the Methods other hunters employ and making declarations as to what they, as an Individual believe is or is not proper hunting.

Example, shooting game at a waterhole. While being a perfectly legal/accepted method used by many in many parts of the world, there are some that believe it is wrong, not sporting and anyone using a waterhole to locate and kill game is not really a hunter.

To completely exaggerate the concept, it is like a hunter claiming that someone else using a scoped rifle is not a Real hunter because they are not using a rifle equipped with only iron sights.

As long as what a hunter is doing is a LEGALLY established method, there should be no problem from any other hunter.

Randall

On another sport.....fishing

catch and release vs catch and eat

live bait vs artificial bait or enter the fly fishermen

More bullshit

I am of the same mind concerning fishing as I am hunting, maybe more so.

Actually of the two, I would rather fish any day than hunt. I have no problem with catch and release if that is what a person likes to do, but I grew up in the 50's and 60's, and fishing meant going out and getting something to supplement my families diet.

I love to eat fish and I love to catch fish, but I really do not like being in a Catch & Release Only situation.

If I want to catch and release a fish or catch and keep a fish, I want that to be MY decision.

With hunting, we really do not have that option. Setting a hook in the jaw of a fish in most cases leaves us options. I have not found anyway to call a bullet back or tell it to veer off to the side.

I understand what you are getting at, I just view it as that setting a hook properly leaves me options, pulling the trigger on one of my rifles leaves no options.

Hope that answers your question. Sorry I have nothing better.

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If you go out and kill something, it is hunting.

So if you go out and kill some buffalo - it is buffalo hunting?

Hell YES!!!!!!

But was it 'PROPER' hunting?...[ ]..( still to be defined by Saeed)

and did you have a "PROPER' PH or guide?

and don't forget it needs to be a 'PROPER' hunting report...!!

The AR ivory tower elite inquisition squad,
.. says:.... you can't just take some happy snaps and say you had good hunting trip...

iVe noticed in another outdoor activity like fishing, you can show photos of your yourself at the back of the boat
holding your prized catch with just a brief explanation like species and location (and wearing a BIG smile)
... and fellow fishos will just congratulate you on your result.

Trax

Do as you will but I'd rather you left me out of any of your post

I don't like you.....it's just that bluntly simple

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I am of the same mind concerning fishing as I am hunting, maybe more so.

Actually of the two, I would rather fish any day than hunt. I have no problem with catch and release if that is what a person likes to do, but I grew up in the 50's and 60's, and fishing meant going out and getting something to supplement my families diet.

I love to eat fish and I love to catch fish, but I really do not like being in a Catch & Release Only situation.

If I want to catch and release a fish or catch and keep a fish, I want that to be MY decision.

With hunting, we really do not have that option. Setting a hook in the jaw of a fish in most cases leaves us options. I have not found anyway to call a bullet back or tell it to veer off to the side.

I understand what you are getting at, I just view it as that setting a hook properly leaves me options, pulling the trigger on one of my rifles leaves no options.

Hope that answers your question. Sorry I have nothing better.

I had no question

I was showing just another point and take in how sportsman differ

Ted Thorn

Tell someone who cares!....Now go iron the creases in your skirt and stop pouting.

HUNTING def.

1. to chase or search for (game or other wild animals) for the purpose of catching or killing.
2. to pursue with force, hostility, etc., in order to capture or kill



So whether you go out with a recurve bow to anchor your deer,
or you advantageously get in a Hughes500 with rifle and kill your game from the air,

You are in fact hunting.

Hunting does NOT have to be 'fair' on an animal,[fair being a relative term anyways!]

you can use what ever modern means/convenience/ technological advantage possible within the law.
How much 'chance' you think an animal deserves is entirely up to the individual and depends on the priorities
of the particular task at hand.
eg:
I see no shame dropping deer from a chopper simply to go fill the home freezer.
In such case my simple and sole priority is clinical, that being;
- to obtain a store of meat supply for the table in short time,
iTs in no way intended to prove sporting prowess , enter the record books, ,or meet anyone elses standards.

Im confident that if great ivory hunters of a 100+ yr ago had a H500 at their disposal,
they would have used it to brain them from the air, rather than laboring-trudging long hard miles month after month.
simply because their pursuit of ivory was not a sporting venture, it was a clinical business venture.

Remember that hunting is a hostile persuite, and anyone thinking that by doing it by one method (vs) another
somehow makes them morally or ethically superior, is plainly deluding themselves.

I believe that many hunters have a deep rooted guilt. They assuage that guilt by finding a loop-hole where by following some arbitrary method they are OK, but everyone else is a heathen. Do bigger horns make you a better human being? I doubt it. Does having two barrels on your rifle or shotgun? Does claiming that you are so moved by the death of an animal that rending your clothing and blowing enormous blubbering snot bubbles is appropriate? Does getting close to an animal that is so nearly retarded/blind/unafraid that a crew of guys walked up to it make you more skilled than the guy who has developed the skill to shoot it or something spooky from a distance? Does skill even make you a better person?

People hunt for entertainment, and within limits do things the way they want. Some would prefer that the world kiss their ass for doing what they want, while sneering at those with differing opinions and methods.

I have some pretty strict standards on how I will hunt. For instance, I will not shoot an animal I see from the road while on Safari. If it is an animal that I would like to take then I will drive down the road for a half mile or so and give it 30 to 45 minutes to wander off. Then I will track the animal and shoot it if we can sneak up on it. If we aren't successful, so be it. It is no loss to me.

The same applies to pheasant hunting. In South Dakota, you can shoot a pheasant that is in the barrow pit if your not standing on the road. Road hunting is very popular there. I will not do that but if someone is hunting with me and wants to do it, no problem. In Montana you can't shoot anytime from the road or from the barrow pit. You must be on the other side of the fence. Laws vary and you must know what they are where you are hunting. Although some hunting methods legal in some areas can give hunters a bad name with the general public and we need to not flaunt those in videos on Youtube. Such as shooting from a car.

Saying all that, my restrictions are what I hunt by but I don't have any heart burn if someone else's standards are different as long as they are legal.

465H&H

I used to oportunistically 'hunt' wild boars that milled about as they tried to get through an obstacle/ hole in a property fence
as they made their back into the safety of the off limits state forest.

I will walk dry water courses in the hot tropics dry season, knowing that wild boars will commonly be found sleeping it off down there,
to better avoid the immense heat of the day.

Am I cheating/taking unfair advantage?...or just using my brains?

realistically,
I began taking 'unfair advantage'-- ever since I first began using the convenience of high speed flat-shooting modern centrefires.

I wonder how many ele bulls & buffalo WDM Bell would have to his name if he had to primitively spear them?
Even just his humble 7x57 with solids was a huge advantage-modern convenience, compared to how natives hunted game before whiteman.

If Mr.Bell had a good scope instead of just open sights, he may well have used it to conveniently brain them from further distances.

Years ago, longer than I really care to think about, I spent a good while analyzing hunting and my part in the equation. The first thing I came to realize was that no matter my intentions/actions/methods or efforts, humans simply can not "Fair Chase" hunt any other species.

On the most base level with the exception maybe of some insects, and even then we will oft times pick up a switch or stick, humans only advantage is our brain. We are ill equipped physically as a species to be a hunter.

Our brain however allowed us to realize early on in our history that to stay alive and survive/succeed, we were going to have to find or invent methods to protect ourselves/families and part of succeeding/surviving includes obtaining food and since humans are basically carnivores, that meant having to kill other species.

Over the centuries of human evolution we developed better more effective methods and equipment.

At Point B, when we no longer had to hunt but realized that to stay in touch with our ancestral roots so to speak, we began hunting for other reasons, such as maintaining a certain type contact with the natural world, playing the role of the Ultimate Predator.

For some among us we try to reconcile our desire to hunt with the reality that we have to take advantage of our brain and technology, by placing self imposed/self determined limits on how we hunt. Where the problem comes in is when we as individuals forget that not everyone that hunts views things from the exact same point of view.

The biggest issue I have with fellow hunters is when they begin equating one hunting method as being more proper/fair/humane or dignified.

The legality of the methods/equipment used by ANY hunter should be the major/foremost concern of all hunters. Illegal hunting methods are the enemies of all hunters. Shooting from a vehicle, at a waterhole, over a bait or at night where legal is a matter of personal choice. It is or should be the decision of the individual.

When hunting with a guide/outfitter/PH, even if something is legal, if the client is uncomfortable with it then the client needs to express that to the Professional.

To me personally, not wanting to hunt in the same manner as someone else does not make me more of a hunter or less of one nor do I believe that difference in beliefs concerning hunting gives me license to condemn another hunter, especially if they are comfortable with what they did and it was legal.