When it comes to Africa, most here are not residents of Africa we travel there to shoot game. If we are honest with ourselves the hunters are the PH and the trackers and we are along for the ride and our job is to cleanly kill the animial sought and not F*CK up the hunting process. I will add some but few could go to a property and know the property well enough to have a sucessful hunt alone. JMO If memory serves me correctly Brian Marsh writes about wanting to hunt with out the aid of a tracker.

D O J

In 26 years hunting SA I have had precious few oportunities to hunt a propery alone. The norm, even for locals, is to have a tracker whose main task is to watch out for the interests of the landowner.

But in recent years (and most recently 3 weeks back in Bots, covered in another topic here) I have had a fair share of doing it myself, and its A WHOLE NEW BALL GAME! Very humbling and very rewarding.

Now, even when a tracker is appointed I make him walk behind and observe. This is a bit uncomfortable because you feel he must be laughing at your obvious lack of skill, but so be it; it's MY hunt after-all.....

Jerry, very true, but just have to get in a lick or two .

+1 Scott

Every area and culture has conventions for what are acceptable sport hunting methods. Even this may vary from animal to animal in the same country. Example: In the US it is taboo to shoot turkeys out of a tree, but a squirrel, mountain lion, or raccoon is fine.

In England they hunt foxes on horse back with hounds, but in the US we hunt them with calls while hiding. One way right, one way wrong? No just different conventions in different places. If the English considered calling foxes unsporting I wouldn't go over there and demand to do it my way. I wouldn't shoot game from a car in the US or Africa, but if I went to some country where that was the convention and expected of me that would be different. I may not feel comfortable with it and decide not to do the hunt and that's my decision, but the norms have changed and what's taboo in one area may not be in another.

I think if you go to a different area with different sport hunting ethics and conventions as a general rule do what they do or do it in a more difficult manner, but don't do it less ethically than their conventions. Example: If I had an international friend come to the US to hunt deer with me. We normally sit in tree stands. He has a problem with tree stand hunting and would prefer to spot and stalk, track, still hunt. Fine by me. My hat’s off to him. Now if he comes over and decides he wants to drive around in a 4x4 and shoot them from the window we have a problem! I don't mean to be on a high horse I just get tired of people doing things as easily, quickly, and painlessly as possible.

Many professional organizations set standards for their professionals above and beyond what is legal and that is a wonderful thing! As a doctor I will be held by my state board to a higher code of ethical conduct than the law would otherwise dictate for me. And if I fail to hold to those standards then I may well lose my license to practice! I think professional hunting organizations creating ethical standards above the minimum legally required and asking their professional members to adhere to them at risk of their license is a reasonable and necessary action. Again as I stated earlier I believe there are reasonable exceptions to some rules like disabled hunters having special accommodations made for them. An interesting and relevant note to my last sentence is an article I read recently (in ASG I think) about a disabled hunter and a creative PH who devised a wheel barrow like apparatus to hunt dangerous and plains game away from the vehicle. My hat’s off to that gentleman and his PH.

Brett

How you hunt is largely dependent on the laws of your local area and peer pressure. We all have some things that we consider unsporting. For instances it is illegal to hunt deer over bait, with dogs, and you are limited to one deer/season in Idaho but not in Georgia (I believe). Both make sense for the local areas. In Idaho we can easily apply enough hunting pressure on deer populations to control population growth. In Georgia the habitat is so thick that extraordinary means must be taken to properly harvest deer, such as baiting, dog hunting and one deer/day limits. Hunting regulations are designed to assure proper deer harvest and to spread that harvest over as many hunters as possible.

I have my personal set of ethics when hunting and in general they are much more restrictive than most on here. But they are mine and I don't expect anyone else to adopt them. We each must live with our own conscious. To sum them up the harder I have to work for an animal the more it means to me. I would rather shoot one or two wild super smart late season pheasants in a day than shoot 10 or 15 game farm birds in a day at a shooting preserve.


The British have it right. They call driven birds a shoot and not a hunt. A hunt is reserved for a walk up or stalking hunt.

In my mind sitting over a deer feeder. a water hole in Africa, shooting out of a vehicle, shooting game farm birds or spot lighting a big game animal is not hunting but simply shooting. If that is your thing fine but can you justify calling it hunting? The challenge is are you a hunter that shoots occasionally or simply a shooter?

465H&H

quote:

In Georgia the habitat is so thick that extraordinary means must be taken to properly harvest deer, such as baiting, dog hunting and one deer/day limits.

Baiting deer in GA is illegal, dog hunting is allowed but only in a small area of the state and the season limit is 12 of which 2 bucks the rest are antlerless.

I am not going against your opinion just correcting you on the hunting regulations in GA.

Thanks for the correction Dave. I was too lazy to look up the regs for Georgia.

465H&H

How about using an aircraft to locate a trophy elephant, and then using the GPS to walk up on him?

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
How about using an aircraft to locate a trophy elephant, and then using the GPS to walk up on him?

Why use a plane and a GPS when you can just use a Helicopter and shoot from the air?

You learn a lot about people when you learn about their hunting Ethics.

Ethics in one thing carry over to Ethics in everything.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
How about using an aircraft to locate a trophy elephant, and then using the GPS to walk up on him?

Since it takes all the hunt out of the picture it would be a definate no-no for me.

465H&H

+1 Gator

Such arrogance to set ones self up as judge and jury amazes me...As long as its legal so be it..

Millions of Whitetail are shot every year from blinds, I have shot whitetail from blinds, ducks also.

Spot and stalk is a standard means of hunting throughout the world.

Loaded questions like shooting at night under a spotlight shows a lack of knowledge, that was most certainly a "cull hunt" and that is standard operating procedure for cull hunting.

Then we have bugling in elk, and rattling in deer, so I suppose this is also a non ethical way to hunt.

What about horse back hunts is that too something we must not do? High fences, thats always a good one.

I could go on and on with this subject.

Before we judge, we should first hunt for a few years, as opposed to making these kind of judgments that ring of a non hunter in disquise.

Ones ethics are his own, the legal issue is a whole nuther ball game, its expected and has dire results if not obeyed.

Seems to me that using any weapon invented after the atlatl is pretty unethical...

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Such arrogance to set ones self up as judge and jury amazes me...As long as its legal so be it..

Millions of Whitetail are shot every year from blinds, I have shot whitetail from blinds, ducks also.

Spot and stalk is a standard means of hunting throughout the world.

Loaded questions like shooting at night under a spotlight shows a lack of knowledge, that was most certainly a "cull hunt" and that is standard operating procedure for cull hunting.

Then we have bugling in elk, and rattling in deer, so I suppose this is also a non ethical way to hunt.

What about horse back hunts is that too something we must not do? High fences, thats always a good one.

I could go on and on with this subject.

Before we judge, we should first hunt for a few years, as opposed to making these kind of judgments that ring of a non hunter in disquise.

Ones ethics are his own, the legal issue is a whole nuther ball game, its expected and has dire results if not obeyed.

Ray!

With all due respect, I think if you go back over the posts no one criticized any one for going on a PAC shoot for elephants at night. In fact every one made an exception for that and also for the culling of antelope at night on ranches. I simply stated that such "hunts" do not fit my description of a hunt. You are free to call it a hunt if you wish and I won't criticize you for doing so. I just don't agree with that description.


As far as your statement that it is "OK if it is legal", I don't think even you fully believe that statement. For instances it is perfectly legal in every state to shoot at an elk at 1,500 yards with a 243 Winchester. I suspect you would roundly castigate any one who admitted to doing it. Not so?

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
How you hunt is largely dependent on the laws of your local area and peer pressure. We all have some things that we consider unsporting. For instances it is illegal to hunt deer over bait, with dogs, and you are limited to one deer/season in Idaho but not in Georgia (I believe). Both make sense for the local areas. In Idaho we can easily apply enough hunting pressure on deer populations to control population growth. In Georgia the habitat is so thick that extraordinary means must be taken to properly harvest deer, such as baiting, dog hunting and one deer/day limits. Hunting regulations are designed to assure proper deer harvest and to spread that harvest over as many hunters as possible.

I have my personal set of ethics when hunting and in general they are much more restrictive than most on here. But they are mine and I don't expect anyone else to adopt them. We each must live with our own conscious. To sum them up the harder I have to work for an animal the more it means to me. I would rather shoot one or two wild super smart late season pheasants in a day than shoot 10 or 15 game farm birds in a day at a shooting preserve.


The British have it right. They call driven birds a shoot and not a hunt. A hunt is reserved for a walk up or stalking hunt.

In my mind sitting over a deer feeder. a water hole in Africa, shooting out of a vehicle, shooting game farm birds or spot lighting a big game animal is not hunting but simply shooting. If that is your thing fine but can you justify calling it hunting? The challenge is are you a hunter that shoots occasionally or simply a shooter?

465H&H

Very valid point about Georgia they have their rules like everyone else.

The same goes for South Carolina. They have a huge deer herd and the brush is thick. If you were to try to spot and stalk in the area known as The Low Country, you'd be crashing around in the brush and swamps and likely step on a water moccasin or a rattler and you'd never, ever see a deer.

We hunt firebreaks and bean fields and the deer usually walk at first and last light. Sometimes shots are taken at several hundred yards. That's just the way it's done. We hunt from stands over bait, also. Most hunting clubs and private estates put out corn year around, if they can afford it, and also plant feed lots with soybean, corn, and other vegetables. It's not unethical. That's just the way it's done.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Such arrogance to set ones self up as judge and jury amazes me...

What about horse back hunts is that too something we must not do?

Damned right. What is arrogance? Being right and knowing it?

The best hunting on earth is done from the back of a high horse.

If the air is too thin up there, one can always descend to a lower level, as all too many do in any case.

Gentleman please note that my intended area of discussion is Africa and specifically Trophy Hunting safaris. I exclude culling, harvesting(meat hunting) and any form of PAC hunts and i think that everyone will agree that concessions and compromises will be made for those with genuine disabilities.

As for the comments about me being a non hunter in disguise and lacking experience! Believe me i would not be so passionate about upholding and preserving the tradition and ethics of hunting in Africa if i had any intention of helping bring it to an end. A non hunter i am not and experienece levels are relative, i have done my fair share of hunting in Southern Africa.

Nice to bring the issue up Scott – ethics isn't something that is written down in stone, it is the very thing we are doing just now – talking and expressing differences we see about it – IMO it should be brought up again and again – and kept up. Some might say it is dieing out, I’d say it is changing – looking from old folks - to worse, looking from youngs (they don’t even know about it yet) to better - as long as we keep it up.

Just a thought – after I have shot an eland a Shangaan tracker made a knot with the hair in its tail:



If I wouldn’t noticed it I wouldn’t even know about it – after I asked what that is, I was told that it is the way to let the spirits out from the dead animal and that he had done it to my previous kills (buffalo and impala) as well (without my knowledge - that is a pity). Nobody is forcing me to do that but stuff like that enriches my hunting experience and I appreciate it very much – I would be much poorer person (ironically I wouldn’t even know that) if I’d left the Zim without noticing it.

There is ethics in Africa no doubt, however one has to (or not) look for it!

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

I have been told that it is common for African hunting companies to host guest hunters that are so physically unsound that the only option is to hunt and shoot from the vehicle. These "disabled" hunters should be denied the passion of a safari because of their infirmity despite their obvious contribution of financial and moral support to the industry of African hunting?

Good point. While I was recovering from extensive surgeries and not very mobile at all, I occasionally had the guys from the hunting club drive and help me to a blind so I could still hunt over a wallow or rub tree.
Not exactly 'sporting' or 'fair chase', but legal. And about the only way I could hunt for a few years.

Fortunately I am a bit more mobile now, but I would not begrudge someone their legal hunting rights on the basis of physical fitness.

As long as it's legal, who else should care?

Not talking about legal or not...ethical or not?

In the UK it would be VERY unethical to shoot gamebirds on the ground. If you were seen to do it just once your shooting name would be mud for ever.

I was in Iceland recently shooting Ptarmigan. In Iceland it is the norn to shoot them on the ground. In fact I was treated as a nutcase for wanting to put them up first.

Does that make the Icelanders unethical?

Of course not.

You don't like a fence, you don't like a blind, you don't like a truck?
Arrange your hunting accordingly.
I don't like to hunt the blind or truck way, so I don't.
I'd prefer to hunt the unfenced areas of Tanzania, but life is full of compromises and I'll hunt big properties in SA. Certainly big enough for the game to get away from me if it wants to.

Wait until the "holier than thou" purists become old and not so mobile, watch them change their narrow minded little ideas then! In this politically correct and over governed world we live in, some bastard will always get on his fucking soap box and tell you how "it" should be done and it's his way or the highway. Stay within the local rules where ever you happen to be hunting and if Mr. Perfect doesn't like it he can stick it "where the the sun don't shine"!!

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:
Wait until the "holier than thou" purists become old and not so mobile, watch them change their narrow minded little ideas then! In this politically correct and over governed world we live in, some bastard will always get on his fucking soap box and tell you how "it" should be done and it's his way or the highway. Stay within the local rules where ever you happen to be hunting and if Mr. Perfect doesn't like it he can stick it "where the the sun don't shine"!!

Well said

465 H&H, MrLexma,

Both good points...and most of my hunting is done horseback btw.

Somehow I knew this thread would the pot...

I enjoy tired, painful legs, days of despair and an element of uncertainty to really enjoy a hunt. At this point in my life if I don’t kill an animal it takes away very little from the overall experience.

I do not judge others by my standards. I have more in common with other hunters and sportsmen then I have with non hunters and so I like their company better regardless of how they hunt.

Aziz

quote:

I do not judge others by my standards. I have more in common with other hunters and sportsmen then I have with non hunters and so I like their company better regardless of how they hunt.

Now that is a refreshingly sensible approach. What makes it more amazing is that it seems to have originated in California. Who still recons that the days of miracles have long gone by?

Well said Aziz. I’d gladly share a campfire with you.

pichon1, you should visit the NZ/OZ board or maybe you have.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
pichon1, you should visit the NZ/OZ board or maybe you have.

Not sure if I'm meant to laugh or cry after after that profound statement. Maybe I'll do both, may as well cover all options.

quote:

Ethical hunter is one who RESPECTS the game he hunts and who contiuosly acts in a manner which assures the species existance and "reduces suffering."

"reduces suffering." .........Could we deduce that since archery is a wounding weapon, it is unethical? Or should only brain shots be acceptable?

"assures the species existance"......might imply that all who spend their money on hunting geneated consevation are in fact ethical! Even waterhole sitters and lion canners and small campers,

"RESPECTS the game he hunts"......... like all questions of ethics is truely only judged from within since it would seem to many onlookers that hunting with less efficeint weapons, or with weapons at all since it is not "fair".

Scott; in a later post you state that you are specificly relateing to Trophy hunting safaris but go on to say you are; "about upholding and preserving the tradition and ethics of hunting in Africa"

"Trophy hunting" is one of the most commonly challenged aspects of hunting and sport vs subsistance certainly could challenge many definitions of respect.

Also please be aware that the history and tradition of hunting for millions of years was setting fires and running animals off clifts, snaring, clubbing, baiting and totally surronding waterholes. The relatively short "sport hunting" history's longer running portion was frought with excessive slaughter,and abuse.

So it is a high road and steep path indeed to get to a point of

quote:

upholding and preserving the tradition and ethics of hunting in Africa

by defining a set of ethics!

As suggested maybe try to define "sporting" for spacific purposes such as the rules for the various record books or to satiate one's own ego and goal setting.

Over thousands of years, a plethora of bibles, korans, scripts and religious wars have yet to get folks to agree on ethical issues so trying to define "ethical" for every situation and everyone thru one narrowly focused set of eyes or even via web forum likely won't get far either!

Respectfully

Your friend afield

Mike O

quote:

The relatively short "sport hunting" history's longer running portion was frought with excessive slaughter,and abuse.

Remember the passenger pigeon? Neither do I. They were hunted out of existence long before I was born.

You make a very good point.

quote:

Originally posted by jetdrvr:

quote:

The relatively short "sport hunting" history's longer running portion was frought with excessive slaughter,and abuse.

Remember the passenger pigeon? Neither do I. They were hunted out of existence long before I was born.

You make a very good point.

That was market hunting not sport hunting

I went to see the old folks this weekend and saw my mother wearing fake leopard skin slippers.She's telling all her friends that her son is going to africa.

Well i certainly seemed to have hit a nerve with some members of this forum! There will never be a conclusive conclusion to the discussion on Ethics but it certainly is good to have an open and frank discussion.

Much about our hunting is being challenged at the moment and never before has the need been as dire to band together and stand united. Below is an attachement about an organisation that strives to strengthen our standing and cause. And for you skeptics out there i am not a member/employee/shareholder/friend of this organisation; but in time i hope to become a member and help uphold the standards and ethics of sport hunting in Africa



About The Rowland Ward Guild

To hunt is a privilege not a right. The Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen brings together likeminded field sportsmen who believe in maintaining and upholding a Code of Conduct in Field Sports, who hope to encourage and actively guide and teach the youth, who regard as a priority the improvement of the environment and who want to conduct the sport with great care and consideration in order to preserve the sport for those that follow.

A guild to belong to and be proud of.

Over the years, Rowland Ward has had many requests from sportsmen who would like to belong to the organisation. Now you have the opportunity to join this prestigious group of sportsmen.

Membership to Rowland Ward ’s Guild of Field Sportsmen, which was started by Robin Halse, G.A.Sparks and Stephen Smith some years ago, is now open to all sportsmen who subscribe to its conduct, aims and objectives.

Aims and objectives

To maintain, uphold and propogate by example a Code of Conduct in Field Sports which has been handed down over many generations.

To actively encourage, guide and teach the youth interested in field sports in the knowledge that they, the sportsmen of the future, will carry on the tradition.

To regard as a priority the conservation and improvement of the environment by both fellow sportsmen and owners of the land and make every effort to influence both the public and the authorities in these matters.

To conduct the sport with great care and consideration in order to preserve the sport for those that follow.

The Guild of Field Sportsmen

The interpretation and implementation of a Code of Conduct and the standards a Sportsman sets will depend on each individual Sportsman’s conscientious behaviour, and whilst many traditional manners must be upheld, many present day practices should be examined and evaluated. Above all it must be accepted that it is a privilege to hunt, not a right. To this end, therefore, the Guild considers that certain broad rules governing the conduct of Field Sport should be observed, and that it is irrelevant whether some of these basic rules are, or are not legally applied by current laws of the land.


Read what Don Causey has to say about the Guild of Field Sportsmen in the latest Hunting Report

Ever get the feeling that hunting is turning into a sport – like stock car racing or soccer? You know, individual hunters jostling to take bigger trophies than anyone else? Mind you, the pursuit of big animals is what trophy hunting is all about. And there is nothing at all wrong with setting individual hunting goals, such as taking the North American 29, or all of the spiral horn antelopes.

The question is one of emphasis. Focusing too much on taking big trophies and reaching hunting goals may be blinding us to the larger pleasures of being afield and causing us to forget the gentlemanly values of yesteryear.

The ruminations above come as the result of visiting the Rowland Ward web site (www.rowlandward .com). Seems that venerable organization – publisher of the important Records of Big Game – has formed what it calls The Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen whose main goal is the celebration of ethical behavior afield.

Ethics are so central to what the organization is about you have to read the organization’s Code of Ethics and agree to abide by it before you can apply. Membership in the guild costs $50 (US) for one year; $90 for two years. That buys you acceptance by the group, a tie or cap with the Rowland Ward logo on it, a subscription to the bi-annual Rowland Ward Magazine, electronic access to a digitized version of Records of Big Game and discounts on the purchase of various books and products.

Here at The Hunting Report, I have long ago accepted that international hunting has moved in new directions of late, away from the gentlemanly roots of the activity. And those moves have been good and bad. They have been good because they have turned hunting into an economic juggernaut worldwide that has pushed the old protectionist ethic to the sidelines of history where it belongs.

Wildlife populations the world over have a new chance to survive because of the new mercantilism of world hunting. On the flip side, it is hard not to feel a twinge of sadness at the decline of gentlemanly values among hunters. Fair play as an end in itself is on the wane. And that is what makes The Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen such an attractive organization.

Every large group needs to have a nucleus of individuals within it that champions rectitude and rightness and nudges the group as a whole toward its better self. You can join the guild by going to the organization’s web site, www.rowlandward.com. For sure, I endorse the group and what it is trying to do.

– Don Causey The Hunt Report.

Click Here to read this edition of the Hunt Report


Code Of Conduct

• That at all times a Member will extend every courtesy, privilege and assistance to a fellow Field Sportsman.

• That all hunting be conducted only during the hours of natural light.

• That no creature be hunted for sport in an enclosed area of such size that such creature is not self-sufficient. Self-sufficiency includes the ability of the animal to exercise its natural inclination to escape from the hunter as well as catering for all its basic needs such as water, food, shelter and breeding.

• That no shooting take place from, or within a short distance of a vehicle, nor the use of vehicles to drive game.

• That no shooting take place from, or within a short distance of an aircraft.

• That no aircraft be used to spot or drive game, nor the use of aircraft to land hunters within a short distance of game for the purpose of hunting the game so spotted.

• That only hunting weapons of such power and calibre that are capable of killing game quickly and efficiently at practical ranges be employed.

• That all forms of competition in the field between Sportsmen whilst hunting and fishing be avoided.

• That no creature be killed for sport, that is deemed to be immature, breeding or dependant and cannot, by virtue of its trophy or flesh, be fully utilised.

• That every effort is made to respect and safeguard the property of the landowner.

• That a landowner-member extend every courtesy, comfort and assistance possible to a member who hunts or fishes on his property.

• That a Professional Hunter/Guide-member makes sure that his clients understand and are fully aware of the Guild’s Code of Ethics and Standards that will be upheld during the course of any hunt.

• That a sportsman respects with understanding, the attitudes, feelings and principles of those that do not engage in activities of Field Sport.

• That a Sportsman should conduct his sport with due regard to his own physical capabilities, recognise his limitiations and responsibility to his companions or assistants.

• The Guild recognises that ’culling’, ’cropping’, ’trapping’, ’capture’ and vermin control are a necessary part of game management as long as they are conducted with consideration and humane treatment of the wildlife involved. However, at no time can these activities be regarded in the context of Field Sports.

quote:

A guild to belong to and be proud of.

Probably a very lonely guild to belong to as well.

quote:

That all hunting be conducted only during the hours of natural light.

Well, there goes at least 75% of the leopard hunters.

BTW, I'm not going to get philosophical here but priviledges can and are easily taken away by those who don't agree with that particular brand of "priviledge". Rights on the other hand are much more difficult to impair. That's why there are Americans and British, we've got the right to keep and bear arms (and the implied but not specified right to hunt), they don't. Guess which side of that position I prefer.

quote:

• That a Sportsman should conduct his sport with due regard to his own physical capabilities, recognise his limitiations and responsibility to his companions or assistants.

That would rule out 50% of safari hunters then

All of this is the same old self-imposed guilt trip crap, out of which grows some trying to dictate to all others how to behave and what to believe and think.

Man. After reading some of these posts, I get the feeling that there are some folks out there who would take exception to fishing with dynamite. Oh well, to each his own.

As long as we´re slinging mud and feces around I´d like to ask a question: Who is voting for Obama?

After Hillary lost, I may have to vote for McCain. I was hoping for Ron Paul.