I am reading a book by an African "Hunter" who describes himself as a "Collector". One of his grandparents was a stamp, the other a coin "collector". He claims he is just following his genetic heritage.

He has opted to collect African game animals.

Is there an issue about valuing the hunt and the animals hunted with an unlimited desire to keep going back just (by author's admission) to "collect" a slightly larger specimen to you guys?

His prime example is the statement he makes that he has killed "dozens and dozens of Greater Kudu, always hoping to get a sixty-incher..." and the subsequent statement that he intends to keep killing them until he reaches that goal. I would have told him to stop shooting them if he isn't sure it will book sixty inches.
He basically has implied that he has all of the Rowland&Ward and SCI Record Book records memorized for every animal in Africa.

That approach just makes me a little queasy...

Rich

I like going after different animals each time. 2 trips, no duplicates so far. Knowing how much time it takes to save up for each trip, I want to have some variety.

Maybe a little different because we don't have to travel as far for them, but how many people go after a better and better whitetail each year?

Different strokes for different folks. The bottom line is that almost all hunters go to Africa to kill something because they want to.....the reasons may vary but the animal is just as dead. Anyone can rationalize their activities anyway they want to, but unless they're doing it for pay, they're killing because they want to, as long as they are legal, it ain't any of my business......

If a guy is looking for a certain trophy, and keeps killing ones that aren't there yet, the dead ones will never get there, and the hunter is either an idiot or is too immature to keep from killing. Either way, I wouldn't care to be around him--or to read his writings.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Different strokes for different folks. The bottom line is that almost all hunters go to Africa to kill something because they want to.....the reasons may vary but the animal is just as dead. Anyone can rationalize their activities anyway they want to, but unless they're doing it for pay, they're killing because they want to, as long as they are legal, it ain't any of my business......

If that's how a man wants to spend his cash and time, I could care less..
I could/would hunt certain species every single year if I could afford it and others I did it once and that was enough.

Don't really see the point...I mean how "many " of any species do any of us need?? We all hunt for many different reasons. Most of us hunt for the love of the chase etc. but in the end we want to connect bullet to hide and bring something home. Otherwise why not take a camera? It may be a little odd in the way the collector described his passion, but I really try not to judge someone I don't know most of us may not feel the same way about it but we are all a little different from one another, thank goodness.

You're right, it's his dollar. He spends it as he sees fit to spend it. However, most collectors I've met are not happy hunters. The anxiety placed upon oneself as a "collector" creates unnecessary stress leaving the individual rarely satisfied.

I used to be a collector and I can tell you, I for one was never satisfied. The addiction associated the collection, left me always wanting more, which was okay, but I never stopped to appreciate the things I'd collected.

After completing my big five on '06, I stopped being a collector. It's brought me consistent satisfaction in every hunt ever since. I built the trophy room and now enjoy my collection.

I'd like to get a Bongo, but I don't want to collect a Bongo. If it happens it happens. Felt the same way in pursuit of a LDE and Mt. Nyala. When you're willing to take your gun out of the cradle of the shooting sticks, because the animal is not quite what you want, you're no longer collecting.

How many of us are willing to walk away from a safari empty handed, minus the primary species you intended to get? Many collectors can't do that.

I wanted to get a yellow backed duiker in C.A.R. so bad, and a lesser kudu in Ethiopia so bad. But I left the ones there I could have shot, for the next guy. The collector in me would have shot those animals, but I'm no longer that guy.

I'm with ISS on this one. Why kill so many kudu looking for a 60 incher? Why not just try and find a 60 incher and then shoot?

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Different strokes for different folks. The bottom line is that almost all hunters go to Africa to kill something because they want to.....the reasons may vary but the animal is just as dead. Anyone can rationalize their activities anyway they want to, but unless they're doing it for pay, they're killing because they want to, as long as they are legal, it ain't any of my business......

Agreed

Saeed has killed probably dozens if not over 100 buffalo, Aaron N. has killed around a dozen lions. Have they reached their "ethical" limits? While they may hunt for different reasons than a collector it has the same end result, a dead animal.

Mike- I agree with you, who has the right to determine ethics for another individual? If I gave millions of dollars to most hunters and told them they had to shoot 50 springbok, and 25 kudus...ect...most would do it.

I personally consider myself a collector. I want one of everything...don't apologize for it either. Some people buy tons of cars, bikes, boats, guns (I only have 3, it's all I need) but if I want to shoot 10 gemsbok looking for a 44" than that my perogative! And no one elses business.

I don't agree with the idea that collectors are unhappy hunters, I've never had more hunting joy then the times I've spent hunting africa. I always look for the chance to improve...don't most athelets (if you'll allow me that).

I always love how someone wants to throw SCI under the bus...they do so much that most people don't have a clue about. but that is for another post!

Only ten posts and already this thread is all over the map.

I think Moja's comment about unhappy "collectors" is correct if you define collectors as those who are interested in the product rather than the process.

There is nothing inherently wrong with taking a taking any number of a certain species. There is also nothing wrong with wanting "one of everything".

I don't know the identity of the mystery author that Rich started this thread about, but I would bet that he has guilt complex of some sort regarding his motivations for hunting.

The parallel that he draws between coin/stamp collecting and hunting is pure garbage. If all he wanted to do was collect trophies(like stamps or coins) he could fill his collection by buying others mounts. My guess is that he is trying to cover for his vanity and his need to see his name in print in the record books.

I would have nothing but admiration for a hunter who says "I'm not going to stop hunting Greater Kudu until I get a sixty-incher, but; I'm not going to shoot every Kudu I can hoping the tape will some day stretch that far. I will enjoy the hunt each time, and wait until I can settle the crosshairs on one that I KNOW is over sixty inches...".

This author quoted over sixty game animal SCI vs Rowland&Ward minimums, sounded like from memory. Nearly every animal he has taken he quotes the size, and the SCI/R&W minimums in the same sentence or at least the same paragraph. I think he has crossed the line into obsessive/compulsive.

I began Elk hunting in Idaho in the fall of 1979. The first five seasons the first legal Elk I could get crosshairs on was a dead Elk. Then I got a bit caught up in killing a big one. Then I challenged myself to use a Contender, then a revolver, and then archery equipment. Killing the animal became the total focus. I enjoy Elk hunting waaaaaaaay too much to hand my hat on having killed one every fall here. I have a longtime friend who wouldn't shoot a bull under 360 even if it meant going home empty handed. With a self bow and arrows and flint arrow heads, etc he made. I admire that man.

I guess this is another ethics test, or perhaps maybe just how far have you come as a hunter. Is the only bottom line killing another one hoping to make the book a little higher up the list? Or, like myself and a lot of the gentlemen here, for the process?

This is a question only you can answer.

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Scottyboy:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Different strokes for different folks. The bottom line is that almost all hunters go to Africa to kill something because they want to.....the reasons may vary but the animal is just as dead. Anyone can rationalize their activities anyway they want to, but unless they're doing it for pay, they're killing because they want to, as long as they are legal, it ain't any of my business......

If that's how a man wants to spend his cash and time, I could care less..
I could/would hunt certain species every single year if I could afford it and others I did it once and that was enough.

Both statements are true as far as I am concerned.

My only objection to trophy collection is the way SCI has elevated it to such an extreme, where certain "collectors" woulde do anything, legal or not, to get into the record book.

My hat is off to the true collector, who would travel the world, and pick and choose only those trophies he wants for his collection.

The way the original statement is phrased puts a bias against this guy to many of us. It is however his dime and his buisness not mine even if I may not like it. Now, as to the 60 incher, I dont know about anyone else but I think kudu are the absolute hardest animal to judge accurately. How many times has he hunted a kudu and thought i would go 60 but found it just fell short after it was down? I am really not defending him but it isnt as black and white nor as easy as many would think. you guys all sound like Washington theses days where everthing is portrayed as an absolute. All this said I think the gent would better portray hunters and those who are collectors by showing a little more restraint on the trigger. I you are not 100 percent sure with a couple people estimating that it will go 60 then dont pull the trigger. That means that you will pull the trigger on a third of what you were before. You will also unequivocly make some mistakes. You will inadvertently miss some shot you should never miss, Now it becomees a hale mary shot

Take the Record book out and it makes no difference at all. The main thing is that someone has placed value on the animal and in so doing allowed it to contribute to the preservation of its species and all of those that live in relation to it.

Competition of any sort, does not belong in the same sentence as hunting. These challenges that are being advertised on this site are to my mind ethically wrong.
Killing is killing, but killing for self gratification and for the sake of an accolade etc is to my mind in direct contradiction to what most hunters I have met aspire to.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordoifferent strokes for different folks. The bottom line is that almost all hunters go to Africa to kill something because they want to, the reasons may vary but the animal is just as dead. Anyone can rationalize their activities anyway they want to, but unless they're doing it for pay, they're killing because they want to, as long as they are legal, it ain't any of my business......

Well said my friend.

Please,

Just two quick thoughts as we head out to LAX on the way to Zim -

1. We packed lots of cool gear, but a tape measure is never in the pack

2. Commenting on someone's motives for hunting is a petty use of time.

My two rand - Find a hunt that floats your boat, enjoy every bit of the experience, and whatever happens, do not let the tape be the measure of your success.

Cheers!

I must admit I am a collector. I try to hunt different animals in different places around the world. There are some animals I have hunted multiple times but never for the book. Always because I enjoy hunting some species more than others.Unless culling I have set minimums on an animal I already have one of. I wont pull the trigger unless the ph says it is above whatever minimum I have set. In those cases the bar gets set pretty high. My biggest thrill as a collector is to hunt an animal I have not experienced before and preferably in a place I have not been as well. Hey, what do you know it actually is all about diversity.

Nothing wrong with "collecting". For example, there is one particular NA species that I hunt over and over. I do not, however, expect them to get bigger after they are shot...nor would I stop hunting them if I shot one that was the world record. I hunt for the experience, not the book. No animal should die so some egomaniac can "elevate" himself over others.

The other aspect of hunting has not been mentioned, but may not be germain to African hunting and that is shooting game for food. If the guy likes eating Kudu for meals on safari and wants his 60 incher, who could complain if he shot one each year.
In my personal case, I generally shoot a yearling spike or doe (or two) for food each year. It is just as valid as shooting a trophy in my book. I have no problem with a hunter filling his legal tag in whatever way or as often as he likes.

It's my assessment that the record books are in place, not to generate a competition, but to actually record accomplishments. We have to separate collecting between success and accomplishment.

Like it or not, hunting for many is a pursuit where size matters. In the upper circles it has become a pursuit where your checkbook matters. Take for example Weatherby Award winners. The gents who've been fortunate to win that award have invested millions of their dollars on hunting.

Like I said earlier, so what, it's their money. We all agree here, that as long as the person is hunting legally, it's not our place to question his motivation.

Here's what bothers me though. Just because a guy gets his collection of animals featured in the trophy room publication, "Great Hunters," does that make him really a "great" hunter.

Hell no! That makes him certainly a distinguished collector, and I think this is where the rub against SCI comes from. The awards and record books are fine. But none of that stuff, should be the single defining characteristic of hunting greatness. Many people however, see it that way...applying that sole criteria to hunting success and honor. Where does bravery, physical toughness, mental fortitude, woodsman skills,. accuracy and overcoming odds fit into the equation? Well perhaps since that can't be measured, it doesn't seem to matter. Icons are being crowned everyday because of what they've "collected."

There are many country boys who could out hunt many of the so-called "Great Hunters", blindfolded.

I'll place any African tracker above all of those guys featured in the "Great Hunter" books in a heartbeat. Money invested multiplied by animals collected DOES NOT EQUAL, hunting greatness. Tendrams, you said it properly, no animal should die so some egomaniac can elevate himself over others.

I guess from reading this thread people have differing definitions of what a "Collector" is as it applies to hunting. I think there are hunters that are completely hung up on the book scores and the success of their safaris is measured by the record book score of animals taken. Their goals are specific record book awards. These are the extreme and I feel they miss the whole point of what safari is about.

I think there are far more hunters/collectors like myself who know what makes a high scoring trophy and strive to take those bigger specimens without missing out on the whole safari "experience". I'm almost always looking for a differnt experience or species I have not taken when I plan a safari. I'm not always successful but if I've hunted an area holding the trophy quality I want and the PH has done his job well that's all I can ask. If I only have an opportunity to take animals below the minimums I've set for myself then I walk away.

If I shoot an animal that makes Gold in the SCI book I do register that trophy and I'm not ashamed of that at all. That is the level I want to participate at.

The original question was as I read it is it ethical to shoot lots of animals of one species to find the truly exceptional trophy. yeah! Why would it not be? Who cares? I think the guy just likes hunting kudu and is hoping for a 60 incher at sometime. I passed on a kudu in Sept because the PH could not promise me that it was over 58". I was fine with that but if I had unlimited funds I would have shot him because he was a very big and stunning kudu. As long as the guy is shooting within the established quotas why would anyone have an issue with the amount of animals he kills?

Mark

As to the original question "ethical hunting limits" I think it is bullshit. Providing the animal was hunted under fairchase conditions and the numbers taken are sustainable then I don't see a problem. It is his money and if he has a penchant for pursuing a particular species then that is his business.

Any debate about ethics generally makes the bile come up, why is it the people who try to preach the most are often the worst offenders.

I agree with you Mark on everything. The collectors issue is probably better left for a different thread.

quote:

Originally posted by SableTrail:

Where does bravery, physical toughness, mental fortitude, woodsman skills,. accuracy and overcoming odds fit into the equation? Well perhaps since that can't be measured, it doesn't seem to matter.
.

Sable- it's called the Conklin Award...

"The Conklin Award is the “Tough Guy” award. It recognizes the world’s greatest active hunter who pursues game in the most difficult terrain and conditions, exhibits the highest degree of ethics, and is a strong participant in wildlife conservattion"

For more info go to this link http://www.wildsheep.org/conklin/

Idaho Sharpshooter:

I think I understand your "queasy" feeling. I was enormously proud to get my buff into the SCI Record Book -and thought SCI was the last word on validating "trophies". Then I discovered their various awards for a hunter having killed one of each kind of variations in a species. That's when I got the queasy feeling. A sporting hunt is supposed to be a personal experience (between us and the animal) and not running up a score -or, at least that's how I see it.

So what most of you are saying is that size really doesn't matter - that it is the solely the technique that makes the experience worthwhile?

I don't think I am a collector, may have been once. I have turned in 7-8 animals for the SCI book. I shot a Rusa deer that would have scored #6 or #8 at the time and still have the signed measurement sheet, but never turned it in. I still carry a tape along sometimes. If I think it may be gold medal, I will have it measured and authenticated before I go home, but may not turn it in to SCI. I am pretty sure I don't shoot enough animals of a particular species to exceed ethical hunting limits, but if someone else wants to shoot 100 of something and it is legal, I don't really have a problem. And I don't eat everything I shoot; especially baboons and coyotes!

I collect different species because I want to hunt the diversity that is out there. I do not hunt for the book but the experience. I took a good ele this last trip but it was a total gift of being a rogue that someone was going to put down. I just happened to be at the right place at the right time. My emphasys was actually on small stuff. The guy I was with "couldnt believe someone would come all the way to Africa to hunt this kind of stuff." He couldnt understand why I got so excited about "a ratty looking aardwolf" as well. Even some of the locals didnt either. Well to each their own. My collecting is strictly for my own enjoyment so I dont really care what someone else thinks. I am not trying to outdo someone else or put my name in some book. It is for me and me alone. I am happy with good representive animals for the most part but certainly get excited when I shoot any exceptional trophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Smith:
He couldnt understand why I got so excited about "a ratty looking aardwolf" as well.

For what it's worth, I think an aardwolf is a beautiful animal, you don't see all that many of them. A trophy to be proud of.

By the way, I have fooled many people with the question "what is the second animal listed in the dictionary?"

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
I am reading a book by an African "Hunter" who describes himself as a "Collector". One of his grandparents was a stamp, the other a coin "collector". He claims he is just following his genetic heritage.

He has opted to collect African game animals.

Is there an issue about valuing the hunt and the animals hunted with an unlimited desire to keep going back just (by author's admission) to "collect" a slightly larger specimen to you guys?

His prime example is the statement he makes that he has killed "dozens and dozens of Greater Kudu, always hoping to get a sixty-incher..." and the subsequent statement that he intends to keep killing them until he reaches that goal. I would have told him to stop shooting them if he isn't sure it will book sixty inches.
He basically has implied that he has all of the Rowland&Ward and SCI Record Book records memorized for every animal in Africa.

That approach just makes me a little queasy...

Rich

That is not collecting but gluttony. He is collecting future garage sale items at the expense of his memories. Collecting memories and experiences outweighs heads on the wall or in a book.
Yuck...

The best Elk hunt I ever had, I didn't get an Elk.
I hunted from "can't see" in the morning until "can't see" at night. Wore out three horses, and the pack mule started giving me the Evil Eye the last three mornings. Saw some very nice young Bulls, but not a big, beginning of the down hill slide boy. If you shoot 300-350 class Bulls every year, you stop seeing anything bigger in a couple seasons.

The point I wanted to make, that about half of you might have missed; was that if the tape measure is your only focus on a hunt, you need to readdress the "why do I hunt" question.

I will confess, that I shot my Cape Buffalo in December of 2008 and he still hasn't had a tape measure put to his horns. He's a nice Bull, and Myles McCallum and I followed he and his herd for five days. Rained all day, every day, after the second day never had really dry clothes to put on or dry hiking boots. Never saw a flat spot big enough to unfold a picnic table on for lunch, and we put nearly a hundred miles in on foot before I got the sticks out and took the shot. That Bull liked to of killed me, and never touched me. I lost seventeen pounds in nine days.

Most of us that do hard things in life value those things inversely in proportion to the amount of effort we have to expend to acquire them.
If I had shot one that would book in the top ten R&W and SCI an hour out the first morning, he would have little value to me. I would have cheated myself out of the reward that was at the end of the five day hunt I did have.

The animal collector loses something of value after "dozens and dozens of Greater Kudu". Only two are of continuing interest to him, as a rule. His first one, and his biggest one. Who here, if the financial means were available; would have a trophy room with thirty or more Greater Kudu mounts on the walls? That animal has no value to him, except as a tape measure trophy.

If that doesn't mean much to you, I believe you are missing out on the most important part of the hunt. And life...

regards,

Rich

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SableTrail:


How many of us are willing to walk away from a safari empty handed, minus the primary species you intended to get?

Sir , very few,and i hunt with a few very special people who are willing to do the above.

Most of them have indeed - like you got their big 5 etc. - but are real hunters and willing to hunt like an s.o.b.and see what happens.

Interestingly such hunters are often extremely succesful.

quote:

Originally posted by Oryxhunter1983:

quote:

Originally posted by SableTrail:

Where does bravery, physical toughness, mental fortitude, woodsman skills,. accuracy and overcoming odds fit into the equation? Well perhaps since that can't be measured, it doesn't seem to matter.
.

Sable- it's called the Conklin Award...

"The Conklin Award is the “Tough Guy” award. It recognizes the world’s greatest active hunter who pursues game in the most difficult terrain and conditions, exhibits the highest degree of ethics, and is a strong participant in wildlife conservattion"

For more info go to this link http://www.wildsheep.org/conklin/

If that is true, then why hasn't Archie Nesbitt won the Conklin award? The guy has shot the whole planet...and done so with a bow.

The animal collector loses something of value after "dozens and dozens of Greater Kudu". Only two are of continuing interest to him, as a rule. His first one, and his biggest one. Who here, if the financial means were available; would have a trophy room with thirty or more Greater Kudu mounts on the walls? That animal has no value to him, except as a tape measure trophy.

Rich,

I couldn't disagree with you more. I was recently in a gentleman's house not far from Cody and the down stairs in his house was loaded with deer trophies. he had probably 2 dozen mule deer ranging fron just nice representative bucks to some real stunners. That guy had a story about everyone of those bucks regardless of size. He was just really into mule deer hunting. Why is it a stretch to presume the guy in the story you read felt any different about big kudu? I have clients tell me on a pretty regular basis that they want to shoot a kudu on their safari regardless of how many they've shot before particularly if they can find one larger than they've already taken. With the greater kudu being the second most populace plains game species next to the impala in southern Africa I don't see any reason for someone to not shoot as many as he wants as long as its legal.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Jack D Bold:
Please,

Just two quick thoughts as we head out to LAX on the way to Zim -

1. We packed lots of cool gear, but a tape measure is never in the pack

2. Commenting on someone's motives for hunting is a petty use of time.

My two rand - Find a hunt that floats your boat, enjoy every bit of the experience, and whatever happens, do not let the tape be the measure of your success.

Cheers!

Jack - Totally agree, very petty indeed!! If you're a collector, good for you. If you choose to shoot 50 elephants, good for you too. I have shot plenty of SCI and several B&C qualifying animals, never entered a single one of them, but for those of you that do, great!! I for one am happy for all hunters and their success, however they choose to go about it. Why in the world would a fellow hunter feel it necessary to tell another that what he does is wrong, un-ethical, etc??

If its legal, knock yourself out, and don't forget to send me some pictures so I can share in the experience!!

quote:

Originally posted by Jack D Bold:

1. We packed lots of cool gear, but a tape measure is never in the pack

No offense meant Jack, although I may not have it in my pocket, I almost always have a tape in the pack; just in case I shoot the new #1 in the world and my PH doesn't have one in camp!

I always carry a tape measure with me but only measure the size of ele tracks with it.

I don't have a problem with the gentleman shooting a kudu on every trip, anymore than I have a problem with someone in the states shooting an elk or deer every year. As long as he is not reducing the overall population of kudu which is highly unlikely because of quota limits let him have at ,if it turns his crank.

465H&H

Mark,

because he didn't have all of them mounted and displayed with pride in his home/office. He didn't write a book about dedicating his life to Kudu hunting. His book isn't about hunting Kudu, it's about his quest to kill a book everything in Africa. It doesn't read like he could even remember all of the hunts. Alongside with the other hundred-plus mounts he showed pictures of. All with precise measurements indicated. This was a record book recounting. If the R&W and SCI Record Books were about the animals, then why do we post the names of the shooters? Why do shooters even bother to enter animals in the books? If I took a sixty-plus inch Greater Kudu, who else cares, in the long run; except other record book shooters who now feel somewhat diminished because mine knocks theirs down a spot in that book?
If I take a big, make that BIG, make that B-I-G, Kudu in Ellisras next month, one that would make the Top Ten, it says I got lucky in a good area for Kudu and made a good shot. My friends here in Idaho and on AR will take equal delight in both complimenting me and razzing me about shooting somebody's pet goat. And in roughly equal measure. I have a friend here, shot an incredible Lion. He made the mistake of showing some of us at Reno a picture of him and this Big Lion, and his wonderful wife. She is wearing a set of flannel pajamas. Guess what everybody got on him about? He's still hearing about "when does your wife get the upgrade to silk from flannel" and "do those things have feet in them?".
That's taking the joy in a hunt over pride in killing something. The author never gets to the joy stage.

Different approach, hunting versus collecting.

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:


The animal collector loses something of value after "dozens and dozens of Greater Kudu". Only two are of continuing interest to him, as a rule. His first one, and his biggest one. Who here, if the financial means were available; would have a trophy room with thirty or more Greater Kudu mounts on the walls? That animal has no value to him, except as a tape measure trophy.

Rich

I am having a hard time with your idea that kudu cease to have value once you have taken a bunch. Would you say the same thing about buffalo? Elephant?

Saeed, CB and JC have all shot dozens of buffalo. Do you think their most recent buffalo have no value just because it is not their first or second?

Kudu are known as the gray ghost for a reason. Hunted properly they are a real bugger to get a shot at. If a guy was to concentrate his efforts on one plains game animal the kudu would be a pretty respectable choice.