quote:

An animal is no longer "young" when it can survive quite well on it's own and is capable of breeding.

Are you saying that the animal in the photo is mature? he may be capable of breeding but probably not big enough in body to get into the the correct position.

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:
Me thinks the little guy on the FAR left in this photo is the "young" the law refers to. It doesn't apply to the trophy quality of an adult bull that can manage on its own and breed, IMO. And I would think the one in question in the article was capable of both.

All of those buff are soft and thus would be classified as too young.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:
Me thinks the little guy on the FAR left in this photo is the "young" the law refers to. It doesn't apply to the trophy quality of an adult bull that can manage on its own and breed, IMO. And I would think the one in question in the article was capable of both.

All of those buff are soft and thus would be classified as too young.

But the 2 on the right are older than the infamous one!

quote:

But the 2 on the right are older than the infamous one!

Correct but they are still too young to shoot. I have looked at 100's just like them with Nigel saying "Nope...still soft".

I think that one on the left is a true Mountain Buffalo.

I'd shoot him in a heartbeat.

quote:

Originally posted by mcdjph:
Are you saying that the animal in the photo is mature? he may be capable of breeding but probably not big enough in body to get into the the correct position.

I didn't say that, did I? I said the one in the article is not "young," as to the intended reference in the LAW.

As for maturity, that too is as an ambiguous a term as "trophy."

Is a human male of 17 or 18 years old mature? What about one who is 20 or 40 or 70? Do we judge the maturity on his intelligence? Or maybe on the size of his head, his hand or his penis?

In reality, this is all so simple. If the authorities in Tanzania or any other country are concerned about the size of any animals taken, they should provide CONCISE parameters to that effect.

Many states here in the U.S. do such with certain species. For example, one might describe a legal bighorn as having at least a 3/4 curl on one horn. Another state might say a legal bull elk has at least one branched antler or maybe at least four points per side. Same for deer. None would be foolhardy enough to use ridiculously vague terms such as young or mature.

That said, I don't know of any state in the U.S. that says for any of the above to be an "ethical" trophy, they must meet some phantom description of a "trophy" as set forth by the ethics police.

quote:

Originally posted by mcdjph:
So at this stage it can be shot?

What of the study that shooting a lion under 6 years old is damaging to the existence of the species, is this wrong?

Why doesn’t a similar equation apply to buffalo?

No one person can bend ethics to suit his own standard, unless he has none.

Of course, it can be shot. When it comes to buffalo, killing a bull is killing a bull. Regardless of how old it is, it's one male animal removed from the herd.

In fact, with many species, some believe allowing the OLDER, trophy males to breed and culling the younger ones is thought to be a better plan.

Regardless, there will ALWAYS be plenty of sexually MATURE males to breed every cow in every herd.

Most of this garbage of how big or how old an animal in Africa MUST be before it can be an ethical trophy, etc. is nothing more than goofiness, just like telling someone they really didn't hunt right if they didn't shoot a buff or elephant at less than ten yards.

quote:

Of course, it can be shot. When it comes to buffalo, killing a bull is killing a bull. Regardless of how old it is, it's one male animal removed from the herd.

and the next client comes along and removes the next bull from the herd, probably 5 safaris will go though a block at 2 or 3 buffalo at a time. Now all of a sudden we don't have a next generation of bulls, Nice one!

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Correct but they are still too young to shoot. I have looked at 100's just like them with Nigel saying "Nope...still soft".

Nah, that was just your PH's and your choice. No different then when an elk hunter and his guide hold out for a 6x6 or a TX whitetail hunter and his guide hold out for 150" buck.

Of course, killing a 5x5 bull or a 130" buck won't do any more damage to the species than killing the larger ones will do. It just means neither of those will be available later -- the same as it would be for the bigger ones.

quote:

Originally posted by mcdjph:
and the next client comes along and removes the next bull from the herd, probably 5 safaris will go though a block at 2 or 3 buffalo at a time. Now all of a sudden we don't have a next generation of bulls, Nice one!

And...your point??

If anyone is dumb enough to shoot all the bulls out of a herd, regardless of their ages, they don't deserve to have anything to shoot. Even farmers who raise herds of milk or meat cows know that much.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
I think that one on the left is a true Mountain Buffalo.

I'd shoot him in a heartbeat.

It would cost $46,500! and the outfit would end up with a house and a car and you, some great memories and and article in a magazine.

But how would you mount him? shoulder mount head to one side or life size over a branch with a leopard standing over it?

you would also be famous on AR! Yay!

[QUOTE]
Of course, it can be shot. When it comes to buffalo, killing a bull is killing a bull. Regardless of how old it is, it's one male animal removed from the herd.
[QUOTE]And...your point??

If anyone is dumb enough to shoot all the bulls out of a herd, regardless of their ages, they don't deserve to have anything to shoot. Even farmers who raise herds of milk or meat cows know that much [QUOTE]

In the article they claimed they shot the “herd bull”

I believe with clients with your views on what to shoot(as above) and a PH like the one in question, it would very quick before all the bulls are shot out of a herd.

Tony,

Man, you are making too much sense!

quote:

]But how would you mount him? shoulder mount head to one side or life size over a branch with a leopard standing over it?

Hey, small buffalo means small taxidermy bill.

quote:

Originally posted by mcdjph:
But how would you mount him?

For Will.....probably when no one is looking!!!

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:
Nah, that was just your PH's and your choice. No different then when an elk hunter and his guide hold out for a 6x6 or a TX whitetail hunter and his guide hold out for 150" buck.

Actually there's a big difference. Shooting a mature 130 whitetail or holding out for a mature 150 whitetail is all your parogative. Shooting a 80-90 whitetail that's 1.5 old is a little different story. That might be legal in some/most places and where it is that's fine. If the hunters had shot a 32" hard bossed old bull or held out for a 40" hard bossed old bull or shot a scrum cap bull then that's all them. However they shot an imature animal that was nowhere near maturity in a country where that is illegal.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
If the hunters had shot a 32" hard bossed old bull or held out for a 40" hard bossed old bull or shot a scrum cap bull then that's all them. However they shot an imature animal that was nowhere near maturity in a country where that is illegal.

Brett

Reread the law. It says absolutely nothing about "maturity" or how big a bull needs to be or how hard the bosses need to be. It simply refers to the "young of the species," which mean calves, not bulls that don't meet YOUR criteria of a trophy. In fact, it mentions "young" twice and the second use is quite telling as to the law's meaning of "young":

"....hunts the young of that species or the female of that species which is pregnant or accompanied by its young..."

If this was a law writen in the U.S., it would probably state calves, just as they sometimes mention fawns, cubs or whatever the "young" of the species is.

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
If the hunters had shot a 32" hard bossed old bull or held out for a 40" hard bossed old bull or shot a scrum cap bull then that's all them. However they shot an imature animal that was nowhere near maturity in a country where that is illegal.

Brett

Reread the law. It says absolutely nothing about "maturity" or how big a bull needs to be or how hard the bosses need to be. It simply refers to the "young of the species," which mean calves, not bulls that don't meet YOUR criteria of a trophy. In fact, it mentioons "young" twice and the second use is quite telling as to the law's meaning of "young":

"....hunts the young of that species or the female of that species which is pregnant or accompanied by its young..."

If this was a law writen in the U.S., it would probably state calves, just as they sometimes mention fawns, cubs or whatever the "young" of the species is.

I made the point that if Tanzania thought it was illegal to shoot soft buffalo, they would not allow the skulls to be exported. They fact they do speaks volumes about how they feel.

I have always felt quotas are the best way to manage game populations. I can see the point of the lion age debate, but if a guy shoots a soft boss on his one and only buff hunt to Africa, let him be.

Brett, how many dinky caribou have you seen mounted or shot? There was (maybe still is) a few dinky caribou bulls mounted in the Elmendorf AFB Officer's Club. They were pathetic. But if they made that hunter happy, who cares?

Now, shoot a 49 inch moose and you are in trouble, unless of course, you are a resident. But I think that law has more to do with the preservation of trophy quality than it does sexual maturity.

You made a point before that asking how many buffalo you shot is like asking how many women you have slept with. It was actually a good point in that the animals you shoot are a lot like the women you sleep with: it is intensely personal, and most of the time, no one else's business.

One other kick to this dead horse. Having been on both sides of the financial fence, it is quite obvious to me that a PH sizes your financial "health" realatively quickly. If they sense you don't have a lot of money, don't do that kind of hunting very often, are on your first DG hunt, etc. etc., you are treated far differently than you are on a 21 day hunt. Just my opinion, but something must have happened to make me feel that way. So at the end of the day, if a guy scrapes and saves for his once in a lifetime buff and ends up shooting a soft buff, that is his business. Frankly, I don't think the guy in Safari looked like a doofus at all; I read that hunt for what it was: an econo hunt that was perhaps worth what he spent. But he seemed happy, so who am I to ruin his parade? Seasoned hunters saw it for what it was. Not every hunt turns out to be perfect. I seriously doubt that story does much to sell hunts for the outfit that hosted this writer.

Outdoor Writer,

This has nothing to do with my criteria of a trophy. My problem with this has nothing to do with the "trophy quality" and everything to do with the age/legality. That's a very young animal and had no business being shot in the country of Tanzania. How anyone could be so delerious as to think it anything other than a very young animal is beyond me. If a bunch of Tanzanian PHs are abhorred by the taking of that animal and they are confident that the taking of that animal violates game laws......who are you.....or I for that matter to contradict them.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Brett, how many dinky caribou have you seen mounted or shot? There was (maybe still is) a few dinky caribou bulls mounted in the Elmendorf AFB Officer's Club. They were pathetic. But if they made that hunter happy, who cares?

Now, shoot a 49 inch moose and you are in trouble, unless of course, you are a resident. But I think that law has more to do with the preservation of trophy quality than it does sexual maturity.

The problem isn't that they shot a dinky legal caribou. Which in fact isn't a problem as the biologist feel the herds can sustain that and therefore it is legal. The problem is they shot a 49" moose in an area with a 50" minimum. There's right and wrong and that is wrong. I don't mean gray. I mean wrong. Again I have no interest in "putting down" the hunters or making this an ethics debate. A law was clearly broken and the PH's balls should be nailed to the wall!!!

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
If the hunters had shot a 32" hard bossed old bull or held out for a 40" hard bossed old bull or shot a scrum cap bull then that's all them. However they shot an imature animal that was nowhere near maturity in a country where that is illegal.

Brett

Reread the law. It says absolutely nothing about "maturity" or how big a bull needs to be or how hard the bosses need to be. It simply refers to the "young of the species," which mean calves, not bulls that don't meet YOUR criteria of a trophy. In fact, it mentioons "young" twice and the second use is quite telling as to the law's meaning of "young":

"....hunts the young of that species or the female of that species which is pregnant or accompanied by its young..."

If this was a law writen in the U.S., it would probably state calves, just as they sometimes mention fawns, cubs or whatever the "young" of the species is.

Tell us how happy you would be to shoot the animal pictured. Your aurgument is about the law...did you write it, are you an expert on the law in Tanzania?

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:

quote:

Originally posted by mcdjph:
and the next client comes along and removes the next bull from the herd, probably 5 safaris will go though a block at 2 or 3 buffalo at a time. Now all of a sudden we don't have a next generation of bulls, Nice one!

And...your point??

If anyone is dumb enough to shoot all the bulls out of a herd, regardless of their ages, they don't deserve to have anything to shoot. Even farmers who raise herds of milk or meat cows know that much.

There has been at least one occasion that I know of, that a lease holder who was handing over the lease to another owner in the coming season. Where they instigated an almost total culling on buffalo bulls before handing over the concession.

Clients who went to hunt there the next season didn't see any.

I think there is a lot of you, and females, are shot in Tanzania every year. By one mistake or another. They just do not get proudly displayed in the SCI magazine. So they go unnototiced.

quote:

Originally posted by jjs:

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
If the hunters had shot a 32" hard bossed old bull or held out for a 40" hard bossed old bull or shot a scrum cap bull then that's all them. However they shot an imature animal that was nowhere near maturity in a country where that is illegal.

Brett

Reread the law. It says absolutely nothing about "maturity" or how big a bull needs to be or how hard the bosses need to be. It simply refers to the "young of the species," which mean calves, not bulls that don't meet YOUR criteria of a trophy. In fact, it mentioons "young" twice and the second use is quite telling as to the law's meaning of "young":

"....hunts the young of that species or the female of that species which is pregnant or accompanied by its young..."

If this was a law writen in the U.S., it would probably state calves, just as they sometimes mention fawns, cubs or whatever the "young" of the species is.

Tell us how happy you would be to shoot the animal pictured. Your aurgument is about the law...did you write it, are you an expert on the law in Tanzania?

Really?

outdoor writer, i do believe you need to rethink youre attitude towards hunting. Let me do it for you in baby talk, maybe you would understand this better.
Hunting is conservation.right??
part of conservation is not shooting young animals as you want them to spread the genes and wAIT for them to mature and become a true TROPHY BULL. Something you probably dont know anything about. We are hunters not killers.

Not only that but a bull that young is not to wise at all and there is no challenge.

As you all know africa is corrupt, they shouldnt be exporting those trophys at all and it is against the law. But if you want to contribute to finish the game in Tanzania, get on a plane and go to lunda-mkupule with david and shoot a couple of young animals and see how proud you would be showing youre friends the trophys on the wall.

I ll say one thing if the director of wildlife saw that article and this gets leaked to the press again, not only will the client not get hes trophys but the outfitter once again will pay another fine even though all he does is break the law. TIA

Guys - First off, I totally agree that the buffalo in question is pathetic, and never should have been shot. So I am not supporting it, but doesn't the law seem very vague??? Wouldn't it be much simpler to make it a cut & dried legal limit of some sort? Not sure exactly what that would be, perhaps Bwanamich could give his opinion on some hard & fast guidelines, maybe a width limit for example. But it seems to me that Tony does have a point as it pertains strictly to the writing of the law! It's vagueness leaves it open to a huge amount of personal interpretation.

Just as the argument we have all had here many times about the age limit on lions. Sounds great, but try finding a hard & fast way to determine in the field, under real hunting conditions, the exact age of a lion, VERY DIFFICULT!!

Guys,

You're basically applying western logic and western solutions to African problems..... and they don't work. It's a bit like saying 'if my uncle had tits, he'd be my aunt'. Sure he would but as he doesn't, he isn't.

There are actually four acts under Tanzanian law that directly apply to sport hunting. (and several others that apply indirectly) Two are written in English and two in Ki Swahili and all four contradict each other. The Ki Swahili acts say that in the event of contradiction, refer to the English acts...... However, it's not at all uncommon for that not to happen and sometimes the opposite happens.

Just one error in the acts (for example) is that pretty much every crocodile that's ever been hunted since the game acts were first introduced was taken illegally. The reason being that whoever wrote the acts forgot to include croc in the list of animals that can be taken in, or close to water.

If the new game laws ever get finished and introduced I sincerely hope they'll be considerably better that the current ones.

As Aaron so quite rightly points out, some things are easier to write than to observe. A minimum length of leopard or crocodile before the shot can be relatively easily determined with sizing markers but an age of a lion cannot....... and even if it could, there's a lot more to consider than just age before deciding whether a particular lion should or should not be shot.

quote:

Tony,

Man, you are making too much sense!

NON-sense...that is!!! Tony wants to take us back to a time where hunters were NOT conservation minded as MOST are today!!!

quote:

outdoor writer, i do believe you need to rethink youre attitude towards hunting. Let me do it for you in baby talk, maybe you would understand this better.
Hunting is conservation.right??
part of conservation is not shooting young animals as you want them to spread the genes and wAIT for them to mature and become a true TROPHY BULL. Something you probably dont know anything about. We are hunters not killers.

Ndorobo,

Well said!!!

quote:

You're basically applying western logic and western solutions to African problems..... and they don't work. It's a bit like saying 'if my uncle had tits, he'd be my aunt'. Sure he would but as he doesn't, he isn't.

Yep...when the English and the other European Countries decided to turn it back over the N.................atives, they pretty much set the stage for a never-ending Cluster-F@#%!!!