Possibly off topic but related.

Clients need to make their own decisions on what is acceptable, and sometimes don't do what a "PH" tells them to do.

Two instances.

I was hunting with a PH who told me to keep my rifle loaded at all times, including in the landcruisers cab. It was my first safari. I was damned uphappy about it. The muzzle could well be pointing up at the trackers hanging over the cab above from the tray. I tried to keep the muzzle pointing forward in case the rifle accidentally went off. Who's fault would it be? Mine 100% if someone was shot. Nowadays I would tell him to ffff off if he insisted rudely ...

Second case, third safari, a few metres away from three duggaboys. I was worried the PH would tell me to shoot the "one of the left". All I could see was blackness through the thorn bushes, could not tell where one stopped and another started. NO WAY would I have taken such a risky and stupid shot.

In both cases I the client would be responsible for the ffff ups by listening to "orders". One needs to make ones own decisions sometimes and living up to ones own mistakes include paying for them.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
At the risk of torquing others off since I seem to be doing a good job of that lately, I think the primary responsibility for addressing the situation falls on the affected individual, the person injured or hurt. Let me give you an example, if I am in a car accident tomorrow caused by another driver that was intoxicated, and I am killed or seriously injured in the accident, the obligation to ensure that myself and my family is taken care of is mine. I address that obligation through savings, health insurance, disability insurance, life insurance and similar means. For me to depend on the other person for responsibility is irresponsible. I think the same situation exists in spades for someone in a profession like professional hunting where the risks are obvious and well known. It is incumbent on the PH to take actions to protect himself and his family and no one should be looking to someone else has having the primary responsibility to make the situation right. I am not suggesting that the drunk driver in my example or the client in a hunting example does not have their own set of obligations and responsibilities for the accident, but I believe that those are ancillary and the primary responsibility is on the affected person. Today we are too quick to want to assign responsibility to someone else every time something goes wrong, instead of acknowledging our own responsibility and taking accountability for our own well being.

Okay, now folks can call me an asshole, hunting show lackey, etc.

I have no problem whatsoever agreeing with this.

PH's know what they are getting into. I have heard many stories about PH's with clients that where just plain dangerous with guns. My first question was "did you send them packing?" Every single time the answer was NO.

People know or should know the dangers of their chosen profession and should prepare accordingly.

Now...........would I help? Hell yes, I'd do everything I could to make it right, or as right as possible.

.

hello,

as a guide but not in Africa it happened that some clients stayed in cabins because they were not safe with their guns to say the least so yes you can do that and will again if ....

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:
Taking out insurance, does not change any responsibility, it merely reduces the monetary risk to any of the individuals. Like saying, "well I accidentally burned your house down, but I am not responsible because you did not insure your house for fire ..."

The problem with focusing just on legal concepts of liability and fault is that your ability to recover is dependent on the wherewithal of the culprit. If your house is burned down by Donald Trump, you should be in good shape, sue him, establish liability and damages and collect your judgment. If your house is burned down by a homeless man, great, sue him, establish liability and damages and then what . . . how do you get blood out of a turnip. All of which brings it back to us and our individual responsibility to take care of ourselves in the first instance. We insure against events like this because we cannot pick who is going to burn our house down, run into us on the freeway . . . accidently shoot us in a tragic accident. And in some cases, our house burns down because lightning strikes it or we get hurt for some reason that has nothing to do with anyone else being at fault.

A poor man has no abililty to pay for the house he burnt down, intentionally or accidentally.
So mear proven or admitted liability, means jackshit in any efforts to compensate the owner in such case.
hench why you insure yourself against such scenarios.

A wealthy person[Trump type?] who burns your house down may well have the ability top cover the cost of your loss,
However many wealthy corporations/individuals have immense financial power to create a lengthy nighmare of delays in the legal process,
before they end up paying anything.

Very wealthy people, despite their wealth, can prove to be very difficult customers when it comes paying the bill for the construction of their expensive luxury home.

PHs should insure themselves just like some farmers insure their highly prized breeding stud bull.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill C:

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu: ...one individual got killed in the process of cleaning up the mess of made of a buffalo (client was more concerned on a replacement PH so he could finish his hunt)

I find this most disturbing. How does one continue with the hunt after an incident such as this???? This tells me all I need to know about the character of the person.

I was stunned as well. Wow.

If you understand the calculating & logistical corporate mind, its really not that surprising.

If I was running a major airline and there was a crash that destroyed the aircraft and killed the crew and passengers,
One of my main concerns would be to deal with logistical operational matters.
Thats means I need to organise a replacement aircraft & crew to continue my legal obligation to providing a RPT service.
Crying over[being sentimental]over spilt milk does bring the dead back to life or reverse the events of the accident.
There is nothing immoral about taking efforts to get aircraft operations back to normal as soon as possible.

Similarly that same airline executive person, may not have difficulty maintaining a similar outlook/approach as the client on a payed service hunt,
should his PH become incapacitated for any reason.

People not uncommonly, climb past dead or dying climbers atop Everest..and dont give it a second thought.

Seasoned focused military personel also dont let sentimentality interfer with operations in the field,
if they loose an officer in battle,they medivac him or bag him.. appoint another, and get on with the task.

More to the extreme, A high level mercenary group will terminate the life of an injured team member if medivac is not viable/posses a risk to the operation,
-thus deemed to be too much of a hindrance to the efficient function & safety of the remaining team.
There is an understanding of that within the team before they set out on mission.
So if another team member puts a knife to across your throat you know not to take it personally, even if he is your best friend.
Its simply astrict operational requirement to keep your manpower/resources focused on the goal you were highly payed by your client to achieve.

If you did that in the national miltary,..you would be considered calous,brutal,cold,inhuman or even become criminalised.

However people tend to forget,everything is relative....and anything your not conditioned to, could appear wrong or strange.

Unless there is legal/police requirement to stop a hunt in the event of death or serious injury to PH or client,
I dont see a problem with continuing a hunt if practically/logistically possible.

Infact, If I was building a house,getting aircraft serviced,obtaining legal service,hunting,coach trip,medical operation etc..or whatever-
and the operations/Co. owner has logistics in place where he could accommodate [me the client] by assuring me that he has other
competent builders,engineers/mechanics,lawyers,PHs,doctors or drivers that can help provide H-quality continued service in the event
of mishap or death to himself or an existing employee[in or outside of work], Id simply call that professional level of service.

IF I was a PH id like to see a client achieve/continue on with his hunt even if something was to happen to me somewhere in the process,
that directly stopped me from providing my skills.

IF I was a client on a hunt with another client/friend, and either of us had a mishap,
then after ensuring the safety and best proper medical treatment,where one ends up in secure trusted hands,
I would have no issue with either of us continuing on with the hunt despite the other not being present.