quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Originally posted by eyedoc:

Another scene in the movie showed the results of similar slaughter of one ethnic group by another. Mass graves where Indians /Arabs were rounded up and executed. Some others driven into the sea and drowned.Dead bodies washing ashore on the beach and left to rot.

"The Zanzibar Revolution - 1961"
Was in my early teens then - not a pleasant day to remember.

Oops ....memory lapse....1967!

check out the entire movie, probably a couple hours long and some graphic footy of Zanizibar overthrow.

FOJ-Thanks for correcting me,it has been a while since I last watched the movie.Also, for the life of me ,I can't recall the title, and it is in my collection of Tapes back home.Can you recall the title?

quote:

Originally posted by KPete:

quote:

Originally posted by Art S.:
As far as hard to watch, I see no difference with their method and all the modern bowhunters I have watched over several years. Neither method provides a humane kill, the only difference being they were delivering multiple wounds as fast as possible as opposed to shooting once, then waiting 20-30 minutes to track in order to allow the animal to bleed out.

A very good point and one that is too often overlooked in discussions regarding hunting ethics.

Are you guys trying to say that archery hunting is unethical??!! Putting a broadhead through a deer's ribcage kills just as fast as putting a bullet through the ribcage. And if you miss the ribcage-- with broadhead or bullet-- you have an animal that will likely die slowly. The point is that the shooter has to make a good shot, and forgo shooting when a good shot does not present itself.

The reason to wait with tracking after shooting-- whether with a bow or rifle-- is to let the animal lay down and die. If you too quickly follow up on a mortally-wounded animal you run the risk of jumping it and losing it.

Haven't we had an invention called a rifle for a few hundred years now?

Look at at minute 3:08 looks like a rifle or something is fired when the elephant falls

Whiteman can not chuck spear so good as these guys. Well known fact.

Jarrod,

I was surprised at the sudden downing of the elephant also, but think it may have been the spear between eye and ear that finally got the brain.

Cant believe these guys are going for a frontal head shot rather than a heart shot w their spears, but that one seemed to work.

I am amazed that the cow buffalo, elephant and hippo did not whack some of these guys.

Andy

I think the elephant was shot from off camera. If you watch real close there is a puff of smoke and what appears to the trail of a bullet coming from the bottom left of the screen. Watch the bottom left real close at 3:07-3:09.

quote:

Originally posted by mike7mm08:
I think the elephant was shot from off camera. If you watch real close there is a puff of smoke and what appears to the trail of a bullet coming from the bottom left of the screen. Watch the bottom left real close at 3:07-3:09.

If you watch, just before the puff of smoke, the camera jars with the concussion of the rifle firing.

Many of the scenes in this film were set-up.

Didn't click the link, but I'd lay odds it's the vid of the natives doing a whole lot of killing--slow killing.

If it is, there's a TOTO tune from the 80s playing. Whomever decided to use that as the theme needs to be shot. Or given an award.

The jungle is the place to test one’s mettle and one’s skill. It is a place for personal and individual adventure. To tackle the adversary on the ground of it’s own choosing and to outwit it in it’s own game of woodcraft is the real joy and thrill of hunting. Always remember that hunting is not just killing animals, it is much more than killing; Killing is the least important part of it.

Hope that helps.


Steve "Shakari" Robinson


Steve

I like that quote, it is real life and sums it up pretty much for me too. I was playing the devils advocate somewhat with my post and it's a case of each to his own I suppose within some moral boundaries.
I'm not so lily white myself having shot deer for money when still at school, my parents having little money and my mother crippled. Shot from vehicles, spotlighting at night and all the rest. Of course these practices are quite accepted and sustainable in NZ and in fact foot hunters cannot control our animal populations which inevitably leads to the need for regular chopper culling anyway.

In saying this I've always had a respect for animals, striving for a quick kill after which generally some feelings of guilt or sadness set in when viewing an animal cut down in its prime. Its also been quite business like for me, gutting, taking the meat and/or head and not feeling any need to celebrate, hence I've been a loner when hunting most times. I don't keep trophies, what few I have are up in the garage ceiling. Memories and a few photos of the great times in the outdoors with a good stalk and a final kill are enough. There have been many many kills, my brother with his single shot 22RF and me with my 32 Remington usually shot around 50 deer each spring, I can't remember the first deer I ever shot and certainly don't remember everyone of all the other animals that have followed since throughout the years.

In someways it was almost gratuitous killing like in the video that sparked this thread. Like the natives, we did have a reason albeit it might not be viewed by some as morally high.

My childhood dream of hunting Africa gets closer as our kids grow and leave home but I do have a nagging wonder of just how I will find it being an individualist hunter not at ease with others around. I guess I will find that out when I get to your wonderful country.

Eagle,

The quote comes from Tryst with Tigers by Sher Jung and it pretty much sums up exactly how I feel about hunting and in fact that feeling becomes stronger every year for me....... so maybe it's a good job I'm more or less retired from the field!

Don't give up on the African dream...... you'll manage it one day and if you do your research properly, I have no doubt you'll find your ideal hunt!

I saw a program on traditional whale hunting and the Inuit ,the Animal lovers were moaning as this woman holds up a 50 BMG round saying ''this is what they want to use to kill the whales, whats traditional about that? ''if they used a spear it was ''cruel'' and if they use a big gun its not traditonal ! i dont know if putting hunting scenes old or new, on you tube is a good idea for hunting ,since for most people killing anything, any way is cruel

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:

...... I do have a nagging wonder of just how I will find it being an individualist hunter not at ease with others around. I guess I will find that out when I get to your wonderful country.

The only 'others' around would be your PH and a handful of trackers + game scout.
Other than sticking to the rules of fair chase you shouldn't have much of a problem.

quote:

Originally posted by tankhunter:
i dont know if putting hunting scenes old or new, on you tube is a good idea for hunting

+1

I reckon you tube does more PR damage to/for hunting that any other single thing.

quote:

I reckon you tube does more PR damage to/for hunting that any other single thing.

Most likely has had a negative impact!

However, it is now incumbent upon SCI, DSC and other non-profits to do some damage control and quick!

They should pay for and produce a series of short videos that explain the benefits of sport hunting to the environment and to local economies. Africa would be a great place to start the series.

Just a short bit on the negative impact of Elephant overpopulation would make quite a positive impact. A bit showing villager's crops being destroyed, various parks being devastated by over grazing of Eles, etc...

This stuff is real and we are truly a positive force in conservation, but thus far have failed at making this clear to all!

Thoughts?

JW

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
I guess they haven't gotten the memo regarding the invention of firearms...

I think they had gotten the memo regarding the invention of firearms.

Just not the wherewithall to buy one. Possibly not the legal blessing to possess one, no matter how much money they accumulated.

quote:

Originally posted by eyedoc:
To understand what is going on in this clip one needs to see the entire movie, for context. This was filmed in the time frame when the colonials were making their exit from Africa and the power was shifting back to black rule.

The scene being discussed now was meant to show how during this time of transition lawlessness was rampant. The game being killed was not to satisfy a need for food, it was being killed because there was no one there to stop it from being killed.

Another scene in the movie showed the results of similar slaughter of one ethnic group by another. Mass graves where Indians were rounded up and executed. Some others driven into the sea and drowned.Dead bodies washing ashore on the beach and left to rot.

This had nothing to do with hunting , either for food or sport. It was killing for the sake of killing, because whitey was no longer there to prevent it.

By the way, there are a few scenes where it is whites that are taking advantage of the void in law enforcement as well.

The movie is meant to show the character of man when the restraints of law and society are lifted. It is extremely interesting but not pleasant to watch.

It's important to note that tribal culture did impose the restraints of law and society upon the individual.

For better or for worse, the restraints of law and society these people are rebelling against are alien to their culture and illegitimate to their eyes.

It does not mean they lack a system of law or a society.

quote:

Originally posted by T man:
I understand subsitence hunting, but I believe in providing the animal with a clean, swift, honorable end.

What exact method do we suggest for skinny homo sapien to bring down an animal like that swiftly and ''honorably'' in the tradition of subsistence hunting?

The options are spears, herding them off a cliff, burning them to death, dropping rocks on their heads if you can catch them in a defile, stealing their young, or the good old fashioned pit trap- aka lying around in a hole with three broken legs for a day waiting for the guys who couldn't find anything in the defile to come and drop rocks on their head instead.

Not much fucking fun any of them

Personally food aside, I think its great sport. No different from thousands of young hunters worldwide using dogs to rip into or bring down pigs, or cats, or the old stories of arabs hamstringing elephants with big swords.

If I were the buff I'd think it fairer to have the chance of breaking away from a few skinny guys with spears, than have my entire heart blown out from 60m away ''honorably'' with a gun

quote:

Originally posted by eyedoc:
To understand what is going on in this clip one needs to see the entire movie, for context. This was filmed in the time frame when the colonials were making their exit from Africa and the power was shifting back to black rule.

The scene being discussed now was meant to show how during this time of transition lawlessness was rampant. The game being killed was not to satisfy a need for food, it was being killed because there was no one there to stop it from being killed.

An anti could say the same thing about 90% of the game we here hunt.

I hunt for sport mostly, sometimes trophy's, very little for food and make no excuses for doing so.

I have also hunted legally/ethically hogs using dogs to bring them down and hold them so I can stab them, which can take more work and blood and the animal screaming then bringing down that buff

I sometimes put a steel hook through the mouth of marine animals and play them for a similar amount of time to get them to the boat, and then stick a knife in their breathing apparatus.

I don't even like the taste of fish that much either.

So all these things died because someone should have been trying to stop me doing it or something?? I'm missing your point here ...

quote:

Another scene in the movie showed the results of similar slaughter of one ethnic group by another. Mass graves where Indians were rounded up and executed. Some others driven into the sea and drowned.Dead bodies washing ashore on the beach and left to rot.

This had nothing to do with hunting ,

As you say, nothing to do with these guys spearing a buffalo either.

Moving on.

quote:

The movie is meant to show the character of man when the restraints of law and society are lifted.

Fine so it was a shit depressing movie.

now is there anything wrong with that style of hunting for them?

No.


In fact the more the ''restraints of society and law'' are applied to me these days, the less acceptable my personal choice of killing with a rifle or any hunting becomes.

My urge to kill is no different from theirs, regardless of my using a different method.

Certainly it does not make me better in anyone's eyes or them any worse.

To deride them leaves you on a slippery slope with arguments an Anti applies against all hunters.

That its about pleasure...duh
The thrill of the hunt, even in the absence of needing food...duh
Even quite savage...duh. Nothing cosmopolitan about blasting an animals heart out to put its antlers on a wall.

Why didn't they just go to the grocery store where meat is made and not harm any animals???

Karl-You are missing my point entirely. These are not my opinions that I am expressing. You need to watch the movie in it's entirety. The hunting clip is just a small part of the big picture of that period of time.I was just trying to give context and to state what the director's motives were.

Here are a couple of my previous posts regarding this film Africa Addio. The original full length version is available on Netflix.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown

My take on the film,(I refer to the original full length film which is both beautiful and disturbing. There are several edited versions including a very short version narrated in English. All of the edited versions have one thing in common: they have cut out the beauty and left all of the disturbing portions. The shortest versions are almost total gore and have all the redeeming value of a snuff film.....) anyway, my take on the film is that is provides some wonderful footage for those who already have a solid working knowledge of Africa and its history, but the film will leave the neophyte with a completely warped sense of what Africa is all about.

The film-makers behind Africa Addio are know as revolutionaries of this genre with other "classics" such as Mondo Cane to their credit. They are also well know for their heavy use of staged scenes and twisting of the facts to show what they want to see.

Racists love this movie and point to it as solid proof that their theory of white supremacy is valid.

I can't quite say I "love" this film, but I do love some of the footage and I am blown away by the irony. Every time I watch this film I am amazed that the racists fail to see the irony, but I guess we all see what we want to see.

There is a saying in academia to the effect that "a historical text provides more insight into the period and culture in which it was produced, than it provides about the period and culture it attempts to describe. Africa Addio is a shining example of this phenomenon.

Bottom line: it is worth a watch, but it is about as factual as the "documentaries" produced by Michael Moore.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown
Just a note.... There are several different versions, or "cuts", of this movie. There is a directors cut, an American release, etc. There is even one version that was titled Africa: Blood and Guts.

You want to get the longest running version. It seems that the shorter versions left out the beautiful stuff and went for shock value only.

One thing that I can say for the full version of this film it that it will leave you with some food for thought. Everyone sees this film differently. Racists view it as proof of the inferiority of blacks and in favor of colonialism. I came away feeling that the film showed many more similarities than differences between blacks and whites.

Regardless, this is one you won't soon forget.

quote:

Thank goodness for modern firearms then.

Ted Roosevelt used modern firearms and still managed to create a long list of wounded and suffering African animals due to his buffon shooting style....yet some have considered him a legendary great white hunter....

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:

quote:

Thank goodness for modern firearms then.

Ted Roosevelt used modern firearms and still managed to create a long list of wounded and suffering African animals due to his buffon shooting style....yet some have considered him a legendary great white hunter....

The difference between a true hunter and a butcher is the same no matter what insturment of death is used.

I agree with you about Roosevelt, and I would include C.H. Stigand and a few other early hunters in that "butcher" category...

I just found it funny the different ways people define a "humane" kill - to some it is only possible with a rifle, bowhunters disagree...

To me I think that the idea of a "humane" kill is a bit of an oxymoron. If we are really truly were concerned about not "stressing" the animal, we wouldn't chase it around the bush with a weapon in our hands in the first place.

And if we really were concerned about killing in the most "humane" manner possible - all game would be darted to sleep, and then polished off when it could feel no pain at all.

Hunting is bloodsport. Everytime we try and blurr that reality, we lose ourselves in semantic philisophical musings that serve as weak justification for what we are really doing.

Firearms may deliver quuicker kills than bows or spears - but the game also has a greater chance of evading the hunter with more primative weapons.


I feel it should be more about a properly conducted hunt and respect for fallen prey. Not so much about a few extra inches.


.

Now I see how the Zimbabwe white farmers felt!