Ann made a good contribution to keeping things interesting in these boring times with her posting on the sexiest PH! I’d also like to stir the pot a bit! Don’t blame me, blame OldHandgunHunter whose signature line got me thinking….

Ideally, how many (a) hunting clients and (b) PH’s should be (i) mauled or (ii) killed yearly to keep the game of hunting dangerous game true to the ‘dangerous’ part? If year after year so many trophy elephant, so many tuskless, so many lion, so very many buffalo and so many leopard are hunted and killed outright – which should always be the objective of any hunt – and no-one gets hurt or killed, can we still talk of “dangerous game” hunting?

As further illustration of what I mean I’ll say what I personally consider good odds in the plains game hunting field. Everyone wants to hunt ethically? Yes! Everyone who shouts yes should however answer truthfully what chance they want to give the hunted trophy to escape to live another day? I often hunt for free range springbok for meat – not a trophy, which I rather reserve for hunting clients, but a young buck for meat. Now if I were to get one every time I set out walking from home it would not really be hunting, but just meat gathering. So I personally like it if my success rate is about 1 in 4. On average one out of every four hunts that I set out on, I like to actually get an animal. I have found that using my trusty .308 I started doing better than 1 in 4! [Remember I hunt here in very open grassveld and the springbok are notoriously difficult to get close to.] This high success rate degrades the experience a bit for me, and have therefore changed my normal meat hunt to use a 1873 model Westley Richards “Monkeytail” used as a muzzle loader. Now my success is much less than 1 in 8, and I’m just loving it!  But this example is just me and my situation for plains game – which do not bite back or stomp too seriously when wounded - hunting.

Let us now look at the success rate of DG hunters. For any animal killing activity to be called a “hunt” the goal should always be a quick and humane kill of the quarry. Right? And they all shouted: “Yes!”. So if it so happens that the PH’s become so good, the clients so well prepared, the rifles and projectile development so advanced that on such nominally dangerous game hunts 9999 times out of a 10000 hunts the animal is killed neatly and humanely with a one shot almost instant kill and no-one gets hurt or is endangered? Can we then for elephant, buffalo, lion, leopard etc. , can we still call it a “dangerous game” hunt? What is “dangerous” about it if hardly ever anyone gets hurt? If however we start using underpowered rifles [and handguns like OldHandgunHunter advises in his signature line ] and poorly performing bullets or low poundage bow and arrows to the point where for every 10 attempts at hunting such DG one hunter or one PH gets seriously mauled or killed, we’d probably call it a “very dangerous game” hunt?

OK, so, between these two extremes, what do you thing are good odds for us to continue to refer to it as dangerous game hunting? Dangerous enough to really get the adrenalin pumping, but not so dangerous as to be a sport only for the stupid? Let’s hear some views on how many needs to be killed or mauled to be just about ideal?


In good hunting.

Andrew McLaren

Man oh man! It must get lonely out on those Free State vlaktes this time of year.

I feel that all game can be dangerous if hunted the wrong way a well known PH was killed by a duiker several years ago, because it was handled as something that is not dangerous.I feel that most professional hunters that know what they are doing can avoid dangerous situation.The problem is that because they avoid dangerous situations it starts getting boring to sum hunters.If people want it dangerous they can have it bay doing things the wrong way.

Andrew,
Depends if by "mauled" you mean a manly scratch (and story) that awes the ladies? Or, stuffed in a blender tore all to hell.
Scott

Jokes and stiring apart, all wild animals will attack if threatened at close quarters. The big 4 will be dangerous into iternity as long as the range of shooting and hunting is within 20 meters or so.

Regarding the choice of weapons, I really like the nostalgic classic hunting ideas & hunting with classic rifles & calibers. I wish I could hunt PG & leopard with my Mannlicher Schoenauer rifles - Mod 1903 in 6.5X54 & Mod 1910 in 9.5X57. I suppose I could even hunt buffalo with the 9.5X57 using 250 gr TSX at 2200 fps.

The chances of having some close encounters would be higher than the current average I presume.

1 per 1000 hunts...just enough to keep dangerous on the board and for it to be 'sport' and not a game. Fortunately MR spots does his best to keep the track record up.

personally I find it best when hunteres go home after a face lift and tummy tuck from Mr spots and their ears not sewn back on quite even at the rural zim hospital...keeps folk talking. Anti hunters do best when they die under something big and nasty- makes the headlines and keeps the 'dangerous' in DG meaningful

EVERY PH and hunter should be mauled at least once in their lifetime!

First off I don’t want anyone hurt or killed while hunting! That being said, even if nobody is ever killed again by the so-called *dangerous game* doesn’t mean the animals are not more dangerous than most other game called plains game. It simply means the hunter, and the PH are doing their job well.

The idea of using a less effective weapon to make the game more dangerous, is not new to hunters, or PHs, especially when hunting elephant. The common deal is to get close and try for a brain shot, a very difficult shot to make by the novice, and dangerous if botched while in close.

This is the same mind-set that draws hunters of African game to use iron sighted double rifles, a weapon most consider to be a very short range rifle. The hunting of large animals like Alaska’s brown bear with a handgun in the alders is most likely about a dangerous as any thing hunted in Africa, yet it somehow doesn’t hold the status that elephant hunting with a 500NE double rifle does with the average hunter.

Dangerous animals are only dangerous if the hunter gets close, but even then if he does his job right the danger passes with the first couple of shots!

I would say that, in most cases, if all animals were declared non-dangerous because of hunter success, I think there would be a lot of PHs in the unemployed line shortly.

……I’ll take the in-close dangerous game, and try my damnedest to avoid death and destruction of myself, or anyone in my hunting party, and enjoy the adrenaline rush, thank you!
.................................. ...............

Using the older calibers and rifles would seem to put things on a more-even keel.
Now, unlike hunters, photo-safariests, PETA tours, and UN animal counters/biologists/others of this ilk, should be limited to the .22LR. As we have read a number of times, the .22LR has killed everything.
Max

i can think of a ph or 2 that got mauled after a party. (by their wives)

All of my African hunting became dangerous when my wife first got wind of what it cost.

Hey Andrew,

are you contemplating thinning out the opposition?

I know a couple of hunters if someone is making a list.

If I was a PH and had been killed in the line of duty I would much rather be killed by a buffalo than a duiker.

I would let BENGO ring in on this one. Butch has the most exciting hunt report I think I've had the pleasure to read here on AR.

hopefully none have to die,,, Ask Judge here on AR if the buffalo he walked up on that had a snare on its foot that almost made him into a dust pile still makes it dangerous game even though he didn't get gored. They are considered "dangerous" for a reason. I lost one friend to an elephant,, he wasn't hunting elephant but bumped into a cow with a calf and she stomoped him into a mud hole...you can't out run them, they will always be considered dangerous to me,,, always!

Andrew,

We could increase the statistic by carrying a one shot Thompson Contender smoke gun.

Another would be to walk into the long grass after a Lion with just your sony walkman.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
...with just your sony walkman.

LOL! What the hell. You have one of those? How about an 8-track player for the Rover?

Check how many people are killed by horses and cattle every year-any time you are dealing with large mobile animals it is dangerous-

SSR

quote:

How many PH's and or Hunters should be mauled or killed yearly?

I think you meant to say, "How many PHs or hunters ARE mauled or killed yearly?"

Bill Quimby

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
If I was a PH and had been killed in the line of duty I would much rather be killed by a buffalo than a duiker.

That's beautiful...!

quote:

Man oh man! It must get lonely out on those Free State vlaktes this time of year. Roll Eyes Big Grin

Yes, posting the occasional odd question in between bouts of self-gratification!!! :-)

Very good question. The fact is that Dangerous game hunting really isn't very. There is lots more illusion of danger than actual danger.

Now unless you are very very wealthy it is very dangerous to your financial health.

I have always wondered tho. Has anybody actually manage to sneak up and slap an old elephant cow on the ass and got away. Now that my boys would put the dangerous in dangerous game hunting.