A famous Arctic explorer once said, "Adventures are the result of incompetence."

Meaning, of course, that people with brains and ability are able to plan and execute expeditions in ways that account for and obviate problems and the element of danger.

I have always thought that this was a harsh indictment, especially as concerns dangerous game hunting - but it could be that I am just being defensive, since I have had my share of DG and even big game hunting "adventures."

It seems to me, however, that DG hunting is different than other outdoor pursuits, even dangerous ones, since IMHO it involves dealing with a lot more things that are absolutely beyond the hunter's control and ability to predict.

Some examples would include: running across previously wounded and vicious DG animals (or any DG animal, for that matter) unexpectedly at close range; shots that wound, instead of kill, owing to unseen intervening brush; having to deal with an elephant in musth; and the need to follow wounded DG (or hunt any DG, for that matter) in thick brush or under otherwise less than optimal circumstances. Not to mention the general proposition that the DG hunter is trying to kill sentient and powerful animals that could as easily kill him as he kill them under any number of other unforseeable and unfortunate circumstances.

I really think that the potential for "adventure" is much higher in DG hunting than in other potentially dangerous outdoor pursuits, such as mountaineering, big game fishing, skydiving, boating, skiing, white water rafting, hiking or even exploring.

Of course, a lot of stupid mistakes are made in all of these pursuits, including DG hunting, but it still seems to me that the potential for adventure is higher in DG hunting, even for competent, experienced, intelligent and well-prepared and outfitted hunters, than it is for competent adherents of these other sports.

Certainly more people are killed each year doing other things in the outdoors than DG hunting. I don't argue that. But I would say that that's only true because more people do such other things than hunt DG, and that such people are generally less careful and competent in their chosen pursuits than DG hunters are in theirs.

I'm not sure if that's why I like DG hunting so much, but along with the fact that I can't ski, it may be the reason.

I think most people want adventure in hunting, especially DG hunting.
However adventure is very subjective.
To some simply being on PG safari may be the ultimate adventure.
Others may not get excited unless their life is at risk.

As far as other dangerous pursuits is involved I believe it all depends on how many times one pushes their own limit.
Anyone who has spent a considerable amount of time in wild places will have a story or two of how they cheated death.

If one throws caution to the wind one time too many his number will come up. Problem is no one knows what the right number is.

Like many AR members are finding out right now in Reno, the House always has the advantage. Don't gamble with more than you can afford to lose, and don't be too greedy if the cards our on your side.
Best to walk away a winner than to stay until your busted.
I find this to be true whether one is playing blackjack, mountain climbing, hunting etc.

Of course one can simply piss you off and the other may stomp you into jelly

quote:

A famous Arctic explorer once said, "Adventures are the result of incompetence."

He pegged it... Here's why;

We'd been hunting buffalo since the early morning in Dande North and by noon it was pretty hot and my wife was getting pretty tired and dehydrated. So much so, she literally fell asleep in the dirt while we took a quick break.

My PH John Sharp, decided to send her back to the truck with the Game Ranger whose name was "Peace" and my friend Todd who was with us also went as he was carrying his 375 (it was my turn to be "on point" for the buffalo).

We were all relatively close to the road, about one klick and all "Peace" had to do was head east, so off they went. Well he promptly got them lost and were it not for Todd's "air sense" they would have headed in the complete opposite direction.

After about 15 minutes, John the two trackers and me broke of the hunt when the three Dagga Boys busted us and headed for the next Zip Code. We were shortly back at the Toyota and no wife in sight. Suffice to say I puckered up tighter than a single engine night carrier landing, not to mention that I was PISSED.

We eventually found them about an hour later, but not before we intercepted and scared off with a shot across the bow, three very angry cow elepants that would have in all probability met up with my wife, Todd and the moron Game Ranger whose incompetence got my wife lost and possibly stomped by the elephants (so much for the theory that all Africans possess an uncanny sense of direction).

Suffice to say John had a BIG "piece" of "Peace's" incompetent ass....jorge

I don't know how many dangerous game hunters have been killed in the last twenty years of so, but I have lost easily a dozen friends or acquaintances in my primary sport of choice that I'm now retired from and participated in for over twenty years, skydiving. I haven't heard of a DG client being killed in quite a while. A couple of PH's, but no clients. Or was there a client killed by an elephant in Zim last year? I'm just curious as to how dangerous DG hunting really is to the client.

Is it the way you may be die,that makes hunting dangerous games such a rush??? Being killed would suck big time,but a long slow death is a greater fear for me than death its self.

Combining a timeless desire to hunt, like both you and your house cat, with the ultimate hunted game, the dangerous game of Africa, and you always have that possiblity in the back of your mind that sometime you might get killed.

I have no idea how that relates to skydiving or other activities. What possesses people to jump from planes, I haven't a clue. Obviously required by the military but voluntary? Maybe they are bored. I obviously don't hunt because I am bored.

You could hunt rattlesnakes blindfolded and it would be more blatantly dangerous than DG hunting. Guys break their necks snow skiing all the time.

Crashing in a commercial jet flight would suck big time because I would have no control over it.

Getting shot at in combat is orders of magnitude greater in danger than hunting DG. I have never been in combat so I don't know how that compares. Surely more blood sweating fear than hunting any DG.

But is there an innate desire to go skiing or jump from a plane or step on a rattlesnake or go to war? Not to me anyway.

When hunting DG you combine a desire to hunt (to be of use to put food on the table, as irrelevant as that may be in our modern times in the US anyway) and have a sense of self-reliance, having at least a chance to bail yourself out. Not sure that I always could, but when they come for you and somehow manage to get out alive it is an experience that, of course, will stay with you, and for me will linger for the rest of my boring, little life.

Disclaimer:
I hereby disavow anything I do or statements to such to any anything else in the universe.

I started a thread similar to this some time ago...

"How Dangerous is Dangerous?"...

The whole sky diving thing came up...

I think the concensus was that there are other activities with much higher mortality rate than DGH but it's the potential danger that draws most people to do it...

I've faced my own mortality in a hospital bed and have developed my own perceptions about death...

I'm planning Zim in 09 and do not plan on dying there...

Just planning on having a good time and experiencing something different...

Though given the choice I'd rather "die on my feet" than pissing myself in a hospital bed...

Just my $.02.....

Matt V.

There is another thread on this board about our adventures while hunting. I have been on ten extremely successful hunts, and which have been remarkably adventure free (thanks be to God!) I plan trips thoroughly; book with experienced outfitters; and have had very good ph's. And I am lucky (I hope this post does not tempt fate,) and my trips (with the exception of an unplanned charter flight I'll never forget) have been unadventuresome.

That said, Sh!t happens. You can step on the adder, run into the elephant, or wounded buffalo. The truck can break down. Air Nib can cancel flights. You can start off for a short recce and be gone the rest of the day. That is why I carry my rifle, which is big enough to deal with anything I might happen upon or might happen upon me, and it has at least a half dozen rounds on it. (The result of an elephant moment while carrying a 300Win mag with 150gr bullets.) I have on my belt a US Army magazine pouch with a lighter in it (I don't smoke), multitool, glasses repair kit, antibiotic salve, bandaids, moleskin, sudafed, tylenol, lomotil, toilet paper and bug dope. When away from the truck, I carry a camelbak canteen with emergency items in it including a couple of energy bars.

I got the idea after reading that Selous shortly after getting started in Africa got stuck out over night without materials to start a fire. He never made that mistake again.

I applied for life insurance a couple of years ago, and they wanted to know if I sky dived, cave dived, did SCUBA, or was a private pilot. I fessed up that I hunted in Africa. They did not care about that so I assume the actuaries have determined that it is safer than the activities mentioned above. Kudude

I agree with everything posted so far on this subject.

But my focus is not on the objective "dangerousness" of DG hunting. That's just statistics and I am fairly sure that they don't exist on this subject in sufficient detail to do a comparison.

My focus is on the charge in the above quoted maxim that "adventures" result from "incompetence."

Whenever I hear about an incident where a hunter (or anyone else) is killed or injured by DG, I try to get the facts and figure out how and why it happened. It seems that, as often as not, someone screwed up big time and that's why they or some poor bastard in their company got whacked, chewed, stomped, gored, etc. So, the incompetence charge sticks in those cases.

You know the stories. Hunter shoots buff/lion/leopard/elephant in the ass and he or PH or tracker is gored/mauled/stomped in follow up. PH/hunter/tracker walks away into bush to answer nature's call just that one time too many without a rifle and gets stuck/chewed/poked/mangled. Hunter uses inadequate rifle/ammo and someone pays the price. Hunter shoots PH instead of pissed off leopard/lion that is mauling him. Etcetera.

But many times - and I'll admit that facts are often hard to come by when it comes to DG incidents - it seems to me that the whacking/chewing/stomping/goring, etc. resulted from a cause or causes utterly beyond the control or ability to predict of the DG hunters in question. Bob Fontana's death - and many others we could cite - are prime examples of that, I think.

In other words, all the planning and care and gear and rifle practice in the world won't help you if you bump a wounded buff in the thick stuff at five paces. Extra matches won't help. A well-packed parachute won't save you. Enough food in your day pack won't matter. And long underwear, that perennial staple of the cautious Arctic explorer, will only help to soak up the blood.

In DG hunting, adventure is often NOT the result of incompetence - but is caused by just plain bad luck, or whatever else you may want to call it.

On the one hand, I do wish there were better data on this question. On the other, as kudude says, maybe the lack of statistics is the only thing keeping my life insurance premiums under control.

There is a big difference between "adventure" and "misadventure".

Well said, NitroX.

Indeed. I've had my share of misadventures, one costing me the sight of my right eye and a near-death experience.

I'm too busted up to skydive anymore, can't fly because I can't get a waiver for both the loss of eyesight and poor hearing caused by loud aircraft engines I flew from age 16 to age 58, plus hundreds of thousand of rounds fired, can't SCUBA or cave dive anymore because of a slight case of emphysema, so the only excitement I have left is DG hunting.

I had a few misadventures in airplanes, caves, and in free fall and under an open canopy, but good training and circumstance still finds me here at age 65, always looking for that rush. Too bad buffalo hunting is so damned expensive, or I'd be out every season for a month at a time, but that's my current stimulus. Being a classic type T personality, I'm not happy unless I'm pushing the edge of the envelope. I used to skydive to relax. It's the most fun you can have with your clothes on, unless you do it naked, and I have.

So back to Africa one more time, at least, compliments of a generous friend who is very much better off than I am but is afflicted also with the type T personality and is completely empathetic to my dilemma.

Thanks for all your considerate answers. Murphy rules the universe, as in "What can go wrong will go wrong", and "Of all the things that can go wrong, the one that will will cause the most damage." I and Mr. Murphy are on a first name basis, and I'm still here. As someone already said, I'd rather die on my feet than rot away in some damned nursing home. Maybe I or my PH will screw up, or maybe I'll be hunting with someone else's wounded buff wandering around, as happened on my first buff hunt. I'd rather get hammered by some buff's bosses than rot away with prostate cancer, but I probably won't.

Semantics aside, the question is: Can virtually all risk and danger be eliminated from DG hunting by careful planning, preparation and execution? Put another way, are all incidents of death or injury in DG hunting the result of incompetence? I think the answer is clearly no.

It would be nice if it were otherwise, but alas, it isn't. Death by reason of incompetence or human error is reassuring. Anyone who is capable and intelligent can downplay it as something that will never happen to him.

But the possibility of being killed as the random result of an irreducibly risky endeavor - such as DG hunting - but pursuing it anyway, to the best of one's ability - now that is what adventure is all about, IMHO.

Absolutely.

MR,

With all due respect this sounds like lawyer speak. There always has to be someone responsible for anything that happens.

This appears to be the antithesis of "shit happens."

When I was a kid and some guy got shot by accident when out deer hunting, eh ... so what? It was an accident.

Nowadays, the lawyers are aflocking, the sheriff, the FBI, the ATF, the state attorney general, the game department flunkies, and every f**king do-gooder comes out of the woodwork for the mandatory TV interview.

There is no such thing as a accident anymore. But then I'm not a lawyer!

Ah, Will, but you are missing my point - especially my last one.

There is such a thing as a no fault accident or injury - especially in DG hunting - and that's what gives it it's spice and makes it special.

Damnum absque injuria!

Assumption of risk! Try suing the Red Sox if you're face is broken by a foul ball. I am happy to say that you and your lawyer will be thrown out of court!

God save the self-reliant and semi-intelligent!

Still, there are lots of screw-ups out there who certainly can screw things up without even trying - and God save us all from them, too, please, while He's at it.

And if He can't or won't, then they had better have liability insurance in the broadest form available.

MR, I think that explorer was overly proud of his planning ability, and probably wouldn't be much fun to hunt with.

With regard to eliminating risk, and the nature of risk in general....go read "Fooled by Randomness" or "The Black Swan", both by Nassim Taleb. The famous artic explorer quote is an excellent axample of "hindsight bias", which allways says "those guys should have seen that coming and planned on it, I would have"....but you can't, we fail to recognize the level of uncertainty with which the world operates.

If all risk was eliminated from hunting DG what would be the point of doing it?

quote:

Originally posted by JPenn:
With regard to eliminating risk, and the nature of risk in general....go read "Fooled by Randomness" or "The Black Swan", both by Nassim Taleb. The famous artic explorer quote is an excellent axample of "hindsight bias", which allways says "those guys should have seen that coming and planned on it, I would have"....but you can't, we fail to recognize the level of uncertainty with which the world operates.

JPenn, thanks for the references.

I will have to look those up. Thinking ahead or on the spot is always harder than criticizing with the benefit of hindsight.

Plan for the worst and hope for the best is a good motto.

Maybe I lean on my PH's too much but never felt stressed hunting in Africa. I have had several high adventure Colorado Elk hunts. All have been do it yourself affairs. Especially the late season hunts several miles into the back country. Dealing with big bulls, severe temperatures, pack animals and riding stock was enjoyable but also very stressful. I've mellowed out alot since I have started taking my two boys along but I have the itch for another real adventure.

Vermo I agree with you on those do it yourself Elk hunts as being "High Adventure". I've hunted Idaho out or Salmon afew times, and that was fun (getting abit lost, losing your big toe nails, freezing, having your flash light burn out, and walking back to camp in complete darkness just afew of the fun things we did!) But, there is something specail about hunting DG in Africa that really got to me. I havn't had "butterflies in my gut" since my High School football days, and was reminded how they felt when I was tracking my Lion.

I remember a guy I hunted with in Alaska who had walked around the side of a hill while bow hunting for caribou, and found himself between momma grizzly and her cubs. He suddenly knew he was in the middle of a new adventure. Poor planning had nothing to do with that. He recovered after a week in the hospital. Africa has more of those kind of species capable and willing to do harm in similiar/different situations.

Though given the choice I'd rather "die on my feet" than pissing myself in a hospital bed...

Just my $.02.....

Matt V.[/QUOTE]


Absolutely

The Odds of dying by exposure to animate mechanical forces (bitten, stung, gored, trampled by an animal etc.) are 1/27,120. Death by drowning 1/1,140. Death by fire or smoke 1/1,167. Death by automobile accident 1/84. Just for those that are curious.

I wonder how many of the 1/84 that die in car accidents are driving the speed limit, wearing set belts and are unimpaired. A good number I would guess. There is no way to completely mitigate risk no matter how much planning you do. All that you can do is reduce the risk.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris_Kenney:
The Odds of dying by exposure to animate mechanical forces (bitten, stung, gored, trampled by an animal etc.) are 1/27,120. Death by drowning 1/1,140. Death by fire or smoke 1/1,167. Death by automobile accident 1/84. Just for those that are curious.

Those odds are for the general population, right? For African PH's, snake handlers, or bull-fighters, etc. the odds would be much different, I imagine.

This is true, however, I would guess even a PH is far more likely to die in a Land Rover crash than by an encouter with a DG animal. I certainly hope fewer than 1:84 PH's die as a result of dangerous game every year.

I suspect you are correct. Those are lifetime odds, not yearly, right?

I seriously doubt that any reliable data exist that would verify any such odds.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
I seriously doubt that any reliable data exist that would verify any such odds.

Doesn't the Insurance industry try to keep accurate track of such things?

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
If all risk was eliminated from hunting DG what would be the point of doing it?

Precisely... I wouldn't have it any other way.

One can look at an adventure from two sides.

Someone might consider going out and having a great, exciting time as an adventure.

Others might consider that when something unplanned happens, is an adventure.

Personally, I find it hard to relate to the "dangerous" bit in relations to hunting.

I hunt because I enjoy it, it all its forms.

To think that I go hunting dangerous game because of the added danger is totally untrue.

I have never, ever felt that I was in any sort of imminent danger while hunting.

My worst fear is falling into a hole and breaking a leg, or getting bitten by a snake.

I am not afraid of snakes, and we see several on any hunt.

I feel more in danger driving on the roads than being chased by an enraged elephant.

Personally I think a "safari" in the wilds of Africa is an adventure in itself.

I value the experiences I have had, both good and bad, from taking some nice animals, to having wheels fall off a bakkie, being thrown off properties by warvets, having lions walk around our tents at night, even nuisance border crossings.

Adds to all of one's life experiences. Worrying about every small detail and what bad things possibly might happen, well then, for those people it is better they stay on their couches watching TV IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by SGraves155:
I suspect you are correct. Those are lifetime odds, not yearly, right?

My mistake, you are correct. They are lifetime. The source is the U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services