What do you think about hunting species wich orginally do not belong to the country you`re visiting..?
For example blackbuck in Argentina?
Muntjac/sika in Great Britain?
Fallow in RSA?
Or different African animals in RSA ranchs wich belongs to other African countries?
In my opinion you should try to hunt them where they naturally belong.. But on the other hand.. I really want to hunt blackbuck, muntjac etc.. And the easiest/cheapest option is the above mentioned, I guess. But should I go for the easiest option?

I say take 'em where you can find 'em. Yes it may add to the atmosphere to take an animal in it's native land but there are those of us that may never have the opportunity to travel to Africa for exotics species. I drew a special permit for exotics here in Texas and it only cost me $10.00US for the application and $75.00US for the permit. Even after travel expenses I'll have an oportunity to take Gemsbok, Oryx (and possibly others) in unlimited numbers for less than $200.00US. I hope to one day go to Africa to hunt but for now I'll take what I can get.

I have observed this.

The purist's view does little to ensure the proliferation of a species while the pragmatic view does.

The blackbuck is an excellent example.

Considering it probably would be impossible to legally or extremely difficult to get access to hunt muntjac in Asia (China or India?), blackbuck in India and Sika in either Japan or Manchuria, I think it is mostly academic.

As for common species such as Fallow in Australia, NZ, USA, Argentina, South Africa or Europe (not its home range as they originate in Persia / Asia Minor), I would hunt them wherever I felt like it, and where they were of interest and good value.

But I don't think personally I would bother hunting them in South Africa or USA unless I lived there as we have them at home. Would love to do so in Europe though.

As long as the animal has an established population with as little human help as possible (ie supplemental feeding) then I don't see the problem. As Nitro says, you can either sit at home and wish India was open to hunting, or go get 'em!
As for the RSA ranches that stock Nyala/Sable/Gemsbok together, it is a matter of choice really. Do you want to pay for 2 safaris or spend days driving around the country, or just go ahead and hunt the animals that have adapted to the new environment?

I must admit that I haven`t really checked out theese animals "natural" status.
I will agree with you guys. If it`s possible to do it in their natural areas, I would prefer it. Or else hunt them in a place where they have been for a long time, and maybe that this area have some of the natural qualities..
But if I were to hunt a ranch in RSA I would only hunt the animals that were found in this area from "the beginning". I know that a lot of ranches are supplied with animals at a regular basis, but I think I would try to avoid them..
I might be a bit conservative on this subject, even though I`m only 26 years old..

Sure Anders, I meant the animals were born on the territory etc.
I am conservative too, and I'm only frikkin 20!

Anders

Quote:

---

But should I go for the easiest option?

---

YES
I you can justify doing it, then do it.
I will hunt anything anywhere anytime

Cheers,

Andr�

As long as the hunt is fair chase, I have no problem with it...

In a perfect world I'd rather take a tropy from its native land, but if cost or Government restrictions prevented that than I see no problem taking a fair chase trophy wearever it is.

All of us Americans out chasing long tailed stubble duck pheasants would be out of luck if we stood firm on the "native country" argument.
mike

The world is growing smaller every day.
Natural habitats are diminishing.
What ever it takes to maintain free chase hunting of all game species seems logical and pragmatic to me

Yepper Ibexebi!!

Ringneck Pheasants are natives of China