I've (at least twice) explained why I think it's a bad idea but will do so again.

It holds members to ransom on things such as membership fees because they have to pay whatever is asked whether they can afford it or not. (Many, especially the young PHs feel they can't afford it now & there's nothing to stop older members jacking the price up to keep young guys out to reduce the competition & thus creating an old boys club. Also remember that all price increases have to be passed on which in turn will mean higher hunt prices...... I appreciate not much of an increase but it is an increase.

Things are hard enough now for the young guys & I don't need to tell any PH/Outfitter that there are plenty of young PHs out there BEGGING for the chance to work for keep & tips just to get the experience & this move will make life even tougher & more expensive for them.

It also forces members to remain members even if they disagree with policies such as the dramatically reduced wilding period on captive bred lions that was foisted on the industry because so many PHASA members (who voted) are involved in that kak!

I suspect having only ONE organisation that one HAS to be a member of to operate would contravene the RSA Constitution and/or Bill of Rights that says something to the tune of everyone has the right to work and/or run a business without impediment. (assuming they stay within the law)

I can understand some kind of compulsory registration requirement but you already have that with the PH licencing requirements & the Game Dept etc.

It's only a personal opinion but mine is that this move restricts the freedom of the law abiding individual & I don't think that's ever a good thing.

As I said previously. It's the same principle of the Americans (quite rightly) not wanting to give up their rights as per their hard won constitution.

While it's easy to disagree with Steve (Shakari), and argue that licensing, credentialing and a set of minimum standards are an absolute necessiity for a civil society, without which there would be a plethora of fly-by-night operators, whether they be doctors, lawyers, building contractors or professional hunters; what happens over the long run is that large numbers of people end up being unable to afford them, and must do without.

It's a bit anarchistic, but things have gotten way out of hand here in the US in ALL of those professions, and there's just no way to climb back up that slippery-slope, so I'll side with Steve (Shakari).

All RSA PHs & Outfitters are & (pretty much) always have been required to hold a current PH/Outfitter licence issued by the game department(s)that can be temporarily or permanently removed from the holder should he infringe the rules & standards etc in any way & at any time.

So why is there a need to have compulsory membership of a SECOND organisation to operate?

All it does is remove freedoms & needlessly increase costs for the individuals in the industry.

Steve
It was suggested from the floor that the subs be 1 days wage for PHs $ 100 ( R 980) and $ 300 for outfitters R 2900.

As stated before, things get put to a vote, if people, general membership, outfitters and PHs in the industry, don't like it it doesn't fly , simple.
Not sure where you're coming from ? Forcing people to do things etc ,they don't and can't force the membership without a quorum at the AGM.
People are not going to vote for things that will screw themselves, that includes the EXCO.

It is also a Government requirement, so basically if you're unhappy then you need to contact the relevant government dept. Hell if I know who.

It's a NATIONAL ACCREDITATION.A PROFESSIONAL BODY STATUS.

It is what it is and if it gets off the ground will give PHASA the teeth it needs, to expel all an any PH an Outfitter that is found guilty of contravening the law as is currently set out.
All the bad apples can finally be expelled or reprimanded, warned.
CHEERS.

Dave

It doesn't affect me any more because I didn't renew when I retired (partly) because they don't have a retired list and I was buggered if I was willing to pay the subs for nothing more than an occasional magazine....... I did email them (2 or 3 times) to suggest a retired list but assume they didn't want one because they didn't even give me the courtesy of a reply.

As for a subscription of US$100 per year: That's over R1000 at today's exchange rate which for some newly qualified and young PHs is still a significant amount. There's also nothing to say that amount might not rise considerably in the future and possibly on nothing more than the whim of the committee or the further collapse of the Rand.

As for "forcing people to do something" - What I mean by that is you're forcing people to become members whether they like it or not, like the current policies of the association or not and/or can afford it or not.

As for a Govt requirement....... Why I wonder do they want to make membership of PHASA compulsory so they can police the industry when they should be representing the interests of their members AND when the game dept(s) already have the power and ability to police their own game laws. If nothing else, it's a conflict of interests just like the lion wilding period betrayal was.

As for those "bad apples" you mention, they can already be driven out of the industry by the very people who issue the licences and whose job it currently is.

As for NATIONAL ACCREDITATION: You already have PROVINCIAL ACCREDITATION and all they needed to do to make it NATIONAL was to change the licencing so one licence covers the whole country and that is a policy that PHASA have been notably negligent in pursuing for decades.

I'l bet a pound to a pinch of the brown stuff that 5 years from now, the vast majority of ordinary members will say this move was a bloody disaster both for individual members and for the industry as a whole.

quote:

Originally posted by leopards valley safaris:
Steve
It was suggested from the floor that the subs be 1 days wage for PHs $ 100 ( R 980) and $ 300 for outfitters R 2900.

As stated before, things get put to a vote, if people, general membership, outfitters and PHs in the industry, don't like it it doesn't fly , simple.
Not sure where you're coming from ? Forcing people to do things etc ,they don't and can't force the membership without a quorum at the AGM.
People are not going to vote for things that will screw themselves, that includes the EXCO.

It is also a Government requirement, so basically if you're unhappy then you need to contact the relevant government dept. Hell if I know who.

It's a NATIONAL ACCREDITATION.

It is what it is and if it gets off the ground will give PHASA the teeth it needs, to expel all an any PH an Outfitter that is found guilty of contravening the law as is currently set out.
All the bad apples can finally be expelled or reprimanded, warned.
CHEERS.

Dave, that is good news. Hopefully PHASA will actually use their role as a national organization to proactively seek to address unprofessional conduct by members and then let the public know when action is taken. A good place to start would be with the South Africans that are bribing their way in the national parks in Zim.

All RSA PHs & Outfitters are & (pretty much) always have been required to hold a current PH/Outfitter licence issued by the game department(s)that can be temporarily or permanently removed from the holder should he infringe the rules & standards etc in any way & at any time.


And we all know that South Africa has more than its share of crooked individuals masquerading" as "professional hunters".

Even in other counytries.

How come nothing is done to them?

quote:

All RSA PHs & Outfitters are & (pretty much) always have been required to hold a current PH/Outfitter licence issued by the game department(s)that can be temporarily or permanently removed from the holder should he infringe the rules & standards etc in any way & at any time.

Substitute 'RSA' with Tanzania and the rule holds valid for that country as well.
There is no distinction as far as I know between a PH and an OUTFITTER - the license qualifies the INDIVIDUAL to be a PH regardless if he owns the company or is an employee.
An outfitter does not necessarily have to be a PH unless he chooses to actively participate in the guiding of clients.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
All RSA PHs & Outfitters are & (pretty much) always have been required to hold a current PH/Outfitter licence issued by the game department(s)that can be temporarily or permanently removed from the holder should he infringe the rules & standards etc in any way & at any time.


And we all know that South Africa has more than its share of crooked individuals masquerading" as "professional hunters".

Even in other counytries.

How come nothing is done to them?

Saeed, in 1994, the country changed.
4 provinces turned into 9. Each province is a federation so 9 separate game departments.

They just could not keep track of multiple outfitters registered in multiple provinces.

If his license was removed in province A he still used license from province B.

So not 100% sure how it's going to work! but all PHs are going onto one Data base and all PHs have to re-register ? So they don't even have a clue who is current.

All current PHs and outfitters who are up to date, will be given NQF 4 level diplomas in Professional hunting.

New PHs will then need to do a 4 yr university Technikon degree.

PHASA works closely with government and was approached by government to become a PROFESSIONAL BODY for NATIONAL ACCREDITATION to govern the industry.
PHASA is currently applying for PROFESSIONAL BODY STATUS in our field.
It has not been awarded yet.

This will bring the Professional hunting community in line with ALL other PROFESSIONAL bodies in the country.

We will have the same Recognized qualifications as Plumbers, electricians, civil engineers, quantity surveyors etc a paper degree in Professional hunting.

As per how it's policing is going to work not sure.

quote:

New PHs will then need to do a 4 yr university degree.

Firstly, what kind of money are you talking about to pursue this degree?

Secondly, a 4 year degree will then qualify the person to be a PH so that he can make a miserable, yes, a miserable $100 a day (working day) when for the same duration he could probably get a lawyer's degree which will have far more lucrative dividends.

Another scenario: Take the son of a well-known, established and reputable outfitter: the son graduated from high school, did not pursue University or maybe did but obtained a degree in something other than what you are proposing and joined the old man, learning through the years (there are many of these chaps around)and has qualified himself in all there is to know about guiding and running the business alongside his old man and thereafter.

Are you suggesting this individual has to go to University and obtain a degree, in which field - Wildlife & Business Management - and will it be a question of "comply or shut shop"?

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

New PHs will then need to do a 4 yr university degree.

Firstly, what kind of money are you talking about to pursue this degree?

Secondly, a 4 year degree will then qualify the person to be a PH so that he can make a miserable, yes, a miserable $100 a day (working day) when for the same duration he could probably get a lawyer's degree which will have far more lucrative dividends.

Another scenario: Take the son of a well-known, established and reputable outfitter: the son graduated from high school, did not pursue University or maybe did but obtained a degree in something other than what you are proposing and joined the old man, learning through the years (there are many of these chaps around)and has qualified himself in all there is to know about guiding and running the business alongside his old man and thereafter.

Are you suggesting this individual has to go to University and obtain a degree, in which field - Wildlife & Business Management - and will it be a question of "comply or shut shop"?

I suggest you write to the department of environmental Affairs of South Africa and ask them.

Saeed

Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators...... so does Zim & most if not all of the other African countries that licence PHs/Outfitters but you are of course dead right in that nowhere near enough is or has ever been done about them. To me, that's the fault of the various game depts whose job it is to enforce the game laws of their respective countries. They all know each other and contact is only ever an email or a phone call away and if they don't have formal procedures for such actions, they damn well should have.

Dave,

You're talking about the new training/exam system that has been discussed by govt & PH schools etc for some years. The same course that at least in the early planning stages had days (at least) of training on subjects such as psychobiology etc but not a minute on any aspect of ballistics or firearms etc...... the same course that is so full of BS, it'll mean the RSA hunting industry will probably take a dramatic nose dive when the currently operating PHs get too old/sick to work and the younger generation won't be able to afford to do the 4 years training & study. In my opinion it'll be a super mega bugly stuff up.

Ah well...... that's Africa run by Africans for you & I'll be interested to see how things turn out!

Fujo

Dead right!

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators......

No one is suggesting otherwise. Fact remains that there are a number of South African PHs and outfitters that are taking advantage of the lawless and corrupt state of affairs in Zim and are offering hunts that are positively reprehensible. Fact also remains that I am not aware of any South African professional hunting association that has spoken out against such actions or taken any action against its members for their involvement in and facilitation of such hunts. Why would they tacitly endorse such actions through silence and inaction?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators......

No one is suggesting otherwise. Fact remains that there are a number of South African PHs and outfitters that are taking advantage of the lawless and corrupt state of affairs in Zim and are offering hunts that are positively reprehensible. Fact also remains that I am not aware of any South African professional hunting association that has spoken out against such actions or taken any action against its members for their involvement in and facilitation of such hunts. Why would they tacitly endorse such actions through silence and inaction?

PHASA can only act if there is a complaint. Have any complaints been lodged yet that anybody knows of?

SA outfitters operating in Zimbabwe do so under the auspices of Zimbabwe qualified PH's and outfitters. I have no idea if that is legal or not, fact is I am not aware of any complaints that have been lodged in this regard with PHASA.

quote:

Originally posted by leopards valley safaris:

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

New PHs will then need to do a 4 yr university degree.

Firstly, what kind of money are you talking about to pursue this degree?

Secondly, a 4 year degree will then qualify the person to be a PH so that he can make a miserable, yes, a miserable $100 a day (working day) when for the same duration he could probably get a lawyer's degree which will have far more lucrative dividends.

Another scenario: Take the son of a well-known, established and reputable outfitter: the son graduated from high school, did not pursue University or maybe did but obtained a degree in something other than what you are proposing and joined the old man, learning through the years (there are many of these chaps around)and has qualified himself in all there is to know about guiding and running the business alongside his old man and thereafter.

Are you suggesting this individual has to go to University and obtain a degree, in which field - Wildlife & Business Management - and will it be a question of "comply or shut shop"?

I suggest you write to the department of environmental Affairs of South Africa and ask them.

Dave - I'm not pointing the finger at you, just commenting on the above. A 4 yr college degree is now a requirement to become a PH, really??? I'm not sure I have ever heard of a dumber requirement for a hunting guide/PH, etc?? That's all about one thing - someone wants to get paid (ie., the college, etc) its not about necessary education to be a hunting guide.

Good heavens, its just hunting - its not brain surgery! Talk about making a mole hill into a mountain. Like every process in life, "experience" and repeating the process is what makes someone good at something - not sitting in a classroom. A real shame for the young guys, IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Pieter Kriel:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators......

No one is suggesting otherwise. Fact remains that there are a number of South African PHs and outfitters that are taking advantage of the lawless and corrupt state of affairs in Zim and are offering hunts that are positively reprehensible. Fact also remains that I am not aware of any South African professional hunting association that has spoken out against such actions or taken any action against its members for their involvement in and facilitation of such hunts. Why would they tacitly endorse such actions through silence and inaction?

PHASA can only act if there is a complaint. Have any complaints been lodged yet that anybody knows of?

SA outfitters operating in Zimbabwe do so under the auspices of Zimbabwe qualified PH's and outfitters. I have no idea if that is legal or not, fact is I am not aware of any complaints that have been lodged in this regard with PHASA.

Are you suggesting that PHASA is unaware this is happening? So if something is happening in front of their eyes and they are aware of it, unless someone complains they are powerless, or lack the will, to act? Come on now.

Maybe another way to approach this issue is:

1. Can we all agree that bribing public officials to secure the right to hunt in national parks is a bad thing?
2. Can we all agree that those that are associated with such activities should be sanctioned and are engaged in activities antithetical to hunting?
3. Can we all agree that it is common knowledge that this is occurring in the national parks in Zim?
4. Can we all agree that a professional association that is aware of such activities should act against members involved in such activities?

So just what aspect of the foregoing do folks disagree with?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Maybe another way to approach this issue is:

1. Can we all agree that bribing public officials to secure the right to hunt in national parks is a bad thing?
2. Can we all agree that those that are associated with such activities should be sanctioned and are engaged in activities antithetical to hunting?
3. Can we all agree that it is common knowledge that this is occurring in the national parks in Zim?
4. Can we all agree that a professional association that is aware of such activities should act against members involved in such activities?

So just what aspect of the foregoing do folks disagree with?

Mike
only 1600 memebers to PHASA, over 9000 registered game ranches not sure how many are outfitters.

We are also an African country run by Africans.
PHASA can ONLY ACT OB MEMBERS THAT VOLONTEER TO JOIN.
The rest is African Law, just like in Zim

The real trick is . . . Once identified, how do you stop them marketing at trade shows?

quote:

I suggest you write to the department of environmental Affairs of South Africa and ask them.

Dave:

I have absolutely no reason to do so as it doesn't affect me, but If you lot are happy to accept such crap that's your problem.

Attempting to compare the hunting industry with Barristers, Civil Engineers, Quantity Surveyors, Chartered Accountants, etc. is out of context and plain ridiculous !

The above are professions that require University Degrees and as you had specifically indicated:

"New PHs will then need to do a 4 yr university degree".

raises the question: which UNIVERSITY offers a B.A. (Degree) in Professional Hunting and by reason of wishing to further one's education, could even go for a PHd. and become a Professor in that field.

If you wanted to say that someone with intentions in pursuing a career in the hunting is required to attend Wildlife College and obtain a DIPLOMA of sorts that will qualify him/her to participate in this trade would be understandable and a totally different kettle of fish.

One just needs to differentiate between a Degree, Diploma and City & Guilds.

The vast majority of RSA PHs who operate in other African countries do so perfectly legally under a cover hunting agreement with locally licenced PHs & PHs from other African countries, including most, if not all of the very well known PHs from those other African countries use the same cover hunting agreements to hunt RSA...... They are not a problem & the fact so many people think they are shows how little they know about what they are posting.

ANYONE hunting in NPs etc are (TTBOMK) breaking the law but catching them & proving it is another matter. More importantly, let's remember that whoever pays the bribe needs someone to pay it to & probably a local inbetween man to arrange such a deal & as we should all know, Zim is a law unto itself & therein lies the insurmountable problem.

Nothing will change until all staff in all GDs throughout Africa become uncorruptable & I tell you now, that ain't ever going to happen!

I also agree with Fujo about the 4 year degree course......... it's bloody ridiculous!

[/QUOTE]
If you wanted to say that someone with intentions in pursuing a career in the hunting is required to attend Wildlife College and obtain a DIPLOMA of sorts that will qualify him/her to participate in this trade would be understandable and a totally different kettle of fish.
One just needs to differentiate between a Degree, Diploma and City & Guilds. [/QUOTE]

Fujo
As I understand it it's a NQF4 so that's a Diploma, not a degree.(Sorry if I confused anyone)
The course is offered by the Port Elizabeth Teknikon, not sure what the name of the course is. It's not all class room it's practical years also. Again not sure.
I do know that the bigger PH schools are also involved and they would probably have a better idea.

And Steve +1 the SA guys are always being painted black.
Not everyone hunting SA, NAMIBIA, MOZAMBIQUE, TANZANIA are natural born citizens.

Ivan Carter is well respected and above reproach in my book and he hunts most of Africa legally...My point.
Regards

Whether it's called a degree, a diploma, a C&G, an NQF or a blue banana is irrelevant but what is important is what the new course will do to the industry, those involved in it & those hunters who will be affected by it & from what I know from the PH academy guys, it's going to be a disaster for all involved.

To my mind, the biggest problem with an association being given that sort of power is that they are almost all now run like businesses and you end up with an SCI situation right here in Africa.

It then is no longer about serving the goals and needs of the PH community, but rather ensuring employment and "Success" of the management.

To comment on Navaluk. Zimbabwe is very complicated and made even more so with Politics and National Parks being broke. Zim has 2 associations, SOAZ (the operators) and ZPHGA (the Ph's and guides).
they are joined at the hip but also are at loggerheads on certain issues being wages, ethics ect. ZPHGA and SOAZ are very aware of what is going on in the National parks. anyone that says they are not doing anything, is clearly not an active member and is not aware of his own industry. the problem is Parks are broke and have exploited hunting "ration" quotas in the parks. these quotas have been around forever but were originally to train it's own staff, and provide meat. the problem is they started charging people to "shoot" these quotas on their behalf in the inflation years. ZPHGA and SOAZ have in the past decided to be pro-active and do these with nominated Ethical outfitters. unfortunately, parks noticed how lucrative this is and since then these quotas have kept increasing to ridiculous levels. The botanical Gardens in Harare now "allegedly" has a "elephant and buffalo on Ration quota" that is transferred to the parks! further ZPHGA, consists of Pro-guides too. This community and most PH's are dead set against commercial hunting in any National park. So as far as I know both associations are now dead against any kind of commercial hunting in any National park,even though it is "legal". ZPHGA would appear to have no teeth, this is true. but it's not for the lack of trying. The only thing they can police, like all associations, is it's members. I can only imagine the political pressures that come with being on these associations committees. Both associations have lost the majority of the members due to the loss of hunting areas, so they have major financial constraints. SOAZ have not even been allowed to engage with Parks about this issue in the past. I'm told here things are changing for the better and parks have asked for proposals. I do believe a special committee between parks and SOAZ has been formed to solve this problem but unless SOAZ comes up with $, it will stay just that.
Know this, if you hunt in a national park, it is short sighted and WILL be the death of our industry in ALL aspects. Plus chances are you will not get your trophy exported.
so as for your friends in Zim, i would imagine they are misinformed and should be more active instead of just complaining.

muck racker thanks for a well laid out explanation. Clearly Zimbabwe is a relatively small community of hunters and guides who must get along with the government where they can impact their livelihood. That's true here in the US as well.
I suppose there really is nothing that can be done without people taking unacceptable risk to individual livelihoods which are obviously a more important consideration than wiping out the parks. I just wish as a potential client hunter, there was a published list of who was involved even one time in these hunts so I could choose not to hire them or their employers. It's also probably too obvious to state, but without foreign hunters willing to hunt parks, this wouldn't be an issue, yet we don't stop it either. So we are all left to cry shame because in the end we don't want to do whatever it takes. For me, all I am willing to do is to hunt elsewhere in the hopes that it starts a trend that drys up the money which of course is why these hunts exist. Clearly if hunters shunned Zim as a whole of where believed to be planning such shunning, I'd bet real money that this park hunting would be over as of tomorrow.

Navaluk, good post however there are many very good and top Zim operators that will not get involved in park hunting and surely they need to be supported.

quote:

Originally posted by INTREPID SAFARIS:
Navaluk, good post however there are many very good and top Zim operators that will not get involved in park hunting and surely they need to be supported.

Hear, hear . . . without their efforts the wildlife in Zim would be completely devastated.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Pieter Kriel:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators......

No one is suggesting otherwise. Fact remains that there are a number of South African PHs and outfitters that are taking advantage of the lawless and corrupt state of affairs in Zim and are offering hunts that are positively reprehensible. Fact also remains that I am not aware of any South African professional hunting association that has spoken out against such actions or taken any action against its members for their involvement in and facilitation of such hunts. Why would they tacitly endorse such actions through silence and inaction?

PHASA can only act if there is a complaint. Have any complaints been lodged yet that anybody knows of?

SA outfitters operating in Zimbabwe do so under the auspices of Zimbabwe qualified PH's and outfitters. I have no idea if that is legal or not, fact is I am not aware of any complaints that have been lodged in this regard with PHASA.

Are you suggesting that PHASA is unaware this is happening? So if something is happening in front of their eyes and they are aware of it, unless someone complains they are powerless, or lack the will, to act? Come on now.

If the hunts are legally conducted (as stated) how can there be cause for any complaints? I'm definitely not trying to say I approve.

Same applies when a Zim PH hunts with his clients in South Africa under the auspices of a legal local outfitter. No complaints, no problems.

PHASA is way bigger than most of us north of SA , as a ex CEO , Chairman and exco member of the Botswana hunting Assoc , we faced a few incidents where it was alleged members did x or y , one time we took action and mr X and Y went to lawyers , we did not have the funds to contest , so were forced to issue an apology and readmit the member , when out of africa tendered on areas we advised the Ministry about the companies track record in africa and were advised they had committed no crime in Bots and so could not be barred from tendering , it became clear we were toothless without legislative powers which were never granted to us, so although the rumor is that government wants certain outfitters out , we were never given the power to do so, the Assoc also has a code of conduct that all PHs and outfitters had to sign , another lesson learnt just because they sign does not mean they change character. The only true power lies in the client , or the hunting clubs such as SCI or DSC , it was through client attrition that the bad apples collapsed in Botswana not because of our Assoc or the government.one of the reasons Dereck Joibert who hates hunting is apparently due to some things he heard or witnessed , we have called him out on some of these allegations but he also knows he will be taken to court by the parties if he cannot give hard evidence , hearsay counts for nothing . At the end of the day it's up to each and every member to help clean up the sport.

quote:

Originally posted by Pieter Kriel:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Pieter Kriel:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators......

No one is suggesting otherwise. Fact remains that there are a number of South African PHs and outfitters that are taking advantage of the lawless and corrupt state of affairs in Zim and are offering hunts that are positively reprehensible. Fact also remains that I am not aware of any South African professional hunting association that has spoken out against such actions or taken any action against its members for their involvement in and facilitation of such hunts. Why would they tacitly endorse such actions through silence and inaction?

PHASA can only act if there is a complaint. Have any complaints been lodged yet that anybody knows of?

SA outfitters operating in Zimbabwe do so under the auspices of Zimbabwe qualified PH's and outfitters. I have no idea if that is legal or not, fact is I am not aware of any complaints that have been lodged in this regard with PHASA.

Are you suggesting that PHASA is unaware this is happening? So if something is happening in front of their eyes and they are aware of it, unless someone complains they are powerless, or lack the will, to act? Come on now.

If the hunts are legally conducted (as stated) how can there be cause for any complaints? I'm definitely not trying to say I approve.

Same applies when a Zim PH hunts with his clients in South Africa under the auspices of a legal local outfitter. No complaints, no problems.

Surely you jest. You know good and well that these hunts are only allowed because some outfitter has given a backhander to a government official to get their signature on a piece of paper . . . anyone that seriously believes there is no cause for a complaint against the offending outfitter needs to have their moral compass checked.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Surely you jest. You know good and well that these hunts are only allowed because some outfitter has given a backhander to a government official to get their signature on a piece of paper . . . anyone that seriously believes there is no cause for a complaint against the offending outfitter needs to have their moral compass checked.

Mike

Exactly what scenario are you referring to?

If you mean park hunts in Zim then the crimes are occurring in that country and it is the Zim courts that need to pursue all those involved, including those who gave, arranged and took the bribe(s) as well as those who guide and take part in the hunts....... and that is a case for the Zimbabwe police & justice system etc. If those entities choose not to do anything about it then what do you expect another body with no legal powers and in another country to do, because if no-one is prosecuted, no-one can be found guilty or be punished so therefore there's nothing anyone else can do.

I'm all for catching and severely punishing such people but the fact is, the fault lies in Zimbabwe not in RSA.

It also raises the question of should the international hunters also face prosecution and possible Zim jail time and how would the world, especially the hunting world feel about that? (Note I only pose the question and don't voice an opinion on that particular aspect)...... it's easy to say the hunters should also face a Zim jail but if just one did, you watch the rest of the hunting clients of the world suddenly get chary about having anything at all to do with Zim.

So let me make sure I understand, your position is that if you have a South African outfitter that is a member of PHASA and that South African outfitter goes into Zim, pays a bribe to secure the right to hunt in a national park and shoots a national treasure, that PHASA should not get involved in that situation? So why then should SCI take action against a group like Out of Africa, since Out of Africa did nothing wrong in Arizona? Bottom line, are suggesting that a professional hunting organization that is purportedly committed to the promotion of ethical hunting by its members, that is aware of unethical conduct detrimental to the sport of hunting should turn a blind eye to such conduct simply because of where the conduct occurred?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So let me make sure I understand, your position is that if you have a South African outfitter that is a member of PHASA and that South African outfitter goes into Zim, pays a bribe to secure the right to hunt in a national park and shoots a national treasure, that PHASA should not get involved in that situation? So why then should SCI take action against a group like Out of Africa, since Out of Africa did nothing wrong in Arizona? Bottom line, are suggesting that a professional hunting organization that is purportedly committed to the promotion of ethical hunting by its members, that is aware of unethical conduct detrimental to the sport of hunting should turn a blind eye to such conduct simply because of where the conduct occurred?

I don't have a position because I'm not entirely sure what exact scenario you're referring to. Hence my question "Exactly what scenario are you referring to?"

However, in the scenario you describe, my point is it's unlikely PHASA would be able or willing to do anything because they would need a Zim legal ruling before they could take the first step and even if they could do something, all they could do (at the moment) is temporarily or permanently remove his membership and even that could probably be challenged in court because without a Zim court ruling there is no absolute proof.

I'm not saying what's just or unjust or right or wrong. I'm just saying that is the current case. The first thing they'd need is absolute proof and the only way that can be obtained is for people to be found guilty in a Zim court of law.

Unfortunately, Zim is a three ring circus with Mad Bob as the ringmaster and we all know these things are highly unlikely to ever come to court.

If you asked me if I thought these people should be brought to justice and punished? then my reply would be yes, of course they should but the unfortunate fact is if the crime is committed in Zim then that's where the justice should be (severely) meted out but it ain't ever going to happen & the only way things might change in that respect is if the western world decided to step in and restore justice & democracy & they've had something like 30 years to do it but have chosen not to do so...... so don't expect anything to change in the foreseeable future.

I guess we could chase this around and around the tree forever so this will be my last word on the subject. You can have the last word.

I think you want to focus on all the reasons why PHASA cannot or should not do anything. I tend to approach it from the other angle, if PHASA wanted to and cared enough about the issue, there is no question that they could do something. You say PHASA needs a legal ruling in Zim first to act (SCI did not apparently need a legal ruling in Zim first to act against Out of Africa however), why? Look these guys advertise the hunts in the parks. Why couldn't PHASA simply say, (1) as an organization we find commercial hunting in national parks by our members to be antithetical to the interests of hunting, (2) any member determined to have conducted such hunts, participated in such hunts or participated in the marketing of such hunts is subject to removal as a member. Instead of making excuses, why wouldn't PHASA try to do something . . . in my opinion, it is because they do not care. If they did care, then just like SCI did with Out of Africa, they would find a way to act.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I guess we could chase this around and around the tree forever so this will be my last word on the subject. You can have the last word.

I think you want to focus on all the reasons why PHASA cannot or should not do anything. I tend to approach it from the other angle, if PHASA wanted to and cared enough about the issue, there is no question that they could do something. You say PHASA needs a legal ruling in Zim first to act (SCI did not apparently need a legal ruling in Zim first to act against Out of Africa however), why? Look these guys advertise the hunts in the parks. Why couldn't PHASA simply say, (1) as an organization we find commercial hunting in national parks by our members to be antithetical to the interests of hunting, (2) any member determined to have conducted such hunts, participated in such hunts or participated in the marketing of such hunts is subject to removal as a member. Instead of making excuses, why wouldn't PHASA try to do something . . . in my opinion, it is because they do not care. If they did care, then just like SCI did with Out of Africa, they would find a way to act.

No Mike you've got it wrong again. I'm not supporting PHASA particularly. All I'm doing is pointing out the glaringly obvious point that PHASA would need proof of wrongdoing AND a complaint to them from someone before they could reasonably be expected to take any action (innocent until PROVEN guilty) and what action they can currently take even if they do have proof AND complaint is, in the real world minimal. If the culprit isn't a PHASA member, they can't do anything at all.

However, if you think PHASA could do something, what do you think they could do and on what grounds do you think they could do it?

As regards SCI & OoA, thet's a totally different kettle of fish and the difference is or at least should be glaringly obvious to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together......... the difference being SCI members were being ripped off (for YEARS) and (for YEARS) were making complaints to the SCI ethics committee who (for YEARS) were either completely ignoring the complaints or even worse were supporting OoA and saying the complaints were unreasonable!

As we all know, the reason the so called Ethics Committee chose to do bugger all (for YEARS) about the complaints was that the Chairman of the so called Ethics Committee was also the lawyer for OoA.

It's the Lado come again, until the people of Zim clean house. South Africa has its own intractable problems and worse is comming for them.

quote:

Originally posted by Navaluk:
It's the Lado come again, until the people of Zim clean house. South Africa has its own intractable problems and worse is comming for them.

Never were truer words spoken.

quote:

quote:
If you violate the ethical standards for lawyers

No one likes lawyers until they need one and when they do, the client is usually the one (in my experience) who doesn't want to fight fair.

Fired client in my shop!

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Pieter Kriel:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Pieter Kriel:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Not just RSA has a number of dodgy operators......

No one is suggesting otherwise. Fact remains that there are a number of South African PHs and outfitters that are taking advantage of the lawless and corrupt state of affairs in Zim and are offering hunts that are positively reprehensible. Fact also remains that I am not aware of any South African professional hunting association that has spoken out against such actions or taken any action against its members for their involvement in and facilitation of such hunts. Why would they tacitly endorse such actions through silence and inaction?

PHASA can only act if there is a complaint. Have any complaints been lodged yet that anybody knows of?

SA outfitters operating in Zimbabwe do so under the auspices of Zimbabwe qualified PH's and outfitters. I have no idea if that is legal or not, fact is I am not aware of any complaints that have been lodged in this regard with PHASA.

Are you suggesting that PHASA is unaware this is happening? So if something is happening in front of their eyes and they are aware of it, unless someone complains they are powerless, or lack the will, to act? Come on now.

If the hunts are legally conducted (as stated) how can there be cause for any complaints? I'm definitely not trying to say I approve.

Same applies when a Zim PH hunts with his clients in South Africa under the auspices of a legal local outfitter. No complaints, no problems.

Surely you jest. You know good and well that these hunts are only allowed because some outfitter has given a backhander to a government official to get their signature on a piece of paper . . . anyone that seriously believes there is no cause for a complaint against the offending outfitter needs to have their moral compass checked.

Mike I think I see what you are referring to.

The South Africans are using local PH's and Outfitters who do not have well-known companies or even websites. They approach these guys with their own clients and make use of the local PH for trophy export- and hunting rights purposes. Even if a South African (or any other nationality PH) bribes a politician for hunting rights they still cannot complete the TR2 form for trophy export purposes by mere fact of not being a registered Zimbabwean national, and by not being a registered Zimbabwean PH.

If the local Zim PH backhands someone I have no idea, neither do I know if the South Africans eventually do backhand someone also. Fact of the matter is all the paperwork is in order which makes it a legal hunt.