Well Gentlemen

What is going on in the discussion regarding Mahkulus RSA hunt for Black Maned Lion - isn't that the hole problem regarding RSA?

Let me explain:

RSA is a very big country - and you can literatly hunt every thing in every possible way!
Only the man who was hunting know the detailes regarding the hunt - and I belive some people can be fooled!

But is it us who shall judge? I think not! Some people like to shoot clays, and some times they shot game as clays! Some people don't give a damn about the trophy (here ment as horn lenght, SCI measure so on), if they just hunted the game the right way! Some people wants to shoot the biggest trophy what ever it takes - and don't mind if its canned hunt or not!

I my self would like my trophys hunted the right way and a mature (over mature is fine by me) trophy.

I'll rather track a 30" cape buffalo with a good boss down, than I would shoot a 50" bull with soft boss out of the car! When I go hunting it's for the hunt, to sweat and suffer!

But I like to shoot good pheasants on a cold December day to!

If you choose RSA for a safari you must be aware that there a many fenced areas - and that some of the fences are about the size of my garden (I live in a flat!) - but there might be a huge trophy in there!And some hunts are as good as it gets! Only you who was hunting there will know the truth - and I dont care as long you're happy with your trophy and think that you can justify the hunt!

You could also go to CAR or Tanzania etc. and there will be no fenced areas - so people wouldn't mistrust you - but your trophy might be shot from the car window - and your hunting bodies can't see!

Everyone wants a huge black maned lion tracked down by foot - but gentlemen only one out of ten thousand lions is like that! Most lions tracked down by foot has almost no mane! But I think that they are the very best lions around!

Best regards

Mads

Mads,

That is a very good post of yours ... of cource you are 100% correct, who are you or me to sit in judgement of a hunt for someone else ... they pay the money and hunt to their satisfaction, not to my or any other hunters rules ... of cource we can have an opinion on the hunt, but that is all it must be our personal opinion and not made in a derogatory tone

Of cource, the hunt must be legal and all the other requirements as set down for each particular country

You make good sense Mads

Regards, Peter

Mads,

Really good post! I would not shoot any game behind a fence no matter how large the enclosure, of course, that's my preference and if someone else chooses to do just that, then they're paying the money, I hope they enjoy themselves. Thanks for the post, very well stated.

Joe

Mads,

You are right of course, as we have no right to judge how others get their trophy.

My only objection is to the fact that some of these people CLAIM to have hunted a fair chase hunt.

I can give you many examples of my own hunts.

We would be driving along, and see a good trophy animal - an example is that 49" buffalo I shot in Zimbabwe - we jump out of the truck and shoot it.

That, to me, is a shoot, and not a hunt.

Now when we find the tracks of some buffalo at a water hole, follow them for hours on end, see them lying in teh shade, and try our best to get close and shoot one.

That is a hunt.

------------------
saeed@ emirates.net.ae

www.accuratereloading.com

In 1998, PHASA looked into the canned lion hunting that was being conducted in RSA. The review was conducted after a TV production supposedly exposed the canned hunting operations in the country. The show made no distinction between shooting circus/zoo animals and shooting animals that were raised for hunting. While PHASA denounced the shooting of tame animals they did not reject the shooting of hand-reared lions. SCI on the other hand, denounced any non fair chase lion hunting.

I am not condoning nor defending these operations. In 1998, I spent $18,000 and 14 days chasing lion in the Klaserie and came up empty handed. I was successful on a nice buff and a few plainsgame, but no lion. In a fair chase environment, there are no guarantees - that�s hunting.

I do feel there is a double standard when it comes to lion hunting VS plainsgame hunting. Most of the hunting that you will do in RSA is conducted on game farms. This is private property with high fence and animals that have been purchased for the expressed purpose of attracting hunters. If a hunting outfit purchases 20 impala, 20 blesbuck, a couple of gensbuck, and an eland knowing that they will be shot by some hunter, what is the difference when it comes to lion?

The lion operation that I saw outside of Kimberly is no different than the other farm hunting experiences. The area was approximately 250 hectare and at the time there were three lion active in the area. There were fed three times a week by truck. While I did not actually see the lion, I did see pictures of the animals. The sickening part was the price for each was based upon the size of the mane. The cost was in the $35,000 range with a guarantee of taking home an MGM grade lion.

When operations like the YO ranch and other exotic farms here in the US offer African animals, what is the difference? You know where the animals are, you know the size of the animal (most have been measured before they were released, and you know that you will be 100% successful in shooting the animal. This is canned hunting at its finest. Why is shooing high fenced lion any different?

The difference is that hunting lion, buffalo, and elephant should be special.
Hunting for these magnificent beasts must not reduced to the equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel.

I didn't jump on Makhulu; I was hoping to hear the details of his experience. I could have then made up my mind about the fairness of the chase.

BTW, I know of a man who shot a bongo ($15K) at the Y-O; he was so adversely affected by the experience, he went to the C.A.R. and hunted one up the right way!

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

[This message has been edited by GeorgeS (edited 01-31-2002).]

GeorgeS - I agree with your assessment, however, you have defined the proverbial �slippery slope�. If lion, buff, and ele are different, why not a majestic kudu or sable? Subjective exceptions are difficult to justify to the average guy.

ZD,
They're different because they are dangerous game. In Africa, they used to refer to plains game and big game, with big game being the Big Five. I still hold to that distinction, but I'd add hippo on dry ground to the big game list.

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

Mats....I liked your post...all except the "sweat & suffer" part. I never understand why some think they need to suffer to earn a trohy....work hard, yes! be prepared, yes! be appreciative and respect the animal, yes! But to feel you need to suffer and sweat ??/

Here's a thought...if you want to suffer and sweat how about getting married and liveing in Mississippi (no offense Mississippi but I've been to Biloxi).

Mads,

Very well put. The fence, or lack thereof, doesn't necessarily qualitate the hunt.

George & Zero,

Indeed the slope is slippery. I don't believe things are black and white in regards to fair chase, and at some point the difference in degree changes the character of the hunt.

If the lion or the buff was on a very huge fenced ranch, as large as it's own normal range, would that qualify? What if the lion hunted as it normally would? An expensieve lion, to be sure, with all that plainsgame eaten up.

Personally, I wouldn't want to hunt a hand-fed animal under any circumstances. Nor do I care to hunt an animal that exists outside it's natural range. (No Texas Bongo for me)

But what is the modern hunting experience about anyway.. but a recreation of the way things USED to be, regardless of where you are hunting.

So where do you draw your limits? I believe there are many ethical answers.

I'm not going to judge anyone for any legal hunting method. It's way to easy for us to become judgmental and divide our ranks. I would like pose this question to all who suggest hunting giant fenced properties with wild free roaming game.

Would you turn down a hunt for brown bears in Alaska on any of the SE Islands? Remember they are fenced by the Ocean! How about wolves, black bear, deer, wolverine? Would that hunting be considered unsporting and unethical? Few if any animals will ever attempt to leave and most will die if they try. It sure possible for them to escape but it's much more difficult then a Kudu jumping a fence which happens all the time.

I suppose since I have worked in both locations I have a good understanding of both. Take for instance the hunting of Elk in Central Washington. The State has put up an 8 foot high fence 50 miles long on both sides of interstate 90 to prevent the elk migration across the busy intersatate. It runs into the more rugged section of the cascades which no herd of Elk will cross as it not elk habitat and far to rugged and extreme for them to even consider. The north side of this area is a residential and orchard community with elk fences to protect the orchards. The east side is a boundry know as the Columbia river. Again the area is contained and the Elk cannot realisticly leave. It's all open to hunting and it's a large area. About the size of many SA ranchs used for hunting. Will the game taken here be considered less of a hunt? They cannot get out. Why would they, the habitat is perfect for them and it's doubtful any would leave if they could. No different then a ranch in SA.

There are plenty of locations throughout Washington BC and AK that have Mountian goats available for hunting. In many of these places the goats will not have a chance to escape. Once your on the mountain with them they will circumnavigate the peaks but will never drop down into the old growth to escape. I have seen many shot while standing and looking at the hunter. They were more or less out of options unless they chose to enter the old growth forest and hide. They don't do well in closed forested areas so don't even attempt it.

Is hunting an animal on 20,000 acreas which has been born and lived it's whole life wild and all it knows is the trail network it has grown up with different then if there were no fences? The animals may have never seen the fence in their whole life anyhow?

Is shooting a treed bear or lion captive with noplace to hide or run a fair or more "sporting". All are legal and well accepted hunting practices. It's Hysterical to think folks judge others for hunting a huge game farm but will shoot a bear on an island in Alaska or a lion up a tree put up there by 4-6 dogs.

We need to consider what it important to each of us and make sure we are happy and secure in "OUR" own decisions. Not every person is going to climb mountians for a goat, stop a charging wild lion in Tanzania, or spend a week on foot tracking a 100 pound elephant.

Some folks have limited capacity and time. It does not mean they are Bad hunters it means they are different hunters. Every Archery hunter alive could come here and rip us a new A$$ for taking game at 150 yards with those big powerful rifles. Yet we feel it's plenty sporting.

I was a very opinionated and judgemental guy for a long time. Now I look at the amount of guys I have guided and I have seen them shaking from total joy and happieness with a trophy they have dreamed of their whole life. Should I say Well To bad your bear was on an Island it was not real hunting. Or Wow imagine how impressive that Kudu would be if it was not on this 20,000 acre fenced ranch.

I have become a lot more open minded where peoples ideals and interests are concerned. Everyone has a different view and even though I don't agree with all styles of hunting I don't have to choose to hunt using those styles or methods, nor does anyone else.

------------------
Be very patient, remember the second mouse gets the cheese

I think the difference is self-sustainability.

If a fenced operation is large enough that the natural flora can support the stock, without supplemental feeding or planting by the owners, then it is no different than an unfenced area that can sustain the wildlife.

Although some species migrate, many live and die within a mile or so of the spot they were born, even without fences.

However, if man must help the animals survive (beyond what we might do for unfenced wildlife in times of depravation) then the animals become more like livestock and less like wild game.

Large carnivores have to have a fair amount of space plus a sufficient food source, and from what I understand, elephants just are not adaptable to enclosures. When I was at Addo Elephant Park a few years ago there was talk of "thinning" the herd because the population had increased to the point the park was becoming overcrowded.

Buffalo could go either way, but I'd think the area would have to be extremely large to call a hunt "fair chase."

In simplistic terms, if you have to feed it, it's livestock; if it feeds itself, it MAY be wild game. There are probably exceptions to this, but those are the general guidelines I follow. Which means, depending on the circumstances, I have no problem hunting a fenced area.

[This message has been edited by Nitro Express (edited 01-31-2002).]

JJ,

You pay your money, take your game and enjoy whatever the experience brings you. Your analogy using SE Alaskan Islands bounded by the ocean as an example of "fenced" is really weak, not to mention the Goats on the mountains. Sounds like you're trying to convince whom? You or me? I'm convinced as far as I'm concerned; guess that leaves you.
I'm aware that you do this for a living and will agree that there are some people out there that will only have the opportunity to take their game in this manner. If that leaves them shaking in delight than so be it. If that is hunting to them, fine. Convince me that it's an "African Experience" that would leave me shaking? I think not. I'll take the mountains and the islands, self-contained as they are, every time.

Geusts,

Someone mentioned "ethics" again that is subjective ...

for example, is baiting for a leopard, or sitting around a waterhole in a blind with a bow ethical .... to one hunter it is, to another it is not, so we have a dilema dont we ??

Regards, Peter

ovis, I don't need to be convinced I have done all of them, I know the difference and have first hand experience on Little "put and take" game farms in South Africa and huge consessions in South Africa. The two are not the same and cannot be judged equally. Aside from them both being in South Afrcia they have no further common ground. I know the pro's and cons of each quite well, it's my business.

I want you to know I fully respect your opinion but would have preferred you explain why the fenced by the ocean is any different then fenced consessions in Africa when both properties are similiar in size and contain a fully self sufficient population of wild game given zero assistance for survival by man.

Each is managed by professionals and each has game which will escape, be hunted, or die of old age. Each includes only native species which live a free to roam life among plenty of predators.

I know many ranch type hunts in SA have a bad association with that style of hunting but let's be realistic would hunting in Kruger park be fair chase? How about Hluhluwe, or umflozi park? I can't imagine anyone with the personal experience of having visited those parks saying because they are fenced it's not hunting. Kruger is bigger then the many of the SE Islands in AK, but it is entirely fenced!

I'm have no desire to debate this becasue it's one of those personal issues we must each be comfortable with in our own minds and feel good about. It's a kind of no win arguement for those who have already made up their minds. My only hope in this was to play devils advocate and point out something few people seem to consider.

If all I knew of South Afrcia was the fist hunting ranch I was on I would have never gone back. Pre-releasing game from a horse trailer an hour before the clients arrive to hunt is what has given many SA ranch hunts a bad name. It is not the end of the story as far as fenced property goes. I have seen Kudu killed on some properties that were so old their teeth were worn to the gums and we had never seen that bull in our lives on the property. Did he live there so long his teeth were worn like that and nobody ever saw him in all that time?

I have hunted properties for a month which have a herd of 40+ buffalo and never seen the buffalo one time. Same with Rhinos and Elephants and Giraffes. You can hunt for a month from vehicle and never see the whole property. That's much different then the small "put and take" game ranches where non-indidgenous species are stocked giving so much of South Africa a bad name.

Your correct, pay your money and take your chance. Those who arrive on site so happy with the great price they are getting for a 7 animals five day safari should wonder why it's so cheap. It's most likely a "put and take" ranch not free roaming wild born game.

Think about how cheap it would be to have a square mile or two fenced and "stocked" with known trophies for your hunters, its shopping not hunting. Think about the difference of hunting on 15 square miles or more, much more for game born wild and living free their whole lives. Quite a different situation. I think the post by "Nitro Express" summed up the whole thing quite well in simple terms.

I know which I will never ever be associated with again!

------------------
Be very patient, remember the second mouse gets the cheese

[This message has been edited by JJHACK (edited 02-01-2002).]

JJ,

I agree 100% with you. Some people who have never hunted Africa, high fence or no high fence, just don't get the picture. Your analogy of the ABC Islands here in S.E. Ak. is spot on as far as I'm concerened. I've hunted them for 30 yrs. for bear and deer and it's just that there a little bigger "fenced in" preserve than most. So the question as usual come down to, how much land is enough? I've hunted a 55,000 acre fenced ranch in Namibia for 14 days, and only saw the fence twice. I hunted a ranch of over 85,000 acres in Zimbabwe that didn't have a single strand of wire around it but in most respects was just as fenced as those in Namibia or SA. Hows that? The owner had over 30 armed black scouts out on the ranch around the clock, 365 days a year to keep out poachers. The ranch was loaded with game. Step 50 yrds. outside the property line and the country was virtually barren of game. I tracked a big old Kudu for the better part of a day through the Mopane scrub. Every time we thought we were about to get a shot, he would disappear. I finally got him, but that's not the point of my story. Three times during the day he headed for the property line, and three times he turned away, and back onto the ranch land. I would say that ranch was effectivly "fenced"!! Hells bells! If you want to look at it from the extremely large picture, the reason we don't have Cape Buffalo in North America is that they all fenced in in Africa - Atlantic Ocean on one side and Indian Ocean on the other!

You cannot equate a natural barrier such as an ocean or mountain range with a man-made fence. There was an outfitter in Montana who sold 'free-ranging' bison hunts some years back. Three sides of the property were fenced; the fourth was a raging torrent of a river. Was it really a 'free-ranging' herd?

Could you ever REALLY be sure that the lion or buffalo you shot on some high-fenced farm in RSA WASN'T a put-up job, dumped a month, a week, a day, an hour before you shot it?

If it doesn't matter to you, then say so.

George

[This message has been edited by GeorgeS (edited 02-01-2002).]

George,

I'm not quite following you on this one. I believe you're stating that the Bison hunt was not free-ranging, because the river acted just like a fence. On the other hand, you say that you can't equate a natural barrier with a man-made fence. Isn't a river a natural barrier? Help me out here. You've got me confused!

Juneau,
The outfitter was pointing out the river to show the bison were free-ranging. I was pointing out the three fenced sides to show they weren't.

Had the bison been surrounded by a [i]passable[/] body of water on all sides, I would consider them 'free-ranging'.

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

George,

OK, I think I got it. If animals are surrounded by a water body that is passable,(ie, they can swim it), then they are free-ranging. If they are surronded by a waterbody that is not passable, then that waterbody can be equated to a fence. Wow! this could really get confusing. Caribou can swim with ease across just about any portion of a river that isn't running vertical. I guess we'll have to print a table of game species v.s current velocities v.s. free-ranging v.s. fenced! I'll leave that up to you. Sounds waay to complicated for me!

I believe JJHack stated the situation most correctly, a natural fence has no distinction from a man-made fence, given equal properties. How can it, since the boundary has the same effect? Any perceived difference exists solely in the mind.

Nitro best expressed the element that does make a difference, whether the game is self-sustainable. If so, then it is as wild as it could ever be. Perhaps fence implies "unwild" to some.

Those that dismiss all ethical arguments as subjective scare me. Are you saying that therefore ethics has no place in hunting? If everyone's ethics is OK, then no ethics is also OK. That line of reasoning takes you to Nihilsm and the will to power - - so I may kill every animal in the forest because....I can.

Our legal hunting laws are merely a minimum ethical standard codified. What we are debating is how we measure our own conduct - -and while there are many legal choices, the purpose of this exercise is for us to examine why we hunt. And that is worthy of re-examination from time to time.

Juneau,
We're not talking about caribou; we're talking about dangerous game, specifically lion.
If you want to stick with Arctic game, a polar bear would be a much better analogy. A bear can swim across open water and walk across ice and tundra. That is where you should hunt him.
Take that same polar bear and put him behind a fence. Then, shoot him. Was it a hunt, or a shame?

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

Most of the issues raised here excellent and reflect a mature hunting...ethos.

On the issue of American bison, there are no free ranging bison, anywhere. Including Yellowstone and the Wood Buffalo National Park up in Alberta. In the United States, bison are almost exclusively private property...and on the same day can go from being Federal property to state property to private property, depending on if they leave the park and where they leave the park. I shot a nice bison in 1997 in Oklahoma, it cost about $2000 and I loved it...and would do it again. But that was a shoot and not a hunt, and I recognize it for what it was..and I still love it. I look forward to my next bison.

When I hunted for the first time in Africa last year, in SA, I hunted on private property that was more or less fenced...some places were huge and some were not so huge and at no time did I feel like I was doing something unethical. There is something special about Africa that makes you or at least it makes me, want to go deeper into the bush. Alaska does the same thing in its own way. It makes you want to go back. Anyway, I loved my trip to the the Eastern Cape and the Indian Ocean...this may not be for everyone, but it was great for me...I truely believe if it were not for the intensive game management in SA and the economic insentives to management of those animals, my chances of shooting a kudu or zebra would be greatly reduced. And the shooting skills required in SA were no less demanding than those required in Wyoming or Montana for antelop or elk...two species which are hemmed in pretty tight quarters themselves these days.

When I am chasing after caribou here in Alaska, something I dearly love doing out on the open tundra, I have yet to feel totally satisfied when I shoot them...they certainly are not fenced in, but it is always more of a shoot than a hunt. But I will be out there in tree weeks or so shooting them on the frozen ground and loving it and not confusing that feeling and experience with others that I have when I am after other animals, like brown bear on Admiralty Island.

But, all of my adrenaline is focused on hunting lion in Tanzania or Zimbabwe or where ever it ends up being, without fencing..mental or otherwise.

So we each must attach our own values to what we hunt and how we hunt those things.

Robert

George, Our four main ranch properties are fenced in South Afrcia, By law they have to be. Not our choice it's just the LAW!

We have Rhino, Buffalo, Leopard, and Elephant. All are legally huntable animals with proper permits. Is it wrong to hunt all these on this property in your opinion?

The Property is fenced but the Leopards come and go as they please so where do we draw the line? The Kudu quite often came and go as they please also, to the great frustration of us all!

If it were not fenced I would give the rhinos about a month outside the fence before they were trapped, darted, or poached and taken away. How does one landowner who has a true passion for trophy quality game management handle neighbors who may not share the same interests?

I'm not trying to cause a debate I'm trying to see how different people view this subject. You have a passion for this subject as seen in your posts.

You may however have mis-spoken to Juneau when you said "we are not talking about cariboo were talking about dangerous game". Your original analogy was with Bison and water crossings not Dangerous game at all.

None of my text was dangerous game specific. Thanks for your lively discussion.jj

------------------
Be very patient, remember the second mouse gets the cheese

The combined realities of laws and economics in RSA mean that most of the hunting will be on fenced property.

The size of the property, the nature of the cover, and the nature of the game determine how "real" the hunting is.

The last time I was in RSA I did not have great success - at least partially due to my own failures. But I was satisfied in every case that the hunting was "real".

While I was there I saw at least two examples of what I call "put and take" or paddock hunting. These places were shown to me proudly as properties I could hunt "next trip, if I wanted". I'll pass. I can tell the difference between hunting wild animals and shooting cattle.

JJ has promised me that every huntable animal on Landelani either was born there or got in on his own. That alone is not sufficient to guarantee fair chase, but if the game population is both diverse and self-sustaining it goes a long way in the right direction!

The fact that Saeed hunted there, and is willing to send others sets any other fears I may have to rest.

The operation next door may be put and take,though.

Caveat emptor.

The worst example of put and take I ever saw is right here in Ohio. Anybody want to shoot a "wild boar" in a 13 acre paddock? Success guaranteed between breakfast and lunch!

Don

JJ,
The ORIGINAL debate had to do with dangerous game, specifically lion.
Other posters dragged plains game into the mix. I tried to differentiate between plains game and dangerous game.
Then you introduced the topic of brown bears on islands surrounded by natural barriers. I tried to differentiate between natural barriers and man-made barriers.
The reference to the bison was made in order to point out how someone used an impassable natural barrier as one boundary to declare his bison free-ranging when the three other boundaries were fenced.
Then Juneau, focusing ONLY on the water barrier, introduced caribou to the mix.

Why are people looking for a rationalization to shooting dangerous game behind a fence?

Either it offends you to do so, or it doesn't. I wouldn't do it. If someone else wants to, they can go right ahead. They'll just never convince me that it's the same as hunting DG that is truly 'free-ranging'.

As for RSA, I have had enough unpleasant experiences there to forswear EVER hunting there again.
I agree with you that fences probably present no problems to leopard, and if an elephant, buffalo, or rhino really wanted to escape, it could. However, it would either be darted and recaptured, or the farmer on whose property it 'trespassed' would try to sell it to any American client in the area before it was recaptured.

Wrong? For me, yes. Unethical? Possibly.
A distortion of what I want a DG hunt to be?
Definitely!

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

Well I have a few opinions on these subjects but with any of them you can add a dollar and buy a cheap hamburger.

As far as canned hunts go it is the same idea I have told my son since he was little, "SOME people will do anything for money or to win" Getting the trophy to some people is "to Win" therefore they do not care how they get it!

I would say of the 50 or so African trophies I have, 48 were taken in free-ranging or very large fenced areas. The 2 taken in a small enclosure, 10,000 acres, were difficult to take because of the very rocky and hilly terrain. I feel just as good about them as my bongo and Lord Derby from Cameroon.

Something else I have thought about quite often is the different difficulty of taking various game. My wife and I have had several large parties during the last year with about 250 people seeing my trophy room. I have been asked many times how hard is it to hunt these animals? I have come up with an explanation that satisfies me. I tell them that I consider some of the animals hunted and some collected. What I mean is some animals will stand perfectly still at 150-200 yards and just look at you, the hard part is finding a good specimen. Others will cause you to track for 6 days and make you pull your hair out, like my Cape Eland. I use this explanation for non African hunters so they don't think that every animal is unbelievably difficult. I am then asked why would I collect some animals. The reason is to me they allow my parents,sisters and their children to see many animals that they would never get to see up close. I must say I do not enjoy them as much as the hard hunted animals but I receive great pleasure from showing them to people that do not have the opportunity to go to Africa.

Mike

Great to see all of the diverse opinions on basically a good post. J.J., being you've "done them all," I will defer to your experience. I haven't and won't. A fence is a fence. Nothing more or less. I won't hunt behind one now or ever. I agree with George. Nope, don't want to debate either. I'll take the mountains and the oceans, or rivers every time. Fences..............

Gentlemen:

I have been on safari three times in Zimbabwe. I have yet to see a fence. There could have been some around, but I didn't see them. I think that all of us dislike the situation of shooting an animal in an small pasture of a few acres or so and especially a lion that is hand fed from a truck three times a week. There are others who enjoy this type of "hunt" and as long as it is legal it is ok. Many times we confuse ethics with personal beliefs. The sad thing is that Africa is changing rapidly and for the worse as far as game goes. It looks to me like the fenced properties will be the only place to hunt unless the blacks who control those countries place a high value on their game. Thanks, HOOT

Well we go to bed in Europe and hell break loos!

I think that you all made my point clear!

But I can't see the difference between some animals, we as trophy hunters has classified as Big Game (or the Big five) being any different, than a warthog a bushbuck or a baboon for that matter! They are all game and should be treated with respect - otherwise I don't think we can justify to go hunting!

That some people have choosen to classifie game as good or bad - hard to hunt or easy to hunt - well for my that depents on your own experience!

When I was in Cameroun we had 12 hunting days! The first evening (We had landed in the morning) we tjecked the rifles and went for a drive through the bush just to see the area and so! And there in front of us a big heard of Giant Elands crossed the cartrack - out of the car and stalk after them. An hour later a good bull stepped out and we had shot a 47" Giant eland! Well so much for the diffecult animal to hunt! I have had much more difficulties finding a good Warthog in Namibia!

Another elusive animal is the Bongo! Well a freind of mine took to CAR to hunt Bongo in the Backos. After the landing in the bush air strip the drove to the camp. Suddently out in the middle between two Backos there was a big Bongo bull - my friend jumps out and packs out his one rifle - but couldn't find the ammo in the luggage! Well he finds the ammo for the second rifle and takes the other rifle and shoots the bongo! Well that was how he got his 33" Bongo!

But when he shows his Bongo every experienced African trophy hunted envy his trophy! I would have shot the Bongo aswell - but that story took the magic out of the Bongo for me!

To differ between what is legal and not legal I don't think is a good definition! In most African countries its legal to bait Lion but in CAR and Benin it is not! I think that every lion is a admirable beast. But when I picture my lion hunt out in the furture I see my self tracking this big old almost mane less buffalow slayer! I don't see myself sitting in a stench of a carcase (know by huntes as a bait) waiting day after day for the big black maned lion! But I can't say that I never will do that! I just can't picture myself in that situation at the moment!

Well I'm of for the weekend with some friends to cash sea trout! Standing there in waders in the sea water near freezing point and the wind in your face for three days - that is to sweat and cry for the animals! Any way you have to finish this debat of without me! Have a nice weekend all of you fine sportsmen!

Best regards

Mads

P.S.

I hope that Mahkulu comes by and tells us about his hunt! I would like to know if he shot the lion with the .416 or .340, if he chose the later I would like to know which bullet and load!

Gentlemen,

I have hunted Zimbabwe 10 times, and I have hunted once in the Republic of South Africa.

In South Africa we hunted 3 different areas.

Two areas were fine as far as hunting on a ranch are concerned, and one area was not much different than shooting captive animals.

The PH I hunted with was a real gentleman and a true pro.

He explaine this to me before we went on the hunt.

There was another area some of our friends hunted on, which he flatly refused to take me to.

He said I would not enjoy hunting there.

Did we enjoy hunting there?

Of course we did. We all had a great time. And this was due in no small part to the people we hunted with.

Is it like hunting in Zimbabwe?

Absolutely not.

------------------
saeed@ emirates.net.ae

www.accuratereloading.com

George and Saeed:

Like most, my first trip to Africa was the ranch hunt in SA. I enjoyed it. Luckily I have been able to afford to expand my horizons from there, but there are a lot of folks that can't.

If I had the funds, I'd be on six 30 day safaris every year (like in the old days of Kenya... but I have a thing for Africa). But not everyone can afford to drop $50 or 60 grand every year (not to mention any names!) for the free-ranging plains and DG hunt.

I think hunting SA is fine as long as you don't pretend that it is something it is not. And it's better than not going at all, that is for darn sure.

Will

Personally, I don't think we can focus on the fence as being the only issue here. In many places game is being fenced in not only by natural barriers but other no so natural barriers such as motorways and urban sprawl.
Getting back to an earlier example of lions, what started ringing real alarm bells in my head was the fact the lions were fed from a truck and that the exact population size (3)
and the trophey quality were known. To me we have to look at the whole picture before we judge a hunt to be sporting/ethical or not.
Can a hunter be duped? yes certainly, but I would be more than happy to hunt most animals under the condions JJ outlines on the huge ranches...

I will hunt RSA this year for the first time. I understand now the property is fenced and didn't know that from the beginning. I don't like the idea of it but then it is 150 square miles of property, so it is not like someones pasture. I would still rather I was hunting an unfenced area. The game can certainly elude me in that amount of land whether it be fenced or not. Time will tell what I think of it.

JJ, your analogy to the Colockum and and the Teanaway area and the fence along I 90 is a bit weak. The elk used to swim the Columbia all the time during hunting season, that is why they put in the West Bar hunt at the start of the rifle season. They tried to have some hunts between the Columbia and Quincy WA to drive them back but it did not work. The fence along I 90 stretches all the way to Spokane and beyond ( all interstates are fenced) and it is a 5 foot fence and elk cross it all the time, and get hit by cars on occasion. There is a feeding station near Thorpe ( between Ellensburg and Cle Ellum)and they cross there often and often tangle with a semi truck. The fence is not intended as a barrier nor is it to wildlife and the environmental impact statements generally addressed that issue. There are some orchard's over here on the Wenatchee side that are fence and generally done by the Game dept. but not all are.

Speiden Island in the San Juans was a shoot and pay hunting area in the 80's for African game and of course it wasn't fenced. Two to three miles long and 1/2 mile wide with few trees. Good for the hunter, not too good for the hunted. Fortunately it was a dismal failure. Certainly a larger Island like those that exist in the Aleutians would be of much larger scale and the argument of the ocean being a "barrier or fence" is a non issue in my mind.

Chic Worthing

[This message has been edited by Customstox (edited 02-01-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Customstox (edited 02-01-2002).]

Chic, The fence along I-90 is fully 8 foot high and the elk do not cross it if it's up and has not been pushed down from the snow or for some other reason. It consists of two 4 foot sections of Fence one on top of the other. It's well over my head standing next to it! Not sure what section your referring to? I spend a good portion of my life in the mountains just west of the Roslin area in the back country, I know it very well!

As far as Speiden Island is concerned it was Owned by Alsaka Airlines for many years and I was hired several times to thin the population of deer and wild sheep. There was never a single species of big game from Afrcia there to my knowledge and certainly not during all the years I worked on that island. There was Mouflon sheep, Fallow deer, Sitka Deer, and lots of turkeys. Not a single head of African game was running wild there!jj

JJ, the area all along by Roslyn and all the way up towards the pass and down to the Columbia and all the way to Idaho is only 5 feet . I have seen dead elk on I 90 a number of times. Not a supposition, I used to be the District Design engineer for the DOT in Wenatchee and am not guessing. Take a look at it down near the Ensign Ranch, it is between the highway and the frontage road. It is not designed to stop deer and elk but cattle and people from straying onto the highway.

You may be right about the species of animals on Spieden. I do know it was set up for hunting.

[This message has been edited by Customstox (edited 02-02-2002).]

Well I suppose they went back and changed all the fence then becasue I'm 5"10" tall and its way over my head and it's also about 50 miles long from just west of EllensBurg all the way well past Cle Elum. I suppose you will one day drive by and say to yourself Wow JJ was right that fence is 8 Foot high! Until then you can believe what you last saw was there!

I hunted with JJhacks people in RSA, so did Saeed, and I thoughly enjoyed the experience. I , frankly , love the RSA and its people/animals/countryside and I dont care if fences are up or not.

I know the animals I hunted were wild and sporty, and the properties were monstrous. I eventually had to poke at a wildebeast at almost 300 yrds, on sticks, just cause we had gone 8 days without being able to get closer.

Sure I'd like to go on an "old time safari" one day, in Tanz,or Zam, or even Zim, but I wouldnt hesitate to go back to The RSA and hunt Plains Game. I think plains Game hunting is fabulous sport.

And I may not be the worlds greatest shot, but I do know when, and when not, to pull a trigger. And when I do that animal is dead, so really killing something is not that big a deal.

I dont think I'd hunt Lion behind a fence, but Im not overly interested in Lion to begin with,"if I had the dough I would be ".

The clip of Saeed getting his Lion, with Roy, is one of my favorites. It was a lovelt animal, mane or not, and it was truly earned...........10

JJ, I drive that often and the next time I am by there I will get a photo and send you a reality check.

You do that, and make sure you have a highway sign in the photo that shows Cle Elums Exits or Something between Ellensburg and Cle Elum!

Your an interesting guy Chic, I am surprised with your local knowledge of central Washington you would drag this out, es[ecially in the interest of your own credibility! I really don't give a rip because I know when Wire mesh is above my head it must be higher then 8 foot, not a difficult concept for me anyway! The posts are 10" square and look like Railroad ties but are pressure treated and must be 10 foot long or more becasue 8 foot of the post is out of the ground and I would guess they are at least 2 foot into the ground. As I said if your gonna go through the exercise to do this then by all means make sure there is a highway sign in the photo with somebody standing next to the fence.

Enjoy!jj

------------------
Be very patient, remember the second mouse gets the cheese