I remember an episode of Judge Judy that stuck with me for years.It was about a couple of which the girl friend was taking a garage mechanic owner to court about something that she said he did wrong to her...The Judge asked her why did she return to his garage again and again after that?

The story is that if you do not get along with someone for whatever reason just avoid him and dont seek him out.If you you go around looking for their posts and responding then I am not sure who is the troll.Some people here just go around looking for crap and someone to crap on.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Some people here just go around looking for crap and someone to crap on.

. . . sounds like you have been looking in the mirror again.

Another AR member has suggested the following:

The AR Posting Quotient: the total number of posts divided by the number of days as a member: if greater than 2.5, recommend therapy.

Query, if someone's quotient is >3.7, I wonder what that implies? Maybe it is time for someone to get outside, read a book, do some chores, earn a living, take a nap, say hello to their family . . . .

quote:

Originally posted by Carlsen Highway:
Your conclusion is that Bell injured and lost, not some, but several hundred elephant?

CH you don't read well it seems!
I never said Bell wounded several hundred elephants

My quote from my earlier post reads below is easy to read, and it was meant exactly what it said. Bell killed far more Buffalo and other game animals than he did elephant. This was because he had to supply a lot of meat to feed several porters, trackers and gun bearers, and though he likely lost some elephant, I would think he wounded and lost far more of the meat supply game. Still as I said on two or three occasions here, I do not believe he was being evasive, just didn't think it mattered to the reader.

quote:

My point is he and most others of his day failed to mention the, I'm sure, several hundred head of GAME that were wounded and lost,

...................................................................BYE!

It seems like the greats of hunting are under attack by those who have failed at life and resorted to living in their mothers basement. Sadly this forum is still infested with termites that needs to be exterminated. Moderators need to do their job.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
.. Bell killed far more Buffalo and other game animals than he did elephant. This was because he had to supply a lot of meat to feed several porters,
trackers and gun bearers,

re:Bell killed far more buff & other game- than elephant?...from where did you get such conclusive data?

Bell is on record for 1011 elephants and around 700 buff.

Bell killed large # of buff primarily for meat, but this does not mean they formed his largest primary meat source.
since One needs to remember the elephants he bagged were also used to feed his camp.
When he has dropped some ele, he now has no need to shoot buff or anything else, for meat.
Buff and other game were, when required, used to supplement his major food source of elephant.
He also traded hides for flour to additionally supplement the camps food supply, along with using gathered native vegetables etc,

Total weight wise, it would seem Bell supplied more meat via his elephants than anything else combined.

The total weight of his 1011 elephants likely being equal to about 5000 buffalo.

The weight tally of his 700 buff, comes to about 14% of the total weight of his 1011 elephants.

quote:

and though he likely lost some elephant, I would think he wounded and lost far more of the meat supply game.

So a highly dedicated crack-shot ivory hunter lapses into 'lazy careless shooting mode' for when hunting a pile of other game
that feeds his large camp and also provides an abundance of valuable product to trade?....,sorry, I don't buy your theory.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
.. Bell killed far more Buffalo and other game animals than he did elephant. This was because he had to supply a lot of meat to feed several porters,
trackers and gun bearers,

quote:

re:Bell killed far more buff & other game- than elephant?...from where did you get such conclusive data?

Bell is on record for 1011 elephants and around 700 buff.

I might ask where the RECORD numbers you quote came from? I will tell you where they came from, BELL and that is the whole reason for this thread. DID BELL STRETCH IT A BIT? SON the RECORD is only the word out of the mouth of BELL, and is up for debate! TRAX you are taking BELL’s word from his book, while you think that is gospel, others disagree. The fact that BELL said it doesn’t make it true!

Now go back on ignore! …………………………..BYE!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
.. Bell killed far more Buffalo and other game animals than he did elephant. This was because he had to supply a lot of meat to feed several porters,
trackers and gun bearers,

quote:

re:Bell killed far more buff & other game- than elephant?...from where did you get such conclusive data?

Bell is on record for 1011 elephants and around 700 buff.

I might ask where the RECORD numbers you quote came from? I will tell you where they came from, BELL and that is the whole reason for this thread. DID BELL STRETCH IT A BIT? SON the RECORD is only the word out of the mouth of BELL, and is up for debate! TRAX you are taking BELL’s word from his book, while you think that is gospel, others disagree. The fact that BELL said it doesn’t make it true!

Now go back on ignore! …………………………..BYE!

Mac not all of the information about Bell came from just his books where many have intimated here journalistic license may apply as of course it can often do with anyone writing for publication. There were articles written by Bell or about him published over the years in various hunting magazines from which some of the information on this thread has been derived. I have copies of some of these articles and indeed have sent them to a poster here who had asked where some of this info was coming from.

I'm not saying Bell did not take some journalistic licence when writing his books or the manuscripts that after his death were compiled into his last book, Bell of Africa, but if we feel that he was stretching the truth in some of the articles on specific subjects he had published in magazines, then we should be fair and apply that premis to everyone who may write articles and all of us who post on forums such as this including me and you.

In Bell's case I have seen no contradicting writings by anyone of his era who would have known him or of him, calling into question his exploits. My opinion is that in the absence of contradicting information we should be prepared to accept, as we do wholeheartedly for some e.g. Jim Corbett who also used small calibres on very dangerous game, that Bell, Taylor, Hunter, Selby, etc, etc, all accomplished what they said they did with the tools they chose to use. Of course some writers may embellish the truth for a good story and in our more modern times with better communication and recording, some of these writers have been 'found out'.

Finding out and exposing some of these writers for what they are has to be done with evidence proffered from those accompanying them on hunts etc or those who know or knew them personally and could make such observations. Sadly none of use today have the opportunity to accompany Bell, Taylor, Corbett, etc on their hunts so we can make judgement.

Our own preferences or experience may cause us to doubt the truth of some of the exploits we read of these old timers, but then who are we with our comparitive miniscule exploits on dangerous or big game hunting to question those who spent years living and hunting in those areas, how dare we.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
TRAX you are taking BELL’s word from his book,...

yet you have failed to explain how you arrived at the conclusion that Bell shot & carelessly wounded
more buff & other game, than he did his elephants.

When you made that claim, you were blatantly ignorant of the fact his 1011 elephant kills were also a rather substantial
primary meat source for the camp.

Bell was man of intelligence and efficiency, and likely would not go around wasting time/effort to recklessly shoot and wound
a whole string of other game for meat, when he has the advantage of tons of dead elephant at his disposal.

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:

Our own preferences or experience may cause us to doubt the truth of some of the exploits we read of these old timers, but then who are we
with our comparitive miniscule exploits on dangerous or big game hunting to question those who spent years living and hunting in those areas,
how dare we.

The likes of Frederick Selous and WDM Bell, just don't fall into the category of renown white-hunter, these guys served in wars hunting and killing people
which are by far a superior adversary to primitive animals. Their perspective and attitude to game hunting would not be quite the same as people of today
who hold down a normal job in civilian society, then occasionally go on their comfy-modern convenience brief stint in the African bush.

Eagle27, your post was a very well written piece, and I totally agree with your take on this subject. Your post is the way to have a civil debate, something that is not common here today!

I’m sure that when one has killed as many as 1100 elephants one of two things becomes evident. One tends to loose count so he states an estimate, and that IMO, is what all the old timers did. Secondly it stands to reason anyone who has even a close estimate of having killed that many elephant has also wounded and lost some, the caliber of the rifle not withstanding.

Where the buffalo are concerned when one was shooting buffalo for meat, in the days when the herds were simply endless, most were shot out of herds. Bell used mostly solids and even with the little 7mm and 6.5mm bell certainly had some shoot-throughs that wounded animals behind the target some that didn’t show sign of wounding, and even if they did they would likely not be followed as they would have certainly run with the herd.

As I have said on numerous occasions within this thread, I do not believe BELL was purposefully being evasive, or out right lying. Again IMO he simply didn’t think the wounded and lost and/or not followed up, were simply not important to anyone in those days, and saw no reason to dwell on it in his writings, and just assumed anyone with experience in the fields of Africa in those days were not interested in that fact of life in the bush.

The fact is nobody today knows the real numbers, and I doubt Bell himself knew them either, nor did any of his acquaintances, nor did they care.

It seems to me, that this place has become a forum where one cannot state an opposing opinion, without someone declaring war! You know what they say about OPINION, everybody has one, and the above is mine, and worth no more than the next man’s opinion!
....................................................................Over and out!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
I’m sure that when one has killed as many as 1100 elephants one of two things becomes evident.
One tends to loose count so he states an estimate, and that IMO, is what all the old timers did.

Go read Bell and you will discover that he didn't give an estimate # on elephant, rather, he had precise count
& record of his elephant kills.....at: 983 bulls, 28 cows, Total = 1011,

The person idiotically & misleadingly people is YOU by estimating it at 1100.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
Where the buffalo are concerned when one was shooting buffalo for meat, in the days when the herds were simply endless,
most were shot out of herds. Bell used mostly solids and even with the little 7mm and 6.5mm bell certainly had some shoot-throughs
that wounded animals behind the target some that didn’t show sign of wounding, and even if they did they would likely not be followed
as they would have certainly run with the herd.

...

Bells dedicated primary workhorse rifle for meat-hunting, was his .256 bore Gibbs Bristol, which he used soft-points in.
So it would be safe to conclude that game hunted specifically for meat, was taken mostly with that rifle & bullet.

His small-bore magazine rifles primarily for elephant, employing solids, were his .256 Mannlicher carbine from Daniel Fraser,
the .275 bore Rigby and his two .303 Lee Enfields.

He at times employed his .256 & .275 bore with solids, for use on buff and other game, besides elephant.


[QUOTE] "I got a .256 Mannlicher-Schonauer and used it on elephant. I used the long Gibbs -a most beautiful rifle- entirely for meat-getting.
And what a deadly weapon it was!...That Gibbs certainly had a full-time job to do. I don't think that even now a better rifle could be found for that
particular work."
- WDM Bell
[end/QUOTE]

Its evident that the doubters who have no proper reading knowledge of WDM Bell, are the ones 'stretching-it'..
and like to go about inventing things about him!

What difference does it REALLY make to anyone alive today whether Bell or anyone else in the past embellished the truth/stretched the truth or flat out lied? Anyone on here have a time machine so they can travel back and reveal people like Bell or Ruark or anyone else as flat out liars?

How many folks on here actually knew or met Bell? How many folks on here have been able to hunt under the exact same conditions as Bell and some of the others?

What if Bell or Capstick or Elmer Keith stretched things a little or even a lot, which of us have actually been hurt by it?

Is there ANYONE on this site than can ACTUALLY prove or disprove Bell's claims? I kind of doubt it.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
What difference does it REALLY make to anyone alive today whether Bell or anyone else in the past embellished the truth/stretched the truth or flat out lied? Anyone on here have a time machine so they can travel back and reveal people like Bell or Ruark or anyone else as flat out liars?

How many folks on here actually knew or met Bell? How many folks on here have been able to hunt under the exact same conditions as Bell and some of the others?

What if Bell or Capstick or Elmer Keith stretched things a little or even a lot, which of us have actually been hurt by it?

Is there ANYONE on this site than can ACTUALLY prove or disprove Bell's claims? I kind of doubt it.

CHC, Spot on!! I was thinking of posting the exact same comments...why is this topic so important? What difference does it make? Let's move on. AIU

So just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, anyway?

quote:

Originally posted by loud-n-boomer:
So just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, anyway?

That whole angels dancing on the head of a pin thing is a myth. Truth is that angels are Baptist and they do not dance.

quote:

If we can speculate and draw conclusions from heresay, why can't we believe what the man wrote?

Be that as it may; Bell was a remarkable individual. Even if was the single experience to fire at aircraft with a hunting rifle whilst in fight - some excitement that is not common to experience.


Santa Claus.

Other information on Bell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._D._M._Bell

quote:

Originally posted by fla3006:
Other information on Bell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._D._M._Bell

Here's a bit of information from that link!

quote:

He mastered an oblique shot from the rear which was angled through the neck muscles and into the brain. This difficult shot has become known the "The Bell Shot" on elephant. After World War One he began to use the more powerful .318 Westley Richards calibre, observing that his 'inexplicable misses' then stopped.

.................................................................

quote:

Re: Wiki,
He mastered an oblique shot from the rear which was angled through the neck muscles and into the brain.
This difficult shot has become known the "The Bell Shot" on elephant. After World War One he began to use the more
powerful .318 Westley Richards calibre,observing that his 'inexplicable misses' then stopped.

Bell used .318 for a short while, but then switched back to his trusty Rigby .275

The advantage of .318 was that it provided better penetration for the oblique angle 'Bell shot',
otherwise the range of other less demanding shot angles- on the brain, were well covered by Bells .275

His .256 and .275 really only encountered problems when hitting heavy bone.
eg;
He tested by firing through the chest of downed elephant, and found the solid stopped up against
the spine after travelling the depth of the chest.
He found such small-bore solids were prone to bending when hitting/abruptly stopping,at such heavy resistance.

A quartering away side brain shot is difficult. Trust me. My only attempt put the bull down, front legs first. Follow up shots were required in my case.