Yesterday a documentary/hunting program was broadcasted on national Swedish TV.

The subject was the South African hunting industry.

You can see the show following the link below.

It is in both Swedish and English but I guess the pictures will tell some part of the story too.

Interesting is for example when they go shopping for Lions on the computer

Take a look at it if you like. It will start after some commercials in the beginning.

http://www.tv4play.se/hem_och_...el_2&videoid=2133597

Difficult to understand, but the gist of the program is anti-hunting. Regardless of the ills found in certain sections of SA hunting, this is an indication of the ongoing struggle to shut down hunting, where-ever and when-ever it occurs.

Addendum ; on the other hand, there are those in the "game industry," whose only consideration is a healthy bank balance, regardless. Wildlife / game and hunting clients are but a means to an end only. They do no-one any favours and definitly they do nothing for hunting's future. In fact they are more of a help to the "antis" than a hinderance.

quote:

Originally posted by Scriptus:
Difficult to understand, but the gist of the program is anti-hunting. Regardless of the ills found in certain sections of SA hunting, this is an indication of the ongoing struggle to shut down hunting, where-ever and when-ever it occurs.

Precisely!

It is called free choice!

The natural tendency for plains animals is to move. Most move great distances. When an animal comes to a barrier, like a high fence, the natural tendency is to walk along it, not to turn about and walk away. Twenty minutes into the video the "client" shoots his beast as it is walking along the high fence. Then the "professional hunter"? takes pictures with his back less than a meter from the fence.

Given a vehicle and that sort of open terrain a man could scout 100 square miles in a day. Yes, you read that correctly 100 square miles, 25,900 hectares, 64,000 acres in a day. If one already knows where the animals hang out it would be like trying to find your run away dog in your backyard.

It is like shooting pheasants that where pen raised and let free the morning before the shoot. In one case the ranch owner buys his birds while in the other case the ranch owner buys his kudus. The birds are well fed and taken care of as are the kudus. Then in both cases the animals are released into a defined area for a time before the "hunter" is guided through the general area the "game" is expected to be. It is a set up shoot and not a fair chase hunt. Whether it be pheasants or kudu, I don't have a problem with that as long as you call it what it is.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Scriptus:
Difficult to understand, but the gist of the program is anti-hunting. Regardless of the ills found in certain sections of SA hunting, this is an indication of the ongoing struggle to shut down hunting, where-ever and when-ever it occurs.

Precisely!

It is called free choice!

Understood. But what do you think would happen if the government of South Africa banned all high fences and put in place a system of licenses and quotas? The game would wander freely and the hunting would be fantastic. Instead of competing by importing and/or raising the best animals, concession owners would compete by maintaining the most desirable habitat and managing game. The heads would be harder to come by but the rewards of the chase would be sweet.

Grenadier, you are mistaken. The ONLY reason there is so much hunting in South Africa is because of the fences. If it weren't for the fences, the local populace would poach and eat with abandon and with no regard to trophy quality. In a short time there would be pitifully few animals to hunt.

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:
Grenadier, you are mistaken. The ONLY reason there is so much hunting in South Africa is because of the fences. If it weren't for the fences, the local populace would poach and eat with abandon and with no regard to trophy quality. In a short time there would be pitifully few animals to hunt.

Precisely. The ONLY way you would be able to combat the tremendous poaching problem that would occur would be to create huge conservancies, where the majority of the game would be far away from the perimiter of the area and thus more difficult for poachers to reach. And given the politics and policies already in place in South Africa, this creation of large conservancies will likely never happen.

Grenadier, have you ever try to hunt on a fenced farm of more than 1500 hectares, That is +/- 3600 acares? you can walk 3 to 5 days and don't see one huntable animal!
In contras you Americans call a piece of land of 40 acres a hunting concession!

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:
Grenadier, you are mistaken. The ONLY reason there is so much hunting in South Africa is because of the fences. If it weren't for the fences, the local populace would poach and eat with abandon and with no regard to trophy quality. In a short time there would be pitifully few animals to hunt.

I have no doubt that the "ONLY reason there is so much hunting in South Africa is because of the fences". But that is because animals are being imported and hunted off at what would otherwise be an unsustainable rate. I don't see how high fences are keeping out poachers any better than low fences would.

quote:

Originally posted by 303epps:
Grenadier, have you ever try to hunt on a fenced farm of more than 1500 hectares, That is +/- 3600 acares? you can walk 3 to 5 days and don't see one huntable animal!
In contras you Americans call a piece of land of 40 acres a hunting concession!

Depends on the terrain and vegetation. I guarantee that I can cover that in little time if the there is anywhere to view from and if the vegetation is low or sparse. For example, in the tundra of Alaska and the high deserts of the southwestern US. On the other hand, if the vegetation is thick and close then absolutely not. It would be more than a challenge in the jungles of Southeast Asia, the dense black forests of the US Pacific northwest, or the broken mountainous terrain of the Colorado Rocky Mountains.

In the terrain shown in the video, the country looked pretty open and they were getting about in vehicles. The workers must be very familiar with the farm and they know exactly what "heads" they are looking for because they put them there. Surely, they also know where the animals congregate. There is no way you can convince me that the hunters started off on foot from any places other than those the "professional" knew were close to game. The only way to make a penned hunt challenging is to have a very big pen and very few animals but it would still be like an Easter Egg hunt, just fewer eggs and a larger yard. Why would that be done when the driving force in any high fence operations is income and the more animals shot/sold, the more income?

As far as, "In contrast you Americans call a piece of land of 40 acres a hunting concession!", it depends on location and the game. A 40 acre parcel in central North Carolina could be very productive. There a hunter could take all five of the deer he is allowed per season because deer can freely move into and out of his parcel. But I will admit that 40 acres in even the best deer country wouldn't provide enough animals for a group of hunters to limit out. Our seasons are short and we limit the amount of game we take but it is fair chase and sustainable. 40 acres would provide more hunting if game were artificially introduced and replenished. I bet I could get a lot of animals out of 40 acres of a zoo.

Again, I have no problems with these sorts of operations. They obviously cater to a clientele that desires what they offer. I just turn a deaf ear when someone tries to convince me that a "put and take" operation is fair chase.

I have said to myself that I'm not going to get involved into titbit bitch fights on AR anymore. Sometimes, because of the nature of the beast(me) I just cannot bite hard enough down and have to say something.

Mr. Grenadier. Please post your name, so that I know who I;m addressing.

Your statements and posts are some of the most ignorant, uninformed statements I have seen on South African hunting.

Do you believe in socialism? Dropping fences, and letting the animals roam free, will decimate their numbers over night, and send us back 60 years ago. Only about 500,000 people in the country, out of a population of 50 million looks after the game. Why? Because of PRIVATE ownership.

Now you can have your believes about high fenced hunting that might differ from everyone else. But, please do not for ONE second advocate a system that will see the demise of ALL these animals. Look what happened on the Game Ranches in Zimbabwe when the "government" took over.

This video that is the topic of this thread, is a anti hunting show piece Sir.

Anyone that are worth their salt in the hunting world, knows that our game fences are everything but animal proof (100%). Leopard, Kudu, Duiker, Nyala, Warthog, and many many more species roam freely amongst MOST high fenced farms. The only reason why they do not move most of the time, is because they are happy where they are. Big, SAFE habitat, with food and water. I do all my hunting on areas where the animals reproduce and occur NATURALY. All hunters that have hunted with me will testify to a FAIR chase hunting experience.

I'm typping this from a ranch in texas. 5000acres big. Full off Black Buck, Aoudad, Axis Deer, Mouflon, etc.....fantastic. If it was not for this ranch, I would never have the good fortune of seeing these fantastic beasties.

Now I can carry one talking about this topic that I am so passionate about, but you have your view and I have mine. Yours however, is uninformed and short sighted.

Please answer to the forum if you have EVER hunted in South Africa and where.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Scriptus:
Difficult to understand, but the gist of the program is anti-hunting. Regardless of the ills found in certain sections of SA hunting, this is an indication of the ongoing struggle to shut down hunting, where-ever and when-ever it occurs.

Precisely!

It is called free choice!

Understood. But what do you think would happen if the government of South Africa banned all high fences and put in place a system of licenses and quotas? The game would wander freely and the hunting would be fantastic. Instead of competing by importing and/or raising the best animals, concession owners would compete by maintaining the most desirable habitat and managing game. The heads would be harder to come by but the rewards of the chase would be sweet.

And the 40 million protein starved poor people will be eating them up in 5 years. Not 10, 5. Then the land is open, free of game, and trees and there are 50 million poor people. Yeah, your train of thought REALY carries a lot of weight!

quote:

The workers must be very familiar with the farm and they know exactly what "heads" they are looking for because they put them there. Surely, they also know where the animals congregate. There is no way you can convince me that the hunters started off on foot from any places other than those the "professional" knew were close to game.

Grenadier

It is better to say nothing and let people think you are a poephol, then to open your moth and confirm their suspicions.

I only wish you along with all the other experts who go out of their way to bash the most successful conservation model in Africa would simply open their minds rather than their mouths.

Clearly you have no experience of South Africa other than what you have gleaned from this forum and a video.

Maybe you should run for president, you must be qualified by now, you watch CNN don't you?

I think that it will be a good idea for the government to force us to take down all the fences. Not only the high ones.
It will then take +- 5 years for some "foot&mouth", anthrax, Bovine-TB, Feline-aids etc to decimate all animals in SA.

Then all the cattle and sheep ranches will go down with it. Then the hungry/lazy population can have some free food (for a while) and we will be a healthy, NON-obese, starving, vegetarian nation.

And the best part is that no one will ever be able to bad mouth SA's game ranching success or hunting because there will not be any.

Fritz, Charl,

Someone posted a video on the forums, in essence, to initiate discussion. I discussed it. I wasn't looking for a fight. I am still not looking for a fight. I attacked nobody. I simply spoke my opinion. Now I face an onslaught and I am even being called names. Wow.

Mr. Van Rooyen - You said, "I do all my hunting on areas where the animals reproduce and occur NATURALLY". That also means that you do not participate in the sort of put and take operation depicted in the video. Surely, you do not condone such operations either. I believe you are sincere and I would be glad to participate in your hunts. So, why are you getting up in arms?

I too have enjoyed watching the exotic animals in Texas. But the norm in Texas is for operations to keep exotics well contained, if even on 5,000 and 10,000 acre ranches. To my mind, the best hunting Texas has to offer is the free range, native, whitetail hunting. I've never seen so many wild deer anywhere else. But to the point, Texas is a great example. Some of the outfits there are more interested in a good hunt and some outfits are more interested in a fast dollar. Some will misrepresent a strictly controlled pen raised and released operation as a fair chase hunt. I'd be surprised if you hadn't heard of any of the shady put-and-take operations there.

There is a regular poster on AR who offers high fence hunts in South America. He is very up front about what he offers - what it is and what it isn't. I am sure he has plenty of fine customers who are looking for just that kind of hunt. He doesn't make any misrepresentations and I admire and respect his honesty.

Mr. Quest - I am the first to admit my experience is extremely limited. Though I've spent decades working, playing, and living in the wilds of the world's five northernmost continents, including Africa north and east, I never once found myself in South Africa. And, though I've walked many hundreds of miles, and spent countless nights in a sleeping bag, in desert, jungle, mountain, and savanna only a small percentage of my experience abroad is as a hunter.

Nevertheless, Mr. Quest, I don't have to taste piss to know I don't want to taste piss. Be it South Africa, South America, or South Carolina I have no desire to participate in any put and take enclosure hunt. If it blows a chill up your skirt that I don't want to shoot a pen raised lion somebody phoned up a few days before then so be it.


~

quote:

Originally posted by African Hunters Quest:

quote:

The workers must be very familiar with the farm and they know exactly what "heads" they are looking for because they put them there. Surely, they also know where the animals congregate. There is no way you can convince me that the hunters started off on foot from any places other than those the "professional" knew were close to game.

Grenadier

It is better to say nothing and let people think you are a poephol, then to open your moth and confirm their suspicions.

I only wish you along with all the other experts who go out of their way to bash the most successful conservation model in Africa would simply open their minds rather than their mouths.

Clearly you have no experience of South Africa other than what you have gleaned from this forum and a video.

Maybe you should run for president, you must be qualified by now, you watch CNN don't you?

What is a poephol...lol

quote:

Originally posted by Bushwack:
What is a poephol...lol

poephol - the afrikaans word for asshole

Mr. Quest is just showing off how well educated he is about South Africa


~

quote:

Originally posted by Fritz Rabe:
I think that it will be a good idea for the government to force us to take down all the fences. Not only the high ones.
It will then take +- 5 years for some "foot&mouth", anthrax, Bovine-TB, Feline-aids etc to decimate all animals in SA.

Then all the cattle and sheep ranches will go down with it. Then the hungry/lazy population can have some free food (for a while) and we will be a healthy, NON-obese, starving, vegetarian nation.

And the best part is that no one will ever be able to bad mouth SA's game ranching success or hunting because there will not be any.

So, without high fences, how did Kenya get along as the place to go for big game before 1975?

~

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
The natural tendency for plains animals is to move. Most move great distances. When an animal comes to a barrier, like a high fence, the natural tendency is to walk along it, not to turn about and walk away. Twenty minutes into the video the "client" shoots his beast as it is walking along the high fence. Then the "professional hunter"? takes pictures with his back less than a meter from the fence.

Given a vehicle and that sort of open terrain a man could scout 100 square miles in a day. Yes, you read that correctly 100 square miles, 25,900 hectares, 64,000 acres in a day. If one already knows where the animals hang out it would be like trying to find your run away dog in your backyard.

It is like shooting pheasants that where pen raised and let free the morning before the shoot. In one case the ranch owner buys his birds while in the other case the ranch owner buys his kudus. The birds are well fed and taken care of as are the kudus. Then in both cases the animals are released into a defined area for a time before the "hunter" is guided through the general area the "game" is expected to be. It is a set up shoot and not a fair chase hunt. Whether it be pheasants or kudu, I don't have a problem with that as long as you call it what it is.

Grenadier, it is more then obvious from your posts that you have never been on a big fenced farm. I'd sure like to see you cover 100sqm in a day. You should not mix fenced area with "put and take" hunts.
I understand some of your thoughts. It is nice to hunt wild areas and it would be nice if game management in rsa would work without fences. But without fences there would be no more game left, period! Even with fences and antipoaching a lot of guys struggle to protect their game (especially rhino) at the moment.
Not every outfitter in rsa is involved in canned lion and all that stuff, there are proper outfitters that believe in fair chase.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:

quote:

Originally posted by Fritz Rabe:
I think that it will be a good idea for the government to force us to take down all the fences. Not only the high ones.
It will then take +- 5 years for some "foot&mouth", anthrax, Bovine-TB, Feline-aids etc to decimate all animals in SA.

Then all the cattle and sheep ranches will go down with it. Then the hungry/lazy population can have some free food (for a while) and we will be a healthy, NON-obese, starving, vegetarian nation.

And the best part is that no one will ever be able to bad mouth SA's game ranching success or hunting because there will not be any.

So, without high fences, how did Kenya get along as the place to go for big game before 1975?

~

Population in Kenya (approx.):
1950 6 Million
1975 14,5 Million
2025 45 Million (projected)

I just want to make one thing clear.
The man making the video is no anti hunter at all.
He is a very keen hunter himself.
He is just very much against the put&shoot sort of hunting that occurs some places in SA.
He talks about how much better and free chase the hunting in Tanzania is.

That said, I think the video makes all hunting in SA look like it is put&shoot and I think that is totally mistaken and misleading.
And in that way comes out as anti hunting even if I don't think that is his intention at all.

I think it is meant to be anti put&shoot.

I think hunting in high fenced places is totally fine and have no problems doing it myself if the fenced in area is big.
But the animals must be totally wild and as hard to hunt as any free roaming animals in unfenced areas.

When it becomes similar to shoot a farmers cow, then it is nothing for me and I don't call it hunting.
It would give me a very bad taste in my mouth if I did it myself, but I have nothing against others doing it, but they should be totally open and honest about it.

This demonstrates my point very well.

We as hunters are spending far too much time trying our best to ram our version of "ethics" down everyone else's throat.

If one does not like put and take hunting, don't hunt there. There is no point in trying to force everyone else not to do it by siding with the antis.

I have been hunting for many years, in different parts of Africa that are as wild as they can get.

And I have hunted on farms in South Africa.

On some occassions, I have enjoyed a tougher hunt on a farm in South Africa than in one of the open areas in Zimbabwe or Tanzania.

Who is to say what is "ethical" hunting and what is not?

I have followed a single eland on a farm in South Africa for most of a day, and never managed to get a shot at him.

I have shot literally hundreds of African game animals, from elephants to practically all the plains game, by seeing them from the truck and shooting them within minutes.

To me personally it is also a question about the future.
The industry is growing in SA.

When will Zim, TZ etc start the same thing?

Do you earn the most money in a natural habitat or in an artificial?

Since people obviosly don't give a F* if they shoot wild or farmed animals i guess it is just a matter of time...

Saeed, thanks for putting it that way! Sometime the farmer had to bring in new blood on his farm, and 99% of the time it is wild stock maybe staying a week in pens, but once realesed it is wild stock again!

303epps - Reintroduction is another matter. In the USA that is how white tailed deer were reintroduced into Indiana, bighorn sheep reintroduced into Nevada, and mountain goats reintroduced into Washington.



Saeed,

You always bring a lot to the table and your African experience is humbling. Thank you.

I don't disagree with you one bit but, in this case, it is the hunter on the receiving end. A video was posted. I said the sort of hunting depicted was not for me but I have no problem if someone else wants to do it as long as it isn't misrepresented to them. Some couldn't get along with that and tried to ram their version of "ethics" down my throat.

It reminds me of the man who doesn't mind nudism but who doesn't want to be a nudist himself. The nudists cannot abide with that attitude. It makes them feel insecure in their nakedness. So, they taunt him, call him names, and tell him he is narrow minded. They do everything they can to convert the man to nudism.

No thanks. I'll keep my clothes on.

~

That program was not antihunting!the editor of this program is a big time big game hunter and hunts all over the world!program one was from Tansania where they hunted buff and elefant but program 2 was about the hunting industry in rsa!the program was NOT good publisity for the industry!

It is a total lack of comprehension of how fences came about in South Africa that is at the root of this discourse.

An understanding of the socio-economic and cultural development and history of my Country has to be understood to grasp why and how our current hunting culture came about.

First and foremost fences are relatively new, perhaps one could argue it origens lay at the hand of the Provincial Game Conservation Act No 17 of 1967.

The need to put up fences founded in a principle of Roman Dutch Law as "game" is defined as "Res Nullia" ie game belonging to the "people" or commonwealth and as such owenership resides with the legal representative of "the people" in the form of the Provincial Authority.

Private owenership can only be bestowed once a game animal is legally hunted and killed by a person and under circumstance defined under that law.

Curatorship as a form of ownership by a person / persons legally owning a piece of land on which game resides can be granted by the Provincial Authority under a set of rules and guidelines. Under a narrow set of provisions such an owner is granted exemption from certain defined and set provisions under the act.

Exemption is granted only if control of the game residing on property is gained by approriate fencing...... hence the use of fences.

Hence then also the legal ability of such an owner to dispose of game on such a property under the guidelines of the act. In the case of hunting by visitor hunters all aspects of this industry is ruled by provisions of the law.

The second often forgotten part of the problem resides with two other seperate acts, the Veterinary act and unrelated acts dealing with public health.

Game animals carry disease that impact domemstic cattle negatively, some diseases, if epidemic, can be catastrophic to a country's economy, hence the need to regulate the movement and occurrence of wildlife in certain areas... again enter the fence.


So do not blame the use of game fences in SA for a hunting culture that may be different to yours... as hunters we too would relish the idea freedom of hunting on unfenced land however our laws are in the way of doing so.

Okay Grenadier I see your point! Sorry to take you on. But if you know nothing about the overall picture in RSA don't condem us! The same I can see hou yuo can hunt on 40 acers, I have 40 acers and can sustain 2 coveys of francolin and none game! I am also against put and take, it is un ethical to bay game and put it in a 200hectare enclousure and call it hunting! A sizable farm starts at 800 ha and in the dreier areas 1500ha is still to small!

ALF, that is the very BEST explanation of how the high-fence hunting concessions came to be in South Africa that I have ever read. Thank you very much.

I have many PH friends in SA, and every one of them offers high quality fair-chase safaris on the concessions they hunt.

From my simple standpoint, the future of hunting may rest totally on the high fence properties around the world. Wildlife takes a backeat acros the board world wide when the future is discussed. While high fenced hunting is not everyone's cup of tea, in the not too distant future, it may be t6he only legal form of hunting that exist.

Between the work of the anti hunting forces and the continual and increasing loss of habitat, the only game animals left will be on controlled, high fence properties.