Mike,

I am not sure I would classify all the information being reported by the media as drivel, anymore than I would rely on one or two sources communicating with people outside of Zim via methods of communication that may be monitored by the government.

Those of us in the US know first hand how our own media is agenda driven, sometimes making up the facts to fit the desired conclusion. But at least here those of us with even a little bit of curiousity can get the hard facts we need from more reliable sources.

The problem with the situation in Zim is that there is a news blackout. The government controls the news. And they also monitor communications going out of the country.

When it was just Mugabe, at least there was some certainty in how screwed up things would be. But, recent reports, some of which I think you have even acknowledged and heard from sources inside of Zim, indicate that Mugabe is no longer calling the shots. This recent report from London (albeit from a news agency), appears to pull no punches in reporting that a military junta is now controlling Zim: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031975/The-Dir...dthirsty-Mugabe.html

If that is true (and the Washington Post filed a similar report regarding Bob's new role in Zim, although not as conclusively), that shift is one of immense import. If the country is now ruled by a committee of men desperate to avoid being tried as war criminals, their sense of self preservation adds a volatility to the mix that did not exist before. And the economic situation, which was surreal before, is now unbelievable. In may of this year, Zim's inflation rate tripped the 1 million percent mark. In the last few days, there have been estimates reported in major media outlets that the inflation rate jumped to 9 million percent. The lowest estimate I have seen in the last couple of weeks was 3 million percent. $50 billion Zim dollars at an excnahge rate to the US dollar of about $1.40.

So, in the last 6 weeks, the inflation rate has at least tripled and a junta is possibly in control of Zim. Before the run off election, no one was going to do anything (in theory) to attract international attention or condemnation - like allowing a foreign hunter to meet his or her demise. Now that Bob has taken the oath, it is anyone's guess what is going to happen.

And that's the point - it is anyone's guess. And a decision on whether to go to Zim is going to have to be a personal one based on the information available at the time. And people are going to have to judge the credibility of that information for themselves - the situation in Zim tends to be short on hard facts due to the information blackout.

How come no one has brought up the purpose of the Matabele forces being trained and armed in Botswana?

Zim is passed being an 'if' and is now just a 'when'. Good luck to those of you that are having that great hunt when 'when' happens.

When I was 30 years old in 1979 in Rhodesia it was an adventure. I'm not sure I would be up to an adventure now though.

To try and bring this closure, at least for a little while, let's focus on what we all seem to agree on:

1. The decision to hunt in Zim is a personal one that each person needs to make based on their assessment of, among other factors (i) the political situation there, and (ii) whether supporting the safari industry there is appropriate given that Mugabe is still in power.

2. Hopefully in assessing the situation in Zim folks will be informed by a variety of sources, taking into account the credibility to be attached to each source, trying to separate fact from conjecture, and not relying exclusively on sources that may have the message influenced by their own biases, e.g., the media, folks in the safari industry, the US State Department, etc.

3. We know that the vast majority of those that have hunted in Zim so far this season have had great safaris and experienced no issues that gave them pause from a safety or security situation. We also know that tomorrow may or may not look like yesterday -- in Zim or anywhere else for that matter.

4. For those that have hunts coming up in Zim, and who elect to go and not cancel, we hope that their experience slots right in with the experiences of those that have already been this season and they come home safe and satisfied.

5. The good people of Zim -- rich or poor, black or white -- deserve so much better than the current situation and we wish them all better tomorrows.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
To try and bring this closure, at least for a little while, let's focus on what we all seem to agree on:

1. The decision to hunt in Zim is a personal one that each person needs to make based on their assessment of, among other factors (i) the political situation there, and (ii) whether supporting the safari industry there is appropriate given that Mugabe is still in power.

2. Hopefully in assessing the situation in Zim folks will be informed by a variety of sources, taking into account the credibility to be attached to each source, trying to separate fact from conjecture, and not relying exclusively on sources that may have the message influenced by their own biases, e.g., the media, folks in the safari industry, the US State Department, etc.

3. We know that the vast majority of those that have hunted in Zim so far this season have had great safaris and experienced no issues that gave them pause from a safety or security situation. We also know that tomorrow may or may not look like yesterday -- in Zim or anywhere else for that matter.

4. For those that have hunts coming up in Zim, and who elect to go and not cancel, we hope that their experience slots right in with the experiences of those that have already been this season and they come home safe and satisfied.

5. The good people of Zim -- rich or poor, black or white -- deserve so much better than the current situation and we wish them all better tomorrows.

This is the post that should have started this thread! Far more fair and ballanced!

I fear this particular thread has somewhat dimmed the pleasent glow of Mike's very good, and successful safari, fo many of us, and maybe for Mike as well. The fault is the fained "TOUNGUE IN CHEEK" WALDO, which was actually an "I TOLD YOU SO" comment, which had the effect of angering some folks unnessarily. That was unfortunent, and not the outcome Mike was looking for, IMO.

Both sides of this little exercize have laid out some well documented facts, pro, or con, that gives the reader a base to decide for himself what he is comforatble with, so all was not wasted rhetoric! We, here, will not settle this in any difinitive way, but at least both sides have been defended. If a reader can filter out the angry exchanges, and take in the INFORMATION, he can decide for himself if one side is more or less correct than the other. GA-DAY Mates!

Safe or not safe is not the question for me the money you spend in zim how much goes to Mugabe's pocket are you not funding his regime aswell thats the question you must live with

Mac,

Make no mistake I meant everything I said in the posts above, including that we should try and find common ground where we can while acknowledging that there are some things certain folks are never going to see eye to eye on. It is just that today I turned 50 and woke up older and wiser this morning.

I realize that diversity of opinion is what makes the world go around. I just hope that folks take a prudent approach to risk and fear, not find themselves paralyzed by risk and fear. If I live another 50 years I doubt that I will have another hunt as enjoyable as the hunt I just returned from. Had I allowed risk and fear to paralyze me, I would be sitting here wondering about what might have been instead of relishing the memories of an unforgettable hunt.

The facts are all out there for everyone to assess in their own way based on their own risk tolerances. Information on Zim and hunting in Zim is available from many different places in many different formats. But the reliability and credibility of information also exists within a wide range and it is important to ask questions like:

- Is it clear who wrote the information?
- Can the individual be trusted? What are their qualifications or credentials?
- If the information is not first hand, what is the source of the individual's information?
- What is the individual's motivation or does the individual have a reason for wanting you to think a certain way?

Not all information is created equally. The quality of information can vary widely and how information is assessed is up to each person to decide for themselves.

So bottom line, today I am older and wiser, no more mature, but older and wiser.

the answer is yes-at least some of the money spent on safari goes in the government's( Mugabe's) pocket. that fact is indisputable. the exact amount going to uncle Bob may vary but for damn sure some of it ends up there( think sales tax, concession fees, license fees, etc.).

Not even Mugabe or his de facto junta would risk the fallout from harming or killing foreigners.

Not unless they are reporters or are somehow actively aiding and abetting the MDC. And even then, one wonders whether the consequences would amount to more than deportation.

Harming or killing foreigners would almost certainly hasten Mugabe's inevitable downfall.

All I can do is wish the best of luck and safety to those Zimbabweans of good heart who continue to persevere.

One thing is certain. Mugabe's regime, like every evil regime throughout history, will end some day. But God alone knows when that will happen and what will replace it.

Mugabe and his henchman would almost certainly NOT harm a tourist, but what about a drunk/stoned 18 year old "war vet" with an AK47 and a grudge against "whitey"? do you really think that the central figures in Harare have total control over the youth militias out in the countryside?

You said Harare, but did you mean Detroit? Washington? Killadelhia? Watts?

no, i meant Harare, since it this the subject matter here. more precisely, i meant the countryside beyond Harare/ Bulawayo, where central government control may be a little looser. i generally make it a point to avoid the ghettos and barrios of any major US city. just seems like common sense.

The sad part will be that if the Shit hits the fan it will cost millions of dollars to send in rescue teams to bail out all the 'tourists' who find them selves in over their head.

Dollars and innocent lives will be lost so 'Bwana' can get a good deal on a hunt.

Who ya gonna call? Executive Outcomes is out of business and I can't see Blackwater or Graystone mounting any rescue operations in black Africa. The howls would be heard stratospherically.

Nope. If you're there when the shit hits the fan, you're on your own...

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty:
WOW! Surestrike! I'd like to apologize for asking you that question. I just wanted to know where you were going to hunt if it wasn't Zim?

Rusty,

It is I who owes you an apology sir. I misread your post and I apologize.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill C:
I just read your hunt report Surestrike:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=367408

It is obvious that you were disappointed by the one-horned buffalo, but I must tell you that I think you got it wrong. That IS a special trophy, and frankly just about the only cape buffalo I would shoot in the future. Maybe that was the one you were supposed to shoot.

I hope you don't mind me posting the link here:




I like the pictures of the children too.

Regards,

Bill

No worries Bill,

Greg

Surestrike, not to change the topic but like Bill C. I would give my eyeteeth to shoot an old warrier like that one.

I once took a pass on one like it thinking it was not big enough. Now that I have changed my mind I can't find one.

Congratulations.