Put it another way,

Can anyone name ONE PH who has had even a fraction of the charges Mark Sullivan has?

MATT GRAHAM
Matt, you are an very respected and experienced PH. I think you have:

a.)
Hunted with Mark Sullivan

b.)
Knows some of his clients personal
(Maybe some who has hunted/guided by Mark and you)

PLEASE
Maybe you can post some words about this.


Best wishes.

Bock, I

You hunt your quarry in a respected way and shoot it. If by misfortune it ends up wounded then go about doing the job of putting it out of its misery as quickly as possible, without goading it!
I would say that defines the ethics of a hunter!

In most cases any wounded animal will try to seek cover and lick its wounds and if cornered will/might make a last stand.

An unprovoked charge from either buffalo or elephant can and does happen.

MS seems to be an expert in obtaining so many charges - Man, in 40 years of hunting buffalo I may have had 10 !

Dammit I ain't bin doing it right an its too late to change now.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

We all agree that his ethics are questionable . . . .

No we do not. "All" is a poor choice of words. You may disagree with his approach, but that is a decision for each person to make. Some people question the ethics of hunting fenced properties, others hunting dangerous game with a bow, some hunting game at feeders, using small caliber rifles on deer, shooting animals at long distances, the list goes on and on . . . the point is while some may take offense others do not see an issue. There is no universal standard of what is or is not permissible for hunters to do. Some seem to believe that they have been appointed the arbiter of what is or is not permissible, regretfully (thankfully?), that is not the case.

Sorry I mean all the PH's I know.

I think ``all`` was a perfect choice.No need to apologize.When it come to the animals we hunt only complete respect is tolerable-no questions asked.

Noodle on this conundrum, how can it be "all" if just I elect not to play ball? Don't get a headache working all that intellectual horsepower in the cold.

Didn't I see a clip of you shooting a honey badger? And you want to lecture others on complete respect for animals? Spare me.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

We all agree that his ethics are questionable . . . .

No we do not. "All" is a poor choice of words. You may disagree with his approach, but that is a decision for each person to make. Some people question the ethics of hunting fenced properties, others hunting dangerous game with a bow, some hunting game at feeders, using small caliber rifles on deer, shooting animals at long distances, the list goes on and on . . . the point is while some may take offense others do not see an issue. There is no universal standard of what is or is not permissible for hunters to do. Some seem to believe that they have been appointed the arbiter of what is or is not permissible, regretfully (thankfully?), that is not the case.

Sorry I mean all the PH's I know.

I think ``all`` was a perfect choice.No need to apologize.When it come to the animals we hunt only complete respect is tolerable-no questions asked.

If the Sullivan bashers cannot confine their commentary to accurate statements, they can at least take solice in knowing they are on the same side of the issue as Shootaway!!! Which when you think about it, is exactly what George is known for: making inaccurate statements that can be easily disproven with the slightest of effort!

Relax, you guys are in good company!

I would just like to ask one question here.

I simply can't understand why those who are on the positive side for Mark Sulivan, are any more credible than those who oppose his methods.

IMO. both sides are simply expressing their opinion and because one side is larger than the other doesn't make to opinion any more credible than the other. The fact is a debate always has two sides, and if everyone is restricted from stating their side then there is no debate, and regardless of which side you are on, there is two sides to this issue.

I don't think for one minute that there is anyone who knows me that is ignorant of the fact that I totally disagree with Mark sulivan's antics. That fact, however, in no way restricts others from being in favor of his habits. What Mark does is his own business, but when it is put in the public eye, it opens his actions up to DEBATE!

I know people who do a lot of what I consider unethical things while hunting, and I have strong opinion of that activity but I don't debate it publicly simply because the person doesn't place these things in a public venue trying to justify them in public. That then becomes a public issue that is open to debate IMO! I for one will always state my personal opinion of a subject expressed in public.

I can add nothing more to this DEBATE because everyone here now knows my opinion!

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

Some things to consider on this:

1. MS DVD videos are produced to sell and make MONEY. As a PH once told me MS will make more on his DVD than my friend will conducting Safaris over the long haul. A top quality DVD will sell and make money for the makers of it.
2. Most PH will have a Cape buffalo charge at one times or another in there careers. MS just appears to have his filmed. In his 22 or 23 years of being a PH how many different Cape Buffalo charges has he had. Some of his DVD re-show prior charges. MS own words indicate that his has guided and personally been involved in about 600 Cape Buffalo Hunts (where a CB was killed) and he is estimating less that 5% were charges however he did not keep any records to substantiate that. So for 23 years being a PH at 4% that would be 1 charge per year average.
3. MS appears to have a Cameraman for his camp for filming daily hunts.
4. MS - name has world wide recognition. Good or Bad depending on who you talk to.
5. MS has a return client base.. ALL PH's want clients to return in the future.
6. MS Appears to be fully book every year and with booking years ahead. ALL PH's would want this.
7. Now if a hunter went on a safari with MS and shot all his animals plus MS having to never fire a shot would that be news worthy. And i am sure this happens, MS clients however do not post their safari details for others to read and be bashed by forum members. And from the reading Bashed they would be..

I have viewed both of carters and some of M. Sullivan DVD's They both provide information that one can learn from.

The thing is when purchasing a DVD i would like to have something new to see and not TV reruns. There are many trying to sell DVD now of hunting safaris in Africa and some are a waste of time and money.

Mac,

Personally, and only speaking for myself, I'm indifferent on the Sullivan subject. Not pro or con. I'm simply pointing out that many of the negative comments about him are inaccurate and can easily be refuted simply by watching the DVDs.

I've seen quite a few scenes of his hunts where the hunter put the animal down with one shot. Maybe they spoke about a finisher that was taken off camera but that's it. I've not seen this latest commentary on excessive number of shots being taken. I've always heard that with buff, you shoot as long as they are on their feet. I would say that is reflective of his videos.

I don't remember the exact DVD, but there is a charge sequence in which one of Mark's clients has borrowed his 500 Jeffery. The buff was in sight the entire time and simply attempting to walk away from them as they pursued. IIRC, the client fired 5 rounds and the buff just kept walking away from them as if nothing had happened. After the client's last shot, the buff turned around and came for them charging downhill. Mark stopped the charge at close quarters. But Mark never shot the buff until it charged. He let the client do all the shooting until it was time to get involved. They didn't goad the animal into charging. They didn't let it suffer a lingering period before settling it's account.

I can't see anything wrong with that hunt. I can't see anything wrong with any of the cat hunts depicted. Accurate and fair commentary on the subject is all I'm advocating. Otherwise it's just a lynch mob.

Mac:
I think I can answer your question as to why. Those that support Mark do so. Those that don't go on the attack without end. Look at your statement of the "stupid habit" that only was one instance. From what I have read over the years on this subject the folks that like Mark are far more gentlemanly than those who do not. I remember one clown who referred to Mark as "marky-mark" in an insulting manner and would not capitalize his name (and, when he attacked others, would point out their grammatical errors) and, of course, never had any personal experience with the gent.
Cheers, mate.
Cal
PS. I imagine it is time to put this topic to rest now or shortly. Until, that is, when I post the DVD tabulations as to shots, who shot, charges, etc., then it will start all over (again).

quote:

Actors within our industry.

What is the problem with it?
As I am watching TAA, I am thankful that we have those that produce, direct & star in outdoor hunting shows, there sure isn't anything else on TV worth watching.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Mac:
I think I can answer your question as to why. Those that support Mark do so. Those that don't go on the attack without end. Look at your statement of the "stupid habit" that only was one instance.

May I ask you, do you personally think kicking dirt in the face of a hippo to get him to charge is a "SMART" thing to do? I certainly do not!

Unlike those who are pro MS seem attack those who are not! I do not attack the pro MS, nor do I attack Mark himself, I just disagree with his tactics.

Cal I have nothing against those who like Mark! They are entitled to their opinion, and since I’m not paying their safari costs They may hunt with anyone they choose, but I demand the same right to dislike his tactics, and to NOT hunt with him, or recommend him to others!

From this point on, say anything you like, I will not respond further in this thread because I have made my opinion plain, and others can do the same without me, as that is their right as well!

Does anyone remember the fiasco Mark had with Pan0?

After he rented his concession for one of his Hollywood style "look how brave I am" episodes?

We can talk this thing to death,a lot of intelligent debate has taken place,one thing that it does not do, or will ever do is change the facts,how many of you kick somebody when he is down,how many of you taunt a wounded animal to prove your f.....g bravado?
If you do so,it is your business & you are welcome to it,but you will never convince people like me that it is honorable conduct,or how we should hunt

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
There is no accounting for taste, and too many are afraid or unwilling, in this permissive world, to judge the conduct of others, no matter how contemptible.

Mike, it also seems as if there are those that are all too anxious to impose their sense of right or wrong on others in matters that are not moral or legal in nature. (Not to mention the herd following sycophants.) Tell me,

1. Is high fenced hunting right or wrong? If wrong, why is it wrong? If acceptable, why is it acceptable? What makes the opinions of those that take one side more "right" than the opinions of those with a contrary view?
2. Is baiting right or wrong? If wrong, why is it wrong? If okay, why is it okay? What makes the opinions of those that take one side more "right" than the opinions of those with a contrary view?
3. Are canned lion hunts right or wrong? If wrong, why is it wrong? If acceptable, why is it acceptable? What makes the opinions of those that take one side more "right" than the opinions of those with a contrary view?
4. Is the use of .22 caliber centerfire rifles to hunt deer wrong? If wrong, why is it wrong? If acceptable, why is it acceptable? What makes the opinions of those that take one position more "right" than the opinions of those with a contrary view?
5. Is hunting with a silenced rifle wrong? From a helicopter? With nightvision equipment? If wrong, why is it wrong? If it is okay, why is it okay? What makes the opinions of those that take one side more "right" than the opinions of those with a contrary view?
6. Is a bird hunt (shoot?) in South America where 1000's of birds are shot for sport right or wrong? If wrong, why is it wrong? If it is okay, why is it okay . . . . ?

The list could go on for pages. Too many people are of the view that their opinion or position on a matter is all that counts and are prepared to stand in judgment of others that have a different view. I respect anyone that has a firmly held view -- and your firmly held view is that Sullivan's behavior is contemptible, that is fine, you are entitled to that view -- but that does not make the views of others wrong. We are not talking about moral or legal issues here, these are matters of individual judgment and preference.

Mike, ethical answers can be had to each of your questions. They are usually but not always fact dependent, and they always require the exercise of fine judgment. Ethics used to come with breeding. (Still true, in my opinion. But good breeding is hard to predict anymore, and that's not entirely a bad thing!)

Every man has the right and the opportunity, by his actions, to prove or condemn himself in the eyes of his peers. Put another way, not every adult can be trusted to act like one.

And as Mac has said, those like Sullivan, who condemn themselves so publicly, deserve what they get in return.

Gents:
When I make my tabulation of the first 10 of Mark's DVDs at least all involved with the topic will have the facts as to how many shots, who shot, how many charges, enticed or wounded charges, etc. It will not attempt to argue the point if something is stupid or not (opinion) but will show factual numbers (if it's a habit or not). This should be fun and will stir the pot even more. I about two weeks, as Arnold said, "I'll be back."
Cheers, mates,
Cal

What a lot of debate surrounding MS and unfortunately the facts of the matter are:

1 We live in a world where the anti hunters seem to be gaining momentum and therefore we need to make sure that our industry appears squeaky clean to the general public. Whilst some people may find a minor battle entertaining ultimately it shows hunters to be cruel and not looking for a clean kill.

2 MS DVD s do nothing to explain the conservation surrounding hunting.

3 Scenes of mass shooting blood pouring out Buffalo's mouth are uncalled for and with a little editing and a bit of thought could make it a lot more public friendly.

I understand that MS has a huge following and I understand that he has his methods, my only issue is that his DVD'S are bad for the image that we as African PH's try to portray, one of respect for wildlife and the conservation thereof.

I don't know either of these gentlemen, have not hunted with either and as a rule don't buy hunting video or watch hunting tv.
My take from what I saw.
Ivan Carter is a gentleman who I would like to talk with. Mark Sullivan is not someone I would like to talk with.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and mine is different than many posted here.

I have most of Mark Sullivan's videos and both of his books.

I thoroughly enjoy the videos. I find them both entertaining and exciting and have no illusions there were meant to be instructional. I have other African hunting videos (and books) to do serve that purpose. I have always and still look at Sullivan's videos like a pep rally before the big game.

I don't see any evidence that he or his clients intentionally wound any animal to make it charge.

In most of the videos I have he does not take a shot before his client fires the second barrel of his own double. "Hit 'em again, Bwanna" is a phrase that sticks in my mind because he often uses it before he fires a shot.

As far as letting the animal suffer by waiting to take another shot - I can't say I've seen that either aside from waiting until the animal was in the clear or presented a better angle or was closer. And as far as waiting, I'd venture to guess many of us have waited for our already shot game to "stiffen up" or bleed out" or "lay down" whether African dangerous game or Northeastern whitetail. Does anyone believe that in the latter case the leopard/lion/buffalo/whitetail/bear/etc. is thinking "Oh I am so glad this conscientious hunter is letting me stiffen up as I lay here in agony and die-he is so honorable!" while in the former the same animal is grumbling about Mark Sullivan's unsportsman like behavior making it wait to die?

Russ,
Do you think that an antihunter who watches one of Ivan's or Aaron's or Johann's sees anything except "the poor nearly extinct elephant being slaughtered for its ivory? And cutting off its tail? That is simply savage!!!" And the same would be said by those same people of my hunt reports and yours too. Your contention is no different than those being used to ban Assault-type rifles. No matter how we write it or how it is said it will be used against us. Period. And even if we write nothing at all, the same antis will be as rabid.

I look forward to Cal's empiric investigation and results. For me, it's great entertainment - nothing more, nothing less. But so are the other non-"instructional" videos and books and magazines.

Simple opinion - like everyone else's.

CCMDoc

I take your point about the anti's, and I am of the opinion that it is a little like, we all eat beef we know its slaughtered but just don't want to see it.

I really dont think that MS sales would be hurt much if some of the gory blood pouring out Buffalo, multiple shots etc were edited out. This is MS style of hunting I dont agree with it, and I don't think any African PH would agree with it, back up shooting on clients animals unless its on top of you is a no no. Nevertheless if some clients enjoy wounding game and the small war that ensues who am I to judge.

quote:

Originally posted by Russ B:
CCMDoc

I take your point about the anti's, and I am of the opinion that it is a little like, we all eat beef we know its slaughtered but just don't want to see it.

I really dont think that MS sales would be hurt much if some of the gory blood pouring out Buffalo, multiple shots etc were edited out. This is MS style of hunting I dont agree with it, and I don't think any African PH would agree with it, back up shooting on clients animals unless its on top of you is a no no. Nevertheless if some clients enjoy wounding game and the small war that ensues who am I to judge.

Fair response and I respect your perspective except the part in bold.

I don't know or know of anyone who enjoys wounding game.

quote:

Originally posted by Russ B:
back up shooting on clients animals unless its on top of you is a no no

That is unless the client insists on such from the get-go, which does happen on occasion.

For many, the gift that keeps on giving: Mark Sullivan redux.

A discussion about Mark Sullivan and his place in our community invariably seems to degenerate into mind-numbing, malicious, and unproven attacks. Of course it's become something of a refrain by folks like Mike Jines and Cal Pappas who, while not necessarily being fans of Sullivan's, nevertheless believe that unfounded accusations have no place in a gentleman's conversation. Granted, you may not like his videos, or the way he hunts, or the cut of his jib, but nothing gives one license to hurl allegations that amount to character assassination without a scintilla of evidence.

That said, I think the evidence is clear that Mark Sullivan has a 'participatory' view of shooting his clients' game - at least on enough occasions depicted on his videos to where this is not easily disputed. Not every animal or with every client, to be sure, but often enough to where this criticism seems valid. (Although you've got to admit, it's an enviable business model: Become a professional hunter; get other people to pay you to go on safari; and, shoot the animals that your client is hunting.)

But as has been stated by others over and over and over again, where is the evidence for his deliberately wounding game? There is none! No less a person than Dave Fulson, who at one time accompanied Sullivan on numerous hunts, says that he never witnessed such behavior - and he was Sullivan's videographer at the time!

And with all due respect to his accusers, where is your evidence that Sullivan:

• Does not follow wounded buffalo into thick bush?
• Leaves wounded buffalo to die a long and lingering death?
• Shoots buffalo from the back of a truck?

An array of 'friends' and 'friends of friends' are quoted in angst-filled posts in this and previous threads accusing Sullivan with ephemeral evidence of these charges along with his deliberately wounding cape buffalo and goading them to charge. As is often the case, it's a PH - though at other times by other posters it's a game scout or concession owner or some such person in the know. And interestingly, all of these characters who have damning evidence on Sullivan share a similar characteristic: They insist on anonymity due to their being, what, discreet? gentlemanly? demure? deceptive? Or maybe just cowardly? Since it's the bogieman Sullivan who is being skewered, the lack of any first-hand evidence is casually dismissed.

As I have written before, and others have recently stated, Cape buffalo charges can be provoked by not shooting backup shots when first available, coupled with a direct and aggressive approach on the wounded animal. Will such tactic dramatically increase the number of charges a PH faces? Certainly. Could such an animal have been killed several minutes earlier? Undoubtedly. Is that undue cruelty to the animal? Probably.

That then begs the question: If the undue suffering of hunted game is anathema to our community, is now the time to begin a discussion on the use of bow & arrow on Cape buffalo? Or pistols? Or black-powder rifles? Or allowing a wounded buffalo 'to get sick for a while' before approaching for the coup d’grace? If it's a perversion to taunt a wounded buffalo into charging, what is it when a hunter's vanity has him choose a weapon where there is far greater likelihood of initially wounding or losing the animal he's hunting? I must admit that I don't foresee the same fervor in exploring these topics as there is for threads attacking Mark Sullivan.

I guess I am still perplexed as to why those folks who hate Sullivan find it inadequate to simply say, "I don't like that Mark Sullivan refrains from killing a buffalo as quickly as possible and instead taunts the wounded animal into charging." That would not only be understandable, but also reasonable and supported by facts. Instead of making a defensible point, these attacks are rendered impotent when they are girded by unsubstantiated rumor, innuendo, or unfounded allegation.

Kim,

I have shot quite a number of buffalo, and was present on quite a lot being shot by others.

In mind at least, and to those PHs that I have hunted with. There is no way in hell that one can have as many ACCIDENTLY wounded buffalo as Mark Sullivan has, so that they can be provoked into charging.

Or Mark Sullivan has the misfortune to get the world's worst buffalo hunters.

It's like deja vu all over again.....

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Kim,

I have shot quite a number of buffalo, and was present on quite a lot being shot by others.

In mind at least, and to those PHs that I have hunted with. There is no way in hell that one can have as many ACCIDENTLY wounded buffalo as Mark Sullivan has, so that they can be provoked into charging.

Or Mark Sullivan has the misfortune to get the world's worst buffalo hunters.

I have great respect for your accomlishhments in the field, Saeed. In particular, your record with Cape buffalo is nothing short of extraordinary. However, I'm incredulous that so many experienced hunters of dangerous game feign bewilderment as to how Mark Sullivan manages to film his many buffalo charges. Study his videos and you will observe:

1) Many of his clients use big-caliber double rifles and don't fire from shooting sticks. On the other hand, it seems that the majority of Cape buffalo hunters, including the likes of Saeed, Boddington, and Moja (at least in most cases I've seen), use them to steady their aim. Sullivan shuns their use - and the consequence is not hard to figure: Fewer accurate and killing first shots. Shooting off-hand with a heavy double rifle with open sights (as many of his clients use) I believe goes a long way to explain why so many of them don't place lethal first shots.

2) Rather than follow-up on a wounded buffalo and firing the moment it is spotted – and as often as is required – Sullivan does something altogether different: He locates the buff and deliberately maneuvers around until he can approach it such that the wounded animal can see him and his client approach. In his own words, Sullivan then proceeds to 'invade the buffalo's space' until it either runs or charges. Since Saeed and most PHs (including mine) never approach a wounded buffalo in this manner, and instead try to kill it from a distance and in most cases from behind, its no surprise that they rarely see a charge.

3) Despite these 'tactics', I doubt seriously that Sullivan has a high percentage of charges each year. My guess would be that he probably encounters as few as a couple and perhaps as many as four charges per season (again, total speculation on my part, but based on the number of charges depicted in movies spanning a couple of decades). After two or three seasons Sullivan likely finds that he has sufficient footage to produce his next video. Regardless, whether it's Sullivan or Boddington or Carter or Charlton, any of the folks who film and sell videos are going to edit out the less exciting or interesting hunts and only include those that will sell to their market. One would have to be deliberately obtuse to assume that most of Sullivan's buffalo hunts result in a charge simply because most of the hunts on his videos depict them.

You may not like Sullivan for the way he hunts, or how he presents himself on film, or for the way he combs his hair. Hell, I've pointed out the issues I have with him. But don't demean the discussion by pretending to be flummoxed over bogus issues like this. I'm certainly no expert, and my buffalo hunts pale in comparison to the number many on this board have under their belts, but it doesn't take a professional hunter to understand how Sullivan produces so many charges on his videos - all it takes are a pair of eyes and a measure of objectivity.

I am starting to wonder if this debate has less to do with tactics and more to do with personalities. If the debate was a serious ethical debate about hunting tactics, then issues like bow hunting dangerous game, hunting with pistols, hunting large game with small calibers, shooting game at 400+ yards, harvesting 1000's of doves, parrots, etc. on South American bird hunts, etc., would have to enter into the conversation. Instead the conversation seems to be less about the substance of ethical hunting and more about the man.

Kim:
If all here had your logic and common sense, coupled with manners and gentlemanly demeanor, the AR forums would be a finer place for all of us. My hat is off to you.
Cal

quote:

Kim:
If all here had your logic and common sense, coupled with manners and gentlemanly demeanor, the AR forums would be a finer place for all of us. My hat is off to you.
Cal

I agree, but we would miss out on sooooooo many pissing contest!

BC:
So true! Also, having met Ivan for the first time at Dallas (he showed me his .600 and I sold him a copy of my book on the .600s) I kind of feel bad for the gent. His name was given 50% of the billing in the title of this thread yet no mention of him! He's shot charging elephants I've been told (I have not seen any of his videos) and he has a well known name. C'mon guys, lets give this other fine gent some name recognition!
Cheers all.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Kim:
If all here had your logic and common sense, coupled with manners and gentlemanly demeanor, the AR forums would be a finer place for all of us. My hat is off to you.
Cal

Yes! Amen! That's right!

Kim,

Both of your posts are spot on. Very good points all around!

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Kim:
If all here had your logic and common sense, coupled with manners and gentlemanly demeanor, the AR forums would be a finer place for all of us. My hat is off to you.
Cal

Agreed!!!

"harvesting 1000's of doves, parrots, etc."

Wow, guilty as charged, I just got back from Argentina.

Kim, I don't get it. You seem to be an accidental, reluctant and ineffectual Sullivan apologist.

I don't think anyone on this thread who has criticized Sullivan "hates" him. Rather, they simply find his methods and self-promotion repugnant.

Some of us, myself included, also happen to think that bowhunting Cape buffalo is a highly questionable, not to say stupid, activity. But that is not relevant to this discussion.

Unless Sullivan decided to see if he could stop a buffalo charge with a bow and arrow. I might be tempted to buy that video!

Kim (KPete),

Your comments and logic are a breath of fresh air for what started out to be a simple thread regarding two professional hunters offering newly released DVDs. Thanks for your perspective and approach.

Respectfully,
Shawn

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. FM:
MATT GRAHAM
Matt, you are an very respected and experienced PH. I think you have:

a.)
Hunted with Mark Sullivan

b.)
Knows some of his clients personal
(Maybe some who has hunted/guided by Mark and you)

PLEASE
Maybe you can post some words about this.


Best wishes from Germany.

FM

It is true - I have never heard a client of his say a bad word about him. That is all I know from that perspectives. The videos are another matter of course. Video is video - what can I say, it is entertainment for some!

quote:

(I have not seen any of his videos) and he has a well known name. C'mon guys, lets give this other fine gent some name recognition!

Please:

a.)
He is an real gent.
He has an great knowlegde of hunting, wildlife, exs. elephants. I think he is the best elephant-hunter in our modern days in every point of view.

b.)
He has great videos.
Other as the MS-videos, but great too.
Look them, you will love them.


Best wishes.

Bock, III

It always amazes me how posts degenerate into a mudslinging barrage from professional hunters/ hunters and the general public.
Lets face it, DVD's are about marketing, marketing is about perceptions, whether it is Mark Sullivan, Ivan Carter, Buzz Charlton or any other of the producers/ hunters it is all about marketing, bookings and money, some put out educational DVD's to help the first time hunter, others cater for the adrenaline junkie, whichever, each to their own.
We may not all agree on everything but there are those out there that thrive on 'action' thrive on 'charges' and therefore the DVD's will continue to morph according to demand, ethics aside, it is business for some and believe me it is getting tougher so there are bound to be some more radical ones ' coming to theaters near you"!!

Just my 2 cents

Mart

I just would like to see one of the I Hate Sullivan For Lunch Bunch to produce ONE CLIENT of Mark's that had nothing but praise for the man's ethics and professionalism afield. JUST ONE...

quote:

Originally posted by martin pieters:
It always amazes me how posts degenerate into a mudslinging barrage from professional hunters/ hunters and the general public.
Lets face it, DVD's are about marketing, marketing is about perceptions, whether it is Mark Sullivan, Ivan Carter, Buzz Charlton or any other of the producers/ hunters it is all about marketing, bookings and money, some put out educational DVD's to help the first time hunter, others cater for the adrenaline junkie, whichever, each to their own.
We may not all agree on everything but there are those out there that thrive on 'action' thrive on 'charges' and therefore the DVD's will continue to morph according to demand, ethics aside, it is business for some and believe me it is getting tougher so there are bound to be some more radical ones ' coming to theaters near you"!!

Just my 2 cents

Mart

martin@bulembisafaris.co.zw
www.martinpieterssafaris.com

" hunt as if it's your last one you'll ever be on"

Precisely 1,000% correct Martin and I doubt anyone can legitimately question your veracity.

quote:

Originally posted by Jorge:
I just would like to see one of the I Hate Sullivan For Lunch Bunch to produce ONE CLIENT of Mark's that had nothing but praise for the man's ethics and professionalism afield. JUST ONE...

USN (ret)
DRSS Verney-Carron 450NE
DSC Life Member
NRA Life Member

Still waiting Jorge ...