I would say that the avaerage American is a better shot than the average European sprots person. This is based on hunting on the continent, as well as spending close to a combined year there. Many of my friends over there are hunters and shooters. Finland dropped the shooting test requirement for Americans a couple of years ago. None of the Americans were failing the test, so now they just ask for a copy of an old hunting license.

THe typical moose shot in Scandanavia is under 50 meters. Often it is 15 meters at a moose bayed with dogs. Or Shooting a moose in a green field at 70 meters under a full moon is not a test of marksmanship. I shot one running at 125 meters and about 2 seconds later shot another on a dead run at about 85 meters. It totally blew their mind. Especially that a moose was hit at over 100 meters. They now call me "The AMerican Sniper". One guy shot a moose at around 150 meters, from a high seat, many years ago, and they still tlak about it every time they get together.

Roe are small (yearlings are VERY small) but they are also shot at short ranges. ANd few guides will let a hunter shoot at a moving deer. It goes on along htese lines with the other species

Magazines make a big deal about this because it gives them something fresh to write about that most Americans have never seen. the old .270 vs '06, Partition vs TSX, etc articles get stale, so they throw a European story in there once every three years.

You are trying to compare apples and oranges. In Africa there is a general motivation for shooting game as that is when a significant amount of money is made and/or reclaimed by the outfitter. No game taken, no money.

In the US all the money is paid up front. Where is the motivation to kill anything, except as regards their "reputation?"

Bill,
I do not fully disagree with you, but a lot of hunts in the US are the same as AFrica as they are on game ranches. You draw blood, you pay. Hunts on public land are a different issue.

Further, my experience with European hunters has been solely in Africa as I have never hunted in Europe. The ones I saw in AFrica were better prepared than a lot of the Americans I have seen in Africa.

A caveat is that I have not seen the numbers of hunters that many of the posters on AR have seen, so my observations are a bit more limited than others - however, what I observed is what I observed.

I fully agree with your post and would one more item-
our US hunters are not as well prepared or knowledgeable as the counterparts in Europe or Africa. We are not, as a rule, good marksmen, shoot for the pot too often and try to re-invent "heritage" like a Terry Redlin print of some farmhouse with ducks flying over. I realize that we are our own worst enemy on this but it is time that we step up our skills, our testing and permiting for guides as well as hunters.

I like the idea of having a proficiency exam with rifle before you are allowed to buy a big game permit, much like Sweden or Finland. I attended the hunter safety course in New Mexico a few years ago and was very please with what I saw - written exam, gun safety and gun proficiency. I have not seen that anywhere else in the US. I would like to see permit prices go up to the point where the states can hold serious proficiency exams and testing.

Yeah, I know, this is the US and we should be able to do what we want, but the bottom line is that we need to be more accountable for our behavoir in the woods and develop a deeper appreciation for the right and privilege to hunt.

dogcat

Last August in Zimbabwe, I had the same discussion with my PH. Being a professional, he was dubious of my criticism of some of our western guides. In the west it appears some are good horse wranglers and know a territory, but hunting skills are a stretch. IMHO, in British Columbia and in Alaska, most guides have to be very good or else their clients are in trouble, probably from the weather--even more than the animals.

In Africa, PH's in dangerous game areas are usually there as a full time career choice and have to pass rigorous training--testing to get licensed. In camp in the Zambezi area were two trainees. One was a second year trainee. I was impressed with his knowkedge and hunting skills. He was in the midst of some testing sequence when I was there and was missing for a few days. He performed at a higher level than I had personally seen in the states.

That said, there a lot of full time really top guides in the western states, but I feel there are on the top of their game because they love it, are full time with many years of experience--almost self-motivated.

Overall in DG areas in Africa most PH's are experienced and impressive. One of the reasons it is so much fun to go over there, besides all the great game.

Dak

Dogcat,



I think there are good and bad shots everywhere. It is unreasonable to be dogmatic about most things, except when I jump to conclusions.

I wish the exam were given in the US to the so-called guides here. I have been on several guided hunts with so-called experienced guides. The summary is that the guides in the US are usually under-educated, do not truly know the outdoors other than how to wrangle horses, do not know more than one of two animals and can barely speak understandable English.

The PH's I have met know every bird, bush and animal, can track, can shoot, are clean and speak two or more languages. I am appalled that I ever thought guides in the US to be qualified for anything other than spitting and chewing.

The average elk, deer, antelope, caribou guide would last about 2 days in the bush in Africa.

I quit hunting in the US with guides, guide services or anyone that reps themselves as an expert. No wonder hunting in the US has a bad name, the "guides" and hunters don't expect more professionalism and hence don't get the respect in the eye of the public that PH's in Africa get.

.

Take solice in the fact that no matter how self-righteous someone is, one can always find someone more so.

More than one fought the brits. The early americans were in my opinion good marksman, and that may be an understatement. Many of the states in the US still have strong ties to guns and shooting. I don't think in this day and time its as important to lay claim to being a good shot with gun as it once was in this country. But I suspect if a man poked around in the right parts of this country and wanted to shoot for a paycheck, a fellow might get taken up on his bet. I don't think as a whole Americans are any better or worse shoots, work schedules and other limitations have played into that. But I suspect in many parts of this country there's some ole boys that still live by the gun, and just might be able to pass just about any shootin test thrown at them.

The names Winchester, Remington, Savage and so on grew to what they are today for a reason.

I thought the reason we couldnt take our trucks to africa was because they are to wide for the hiways and the steering wheel is on the wrong side.

And yes I did pass my Texas hunter education class

Are they the same good ole boys who take "sound shots"? The ones who open up like the first day of the Somme at running deer at 400 yards? The same ones who make it so you need to be head to toe in Blaze orange if your going to hunt public land? The same public hand where it is dangerous to use white toilet paper?

The States and perhaps to a lesser degree Canada, have a lot of very casual "one box of bullets a year" hunters some who I would not trust with a pointy stick never mind a rifle! But as Alf suggests, they tend not to hunt abroad (can't take your pick em up truck to Africa very easy! ) You simply don't get as many of those sort in the UK or Europe as the licensing/red tape discourages them.

Still, I also believe you can't generalise too much, and their are good and bad where ever you go.

With regards the issue of American guides, does any State require them to sit tests ect?

Regards,

Pete

Once again the solution seems simple to me.... Get a double rifle, and practice with it... a lot, until shooting it is second nature.

On a more serious note, I asked Ganyana a couple of questions about the contents of the exam and he was kind enough to send a very detailed answer which I thought a few people here might be interesting in sharing:



"Requirements for a PH



1) Write learners theory exams. 4 Papers - Law, Firearms, Habits & Habitats and General paper.



Pass mark is 60% for each paper.



Present your results slip, a letter from a qualified PH stating that he is your tutor and a basic first aid certificate to the hunting office and you will be issued a learners license, and your log book stamped with the date of commencement of your formal apprenticeship.



Many youngsters from school do a year or so as a "gopher" for one of the big companies before they write their learners exams.



The learners is pretty comprehensive but the first three papers are purely book knowledge and anybody with a basic knowledge of the bush and some common sense will pass the "general" paper.



During your time as an apprentice you are expected to a) learn about the bush, b) learn about hunting (as opposed to shooting) c) Learn about clients.



You must also shoot 4 ele/buff (minimum) and 1 lion or 4 leopard. It is also expected that you would have accompanied hunts with clients and your tutor.



As a leaner you are permitted to carry out hunts with clients for soft skinned game in areas where nothing more dangerous than leopard may be encountered. Doing plainsgame hunts is a good way to gain experience in hunting and dealing with clients.



You must then pass a MARS advanced first aid certificate, and the shooting exam. Parks make a variety of ele and buff available to appy hunters but they have to have passed the shooting exam before they can take advantage of whatever ration or problem animals the local warden makes available.



The shooting test is

1 Speed shoot (aka Haley's hop) . 3 Targets at 10,15 and 20 paces. maximum of 3 rounds in rifle. on buzzer, shoot furthest to nearest, reload and then shoot near to far. Bull 6" score divided by time. Full house in 24 seconds is the pass mark. (you can of course be faster and less accurate! and still pass)



Major cal (.416 up) scores 5,4,2 (9,3 to .416) Minor scores 5,3,1



Scoring rings 6" bull, 10" inner



2) Run down. 40 meter run and then four targets at 10,15,20,25 m. score divided by time. Full house in 22 seconds to pass



3) Fire and movement. run 30 m then a series of three targets, only one visible at a time. keep waling and shooting. Range to targets only 10 m. Full house in 17 seconds to pass.



4) Accuracy shoot. 2/3 sized buff target at 75m. Two shots in two minutes. A hit in the heart zone scores 10. Anything else is taken as a miss. any position but from the bench. Most shoot from shooting sticks.



When your tutor thinks you know what you are doing, you attend one of the 'Interviews" (held twice a year). Just a short 20 min oral exam to see if you actually know your stuff. Will have an interpretive table with c20 skulls + skin samples for identification plus many skulls from buff antelope etc to estimate trophy size. etc. Interview is intense. Panel of six trying to get through everything from map reading to tree id in 20 mins. If you know your stuff basically and have the required minimum experience you go on the proficiency exam.



You site, and build a fly camp in the Zambezi Valley. Host an examiner. ( three candidates may combine into a camp to keep cost reasonable)



Proficiency lasts a week and CANDIDATE WILL BE ASKED TO SHOOT EITHER AND ELE OR A BUFF, PLUS BUILD A BLIND AND BAIT IN A HYAENA, LION OR LEOPARD. hYAENA ARE SHOT for skinning practice, as are baboon. Candidate will be examined on all aspects of being a PH from running a camp, through tacking setting up a hunt, skinning, baits and blinds, trees, birds, spoor you name it. When you have 5 candidates between two examiners and often a 3rd Moderator along as well, and you are with them 14 - 20hrs a day you have plenty of time to ask a million questions.



After that, if you actually show that you are professional you have the privilege of paying the government and exorbitant annul fee, calling yourself a PH and having hassle free firearms licensing!"

I have seen terrible shots from most parts of the world. I know why Spanish clients (on average) make me very nervous (same feeling as having a tuskless cow with young calf at heel 2 paces behind you) - and it's not because they cannot shoot straight - although to be fair they have missed me every time

I would venture that AR members are better than average shots - Will perhaps a little postal match - say 6" disk at 50 yards offhand?. I certainly know who are the worst though. Council game scouts and Zimbabwe policemen (our police fire four shots in their entire training!!!!)

You know it never ceases to amaze me how poor the Americans are as hunters and shooters. Heck they only win gold medals and all by accident and the 450,000 deer killed last season in Pennsylvania was mostly road kill or accidental death and believe it or not most use those rotten american built firearms that have won every war they fought in. I guess I have really been living in a dream world.

Hi Zimhunter

Next time you are in country stop at any parks station and ask to have a look at the station dangerous game rifles. It will be an eye opening experience! many have no sights, many are worn beyond belief. Last year at the shooting exam, one of my scouts drew an FN (Mauser Action) in .458 Win from Makuti Armory. As he was chabering a round it went off, blowing the bolt open - breaking his thumb and liberally splatering him and Charlie Haley (who was examining) with bits of brass! How? No Idea.

Most of the CZ's we see here are 1950's to 1980's vintage. See very few of the newer ones, and on most of the parks or "company" owned rifles the safety can be taken on or off by giving the rifle a good shake- no exageration.

Scrap - yes, but the controversial article was aimed - not at US hunters, but incomming people to the hunting industry. An appy's wages are arround the US$200 a month mark and many carry rifles that are best described as "abominations before the Lord".

Also- how to you test a weapons durability? Give it to a game scout! in 1995 the Brit government donated us 1000 brand new SLR's (Brit mad F.N. FAL's). Within 6 months over half were inoperable. Today about 200 or so still work and are invarably carried by the old school NCO's who are ex Rhodesian Army and appreciate the FN's qualities and the nicities of maintaining it. Watch a party of game scouts going out on patrol- they load their AK's, throw them in the truck and then sit on them while they bounce over a dirt road. The station heavy rifles are subjected to the same treatment! - Which is why there is a big stink on at the moment over a problem elephant that was shot at Kariba last weekend (during the tiger tournament). In full view of many visiting competetors, (with vedeo cammera's) two parks officers fired 47 rounds from a .458 and .375 into this bull, before it chased them and a seargent with a SLR put in a couple of lung shots and dropped it! The rifles were bought to me to see what was wrong. The FN. .375 had no front sight, the Interarms .458 was a smooth bore with bullets keyholing at 25 yards.

.

Hi Alf

I picked up my copy of Big Bore Journal in town today, and note that at the SA big bore shoots they had a 90% failure rate of the rifles in their initial matches! "failure" being some sort of problem that could have easily resulted in a dead hunter if it were for real. (Article by P. van der Walt) and he was commenting that now most shooter have a few practice "competitions" against the timer to find the problems before a real match.

So- in answer to your question - No, I would not trust ANY factory rifle, from the box, made by anyone today to be reliable enough. I like Krieghoff Doubles (cannot afford one but doesn't stop me liking them) I like original Mausers - but they ain't all perfect (See John Taylors comments). You always get a friday afternoon rifle even from Obendorf or F.N. The old english makes were superb- if you ordered a top grade gun. - I own a H&H .404 built post war on an F.N action. The aluminium magazine box had disintergrated under recoil causing jambs which is why it was given to me. In the last couple of years I have handeled two new .450 Rigby's that suffered bolt set back after only 50 or so shots and both have had new actions fitted (actually Rigby changed the make of action and so had to change the stock's as well).

Some are better out of the box -on average- than others. some will never, in my opinion be satisfactory. I have never yet seen a Rem 700 in .416 that I would use. I have seen old push feed M70's that work great and I could trust but if I was able to afford a new rifle I would probably order a) Krieghoff, b) Manlicher c) Winchester or the new Weatherby. I love Ruger No 1's and when hunting alone often used a Webly single shot (.450/400) but wouldn't like to carry one to back up somebody else or follow up a wounded animal in the jesse. (as for weatherby, I am not particularly partial to weatherby calibers but downloaded slightly they perform superbly, and I believe the new models can be had in non weatherby calibers on order).

My standard is simple. It must work! Weather it is pissing with rain and I've just dropped it in the mud, or its a 120 degree day in the kalahari and we have just had a sandstorm. My FAL and M16's work, why shouldn't my DGR?

As to the PH proficiency.

It is not "my" exam. There are a pool of examiners of whome two are assigned to each group of 4 or 5 candidates. The two Senior examiners, Don Heath and David Mpungu circulate between the groups to "moderate" - keep the standard uniform. (a few years back we had one examiner who tried to fail his entire group and another who wanted to pass everybody just for the effort they made!).

The basic question is- is this candidate suficienty competant to conduct a client in a dangerous situation and if all goes wrong, sort it out. If yes, then we can niggle about minor points. If not- then no we cannot with a clear concience allow him to take out clients after dangerous game. The other aspects that are examined fairly stringently are tracking and skinning. No, we do not expect the PH to be able to track like a san bushman, but he must be able to follow basic spoor. This is often essential when you are a contract hunter in an area where the tracker is supplied. A dangerous animal is wounded and the tracker, not knowing you, has absolutely no intention of finding that animal! You need to be pretty good at the basics. As to skinning, many white African males are inherantly lazy when it comes to the dirty work and far too many leave this sort of work to the "boy". If you haven't done the work yourself you do not appreciate how tired one gets when there is much skinning and if you cannot do the job then the regular skinner will blame subsiquent cock ups on the taxidermist or the salt. And when you get home with that rowland ward klipspringer to find your skinner down with Malaria it is a bit late to start learning. Most candidates reckon they will never overload or under appreciate their skinners again! One group this year shot two ele in two minutes (somebody lost controll of the situation). 5 men two ele. All skins and meat have to be recovered and accounted for. Boy did they work- took them two days.

That said, plenty pass, and many who have been properly tutored, on their first try. This year - as last year all the ele's were shot full frontal and three in full charge. - can you defend your client? can you pull off a frontal brain shot? Some could (including the only girl along)- many couldn't. Most of the buff were taken frontal as well. Three wounded and lost though doesn't do much for the candidates- see you next year.

The actual stats were
Hunters 6 passed outright, 8 with various restrictions and 4 see you later. Guides Two candidates, two passed.

Actually by the time of the proficiency exam, no candidate should fail. They have done all the theory exams ( 4 x3hr papers), done a minimum of two years apprenticeship during which time they have done an advanced first aid certificate and passed the shooting exam. There is then an oral exam, and only those deemed likely to pass the proficiency are allowed on. This is a fairly recent development. Untill two years ago the shooting exam and the interviews (ie the oral exam) were held on the first day of the proficiency. This ment that each pair of examiners were sadeled with 10 to 11 candidates to a group, half of whom were guaranteed failures. This made recovering ele's easy but cost failing candidates a huge ammount of money. ( setting up and running the camp, hosting the examiners, vehicles and the million zim dollars to parks to cover the cost of the animals - I reckon it cost each candidate arround 5 mill for this years exam. To take a failure along is a waste of his money and our time).

Why don't more pass? I blame the tutors, rather than the lack of big game experience. Each candidate needs to have personally shot 4 ele and buff and one lion or 4 leopard, pluss accompanied hunts before he may book for the oral exam. There are a few "parker pen" kills which may make ones log book look great but never pay off on the day. That is the tutors fault. Also many hunting candidates never spend enough time in non hunting areas (like mana pools) walking in ammongst the herds of buff and ele that are not afraid of man, and pushing the boundaries a few times getting the odd mock charge and standing it down without shooting. (I can hear Norman Monks - the warden of Mana screaming blue murder about me recomending that appy hunters should be so irresponsble and antagonise his ele's. He has a point, but the only way to learn to handle elephants and be confident up close is in a non hunting area. ) Many apprentice pro guides consiquently fare better than hunters since they are more used to staying in control of a large group of people around dangerous animals.

Hope this essay answers your questions If not I'm on e-mail until a week monday.

Excellent, excellent, excellent reply. All words of wisdom, especially the part about being "comfortable" around elephant.



That is what I hate most about being a tourist-hunter, in that I haven't seen a real elephant for 11 months and the next moment I am suppoose to be fearless in the face of up close and personal ele's. It takes a few days to get back to "normal."



And the poor Appys get treated like shit. They are suppose to be getting hunt experience at these concessions and usually wind up getting in on few hunts and get treated worse than grunts. Andy's reply to this is "that is the way the system operates," but it really pisses me off.....which is why I could never qualify for the exam!

E-x-c-e-l-l-e-n-t !!!!!!!!

LG

Your M16 worked?? That is amazing as the M16 is one of the biggest pieces of shit on the planet. They were pure shit in Vietnam and got a lot of fellows killed and they are still shit in Iraq and have caused numerous deaths in that country as well. You mention the FN- FAL and I can honestly say that now you have mentioned a great rifle to say the least! They should have been the main battle rifle of the US military but they were sabotaged during the testing so Colt could have the contract. Do you think that a little money may have been passed under the table??

Hi Holand

We started of using mosberb 500 shotguns for anti-poaching. Some stayed with it and some of us went back to the FAL's that we had used for daylight ops. My HB- FAL works well provided it is kept clean. Very few of the game scouts can keep a FAL serviceable for more than a few days.

Just about all of us involved in the night ops went out and bough either M16 A2's (your army was being generous) or civi model AR15's. I have had 2. 1 st one was a 1970's vintage AR15. with a 1:14 barrel twist. Not particluarly accurate but worked well and since I have never had to engage a human target over 25 m it was fine. I shot a couple of thousand rounds through it in short order getting used to point shooting it (FAL is much easier to point shoot with, for me anyway). Sold it on and bought a mint M16 A2. We use IMI 55gnd hollow point ammo and I can honestly say that the AR15/M16's have never hichuped once - After the magazines were sorted out. Each rifle was/is magazine fussy. My M16 likes only 3 of my 30 round mags, but is happy with all of the 20 rnd ones. The older Ar worked fine with different 30 rnd mags.

I have often heard complaints about the M16 and was part of a test with the Zimbabwe National Army & Police to choose a new .223 service rifle. The government aquired M16's, Sig 551's Galil's, Steyr AUG's, FN. CAR's and beretta's. Used them all and we issued then to game scouts to see what they could break. Officers who could look after things liked the Sig then the Colt, Game scouts broke everything except the FN's and the Galil's. Most prefered the FN. So- We bought Steyr AUG's for the police, Berreta's for the airforce, new AK's from china for the army and sold the rest to eager officers. Just sorry I was too junior to get one of the three surviving sigs.

Ganyana,
Do you think they ("I certainly know who are the worst though")could hit a charging Oklahoma bunny with a shotgun? If they couldn't, then I would think they were bad shots. Do you personally know anybody who has missed a shot like that?

Hitting a charging Oklahoma bunny with your fingers frozen solid and with a couple of rednecks behind you is a) considerably more difficult than shooting a poacher. b) considerably more dangerous Africa certainly doesn't have a monopoly on high adrenaline hunting

LMFAO!
I went hunting with some guys in 1984. Let's just say they liked their whiskey. Most dangerous hunt I've ever been on.
JCN

Lets see now. Which is more dangerous. A tuskless ele cow in the jesse with calf at heel 2 paces behind you or A redneck with a shotgun 2 paces behind and a rabbit in front.

I love elephants

Mind you, the golden toothed brigade from oaklahoma (somewhat like our Gwaai valley farmers - all call the same woman grandma!) are still relitively ok compared to a spanish client behind with a rifle and a warthog infront. Or ...no I was going to say a parks game scout behind with an AK and anything in front - but since the average game scout couldn't hit a barn if they were standing inside you are probably relatively safe there

After reading the shooting exam requirements of the Zim Ph's, I've convinced a few members of my gun club to try something similar but less rigourous. I'm dreading the rapid fire drill with my 416 but I know its gotta be done. I started taking shooting seriously with handguns and even went to Front Site and Gunsite training sessions. Then I started shooting sporting clays. Only in the last few years did I begin shooting high powered rifles but I think the training approaches of handgun practice and sport shotgun shooting had already given me a head start. It is probable that a lot of rifle shooters never practice in any sort of simulated hunting situation. How can you expect them to be any good when the only time they shoot is on a safari?

On my only South African safari, I still managed to make a clean miss on a duiker at only 80 yards. Fortunately I made acceptable (one shot kills) on the five antelope I did take.

A nieghbor kid called me up one day asking me to hunt pheasants before chores started (we both lived on dairy farms in Minnesota) since I couldn't go he asked another nieghbor kid known for his "humor". They were walking through a pasture on the way toward a swamp. The kid's family had over 500 dairy cows so there were a lot of cow pies to step over. The guest fired his twelve guage into a fresh cow pattie laying between them splattering his host head to foot with crap and scaring him half to death. The guest thought he was being funny. He couldn't understand how the whole nieghborhood had lost their sanity getting mad over having fun. I've wondered for twenty years what happened to our humorist.

Anyway, one doesn't have to go 1/2 way around the world to find stupid people and it doesn't neccesarily take alcohol to make them that way.

In reguard to the safety on the left side: I also used to love the safety on the left side and remember discussing it with Finn Aagaard (who liked the right side M-70 safety). I was convinced I was right until I was hunting with my 505 Gibbs (which has a M-70 right side safety) and had a wounded bear get into the brush because I could not find my safety in time as I was fooling around on the left side. Now all my rifles have similiar right sided safeties. I don't know if they are "better" but they are the most popular and on dangerous game rifles there is no substitute for familiarity.