Hunting SA or "Wild" Africa - Which is Better

[Ontario Hunter]

It may be a terminology disconnect. To me, spot and stalk is walking or driving until you see an animal and then planning a stalk. It’s how we hunt bear in Alaska.

Tracking is walking or driving until you find promising tracks and then following said tracks to the animal. This is what I go to Africa for. I have successfully hunted elephant, buffalo, eland and a few other head of PG this way.

Driving until you see an animal and then shooting it from the vehicle is, in my mind, not hunting at all.

I agree. My lodge will not do that. The game becomes shy of vehicles. Sometimes we drive till game is spotted and get out and stalk. Once we're outside the vehicle they are often away. Then it's down to tracking. I have shot a couple of animals resting on the vehicle but they were management (culling) and loners. A few impala and a warthog. One property owner would kick me off the place if I didn't shoot hogs on sight. Many times we find animals simply on a walkabout. I seem to recall my PH's GPS said we put in seventeen klicks the day I shot my hartebeest.

Last trip my PH had a semi heated discussion with one landowner in Afrikans. I learned later the guy was insisting we shoot animals from his fancy truck. PH wouldn't agree to it. The property owner was a bit of a disappointment but the hunts were okay.

I always preferred tracking when hunting North America. It's why I usually waited till there was snow on the ground (cold weather also gets rid of most of the slob hunters). I shot some very nice elk and moose but never called one. Always tracking. That takes real skill. One on one, me against the animal. Can't get any fairer chase than that. I've been so close I could see eyelashes. Once I shot a bull moose bedded in thick noisy tag alders less than twenty yards away. Tracked them all day and got him just before dark. A cow was standing ahead of him but brush was so thick I couldn't see her. Some other fellas shot at them just before noon so they were spooky. That was an accomplishment.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

A "wild" safari might cost twice as much as a SA hunt but what happens if the hunt is a bust? PH is a dud, weather is bad, game is gone, lodge overbooked ... lots can go wrong. So someone who saves up for a lifetime for one trip to "wild" Africa has a bad safari. Then what? At least in SA if the hunt goes south, he may have enough money left in savings for a second attempt. Or at least justify the expense of a second attempt. A second attempt at "wild" Africa likely would be out of reach for most working class hunters. I can tell you, if I'd been stuck patrolling a park boundary, I'd have been on the next plane out of there and never give Africa a thought again, especially for that price tag.

For me, the hunting experience in South Africa has been very satisfying. The hunts for the most part have been challenging, the landowners are generally wonderful folks, no competition either from other hunters or poachers, the land is beautiful and varied, and the price is reasonable. Fortunately, the weather has always cooperated and even in the midst of a seven year drought we were able to find lots of game. My PHs were local guys with an ear to the ground and connections everywhere. The farmers' network. Whatever you want, they know where to find some, even on the spur of the moment.

I think if I wanted a truly "wild" hunt I would DIY to Alaska for moose or caribou. But I've been DIY my whole life. Been there, done that ... a lot. And I absutely loved it. It was brutally exhausting but nothing can compare to the rewards of knowing I did it ... on my own. Just me alone a hundred miles from anywhere. For me, a "wild" hunt in Africa would not be nearly as wild. I'm content to hunt landowner properties these days.

 

[lhook7]

I can’t imagine spending the money to hunt South Africa when I could do the same thing in Texas for less money. I’ll stick with wild Africa, seems a much better value to me.

 

[Red Leg]

A "wild" safari might cost twice as much as a SA hunt but what happens if the hunt is a bust? PH is a dud, weather is bad, game is gone, lodge overbooked ... lots can go wrong. So someone who saves up for a lifetime for one trip to "wild" Africa has a bad safari. Then what? At least in SA if the hunt goes south, he may have enough money left in savings for a second attempt. Or at least justify the expense of a second attempt. A second attempt at "wild" Africa likely would be out of reach for most working class hunters. I can tell you, if I'd been stuck patrolling a park boundary, I'd have been on the next plane out of there and never give Africa a thought again, especially for that price tag.

For me, the hunting experience in South Africa has been very satisfying. The hunts for the most part have been challenging, the landowners are generally wonderful folks, no competition either from other hunters or poachers, the land is beautiful and varied, and the price is reasonable. Fortunately, the weather has always cooperated and even in the midst of a seven year drought we were able to find lots of game. My PHs were local guys with an ear to the ground and connections everywhere. The farmers' network. Whatever you want, they know where to find some, even on the spur of the moment.

I think if I wanted a truly "wild" hunt I would DIY to Alaska for moose or caribou. But I've been DIY my whole life. Been there, done that ... a lot. And I absutely loved it. It was brutally exhausting but nothing can compare to the rewards of knowing I did it ... on my own. Just me alone a hundred miles from anywhere. For me, a "wild" hunt in Africa would not be nearly as wild. I'm content to hunt landowner properties these days.

That may be the most unique reason I have yet heard for hunting a game farm in South Africa. If that sort of guaranteed "hunting" experience is so critical, you really should take @Ihook7 's advice and hunt a game farm in the Texas Hill country. High fences, certainty of getting your trophy, and like many cases in South Africa, no more native to the area than the sable, lechwe, waterbuck or nyala. And think how virtuous you could claim to be for not spending money on all that airfare.

I have hunted game farms twice in Africa. As I have noted many times here, they were excellent experiences. But it is not the same as hunting indigenous species in their native habitat - whether a cattle ranch in Namibia, or wilderness areas in the Caprivi, Mozambique, or Zambia. Those experiences have been worth a premium to me in effort (Namibia) or cost in the remainder.

 

[375Fox]

A "wild" safari might cost twice as much as a SA hunt but what happens if the hunt is a bust? PH is a dud, weather is bad, game is gone, lodge overbooked ... lots can go wrong. So someone who saves up for a lifetime for one trip to "wild" Africa has a bad safari. Then what? At least in SA if the hunt goes south, he may have enough money left in savings for a second attempt. Or at least justify the expense of a second attempt. A second attempt at "wild" Africa likely would be out of reach for most working class hunters. I can tell you, if I'd been stuck patrolling a park boundary, I'd have been on the next plane out of there and never give Africa a thought again, especially for that price tag.

For me, the hunting experience in South Africa has been very satisfying. The hunts for the most part have been challenging, the landowners are generally wonderful folks, no competition either from other hunters or poachers, the land is beautiful and varied, and the price is reasonable. Fortunately, the weather has always cooperated and even in the midst of a seven year drought we were able to find lots of game. My PHs were local guys with an ear to the ground and connections everywhere. The farmers' network. Whatever you want, they know where to find some, even on the spur of the moment.

I think if I wanted a truly "wild" hunt I would DIY to Alaska for moose or caribou. But I've been DIY my whole life. Been there, done that ... a lot. And I absutely loved it. It was brutally exhausting but nothing can compare to the rewards of knowing I did it ... on my own. Just me alone a hundred miles from anywhere. For me, a "wild" hunt in Africa would not be nearly as wild. I'm content to hunt landowner properties these days.

Alternative scenario, a person saves his whole life for a buffalo hunt and hunts South Africa. On the high fence property, Buffalo chase the truck looking for hay as they pull in. He notices there are only bulls on the property after a while, no cows. He takes a buffalo and realizes it has an ear tag hole. That’s equally disappointing as driving a National park boundary for an entire hunt hoping buffalo cross in. A low end South African buffalo hunt is $8000. I hope the park boundary hunt wasn’t more than $11,000 or $12,000 both expensive to someone who saved an entire life to go on them. A quality area in Zimbabwe with success rates above 90% will be right around $15,000. True self sustaining buffalo in South Africa appear to start around $12,000. A person needs to put the proper research in regardless what hunt they choose on both PH and area. Neither a park boundary hunt or a put and take hunt are acceptable to me.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

That may be the most unique reason I have yet heard for hunting a game farm in South Africa. If that sort of guaranteed "hunting" experience is so critical, you really should take @Ihook7 's advice and hunt a game farm in the Texas Hill country. High fences, certainty of getting your trophy, and like many cases in South Africa, no more native to the area than the sable, lechwe, waterbuck or nyala. And think how virtuous you could claim to be for not spending money on all that airfare.

I have hunted game farms twice in Africa. As I have noted many times here, they were excellent experiences. But it is not the same as hunting indigenous species in their native habitat - whether a cattle ranch in Namibia, or wilderness areas in the Caprivi, Mozambique, or Zambia. Those experiences have been worth a premium to me in effort (Namibia) or cost in the remainder.

FYI sable, waterbuck, and lowland nyala are all native to South Africa. I also generally have little interest in exotics. However, I didn't have the money to make another trip to North Africa for Barbary sheep so I hunted one in South Africa. North Africa generally is not the safest place to visit these days anyway. I thought it would be a very challenging hunt. I guess it was challenging enough ... barely. But the variety of topography and game on just the small end of the property we hunted was astonishing.

I'm definitely not interested in hunting artificially colored species. Did hunt an old white blesbuck last trip because the landowner wanted it for wedding feast. Didn't get him. Shot another common instead ... and paid the trophy fee. No objection. The landowner was a very nice guy. Lunch with them was quite entertaining! Their little dog policed the free roaming chickens. One young hen made the mistake of stepping across the threshold!

His gray parrot had the run of the house. That bird was a character! And I came away with very nice black wildebeest, the object of the hunt. Great day. Great price.

 

[Red Leg]

FYI sable, waterbuck, and lowland nyala are all native to South Africa.

"For your information" it depends upon where doesn't it? It is a rather large country. Rather like saying the blacktail is native to the United States.

 

[Happy Myles]

I have never run into an over booked lodge in East Africa in fact never ran into a lodge. Always tents or thatched huts. I do not share campi. Just me or who I take with me. Enjoy using a variety of outfitters and area. Enjoy the adventure. West Africa is different in terms of camp quality still a great adventure

 

[Red Leg]

@Ontario Hunter so we clearly understand one another. I have no problem at all if you find hunting an African game ranch a satisfying experience. I have no problem if you are committed to the same outfitter or enjoy traveling to different enclosed ranches in the area to hunt different game. I have done that in the Limpopo.

What I find frankly amusing is arguing to those who have questions about hunting Africa that such an experience is superior in some way to hunting more remote areas. Lots of folks here have every bit of international hunting experience as do you. Many, I suspect, quite a bit more. @Happy Myles for instance makes us all look like rank armatures. Their opinions are at least as valuable as yours.

At best hunting a ranch is different. Such a hunt can possibly offer greater value, but only depending upon what constitutes value to any given individual. As you have noted above, certainty is important to you. Apparently, so is visiting with local ranchers. That is great. That may be important to a new African hunter as well. For me, it is hunting naturally occurring indigenous animals in their home range. I also don't much like sharing camp with strangers (happened on my two high fence hunts), and I much prefer actual wilderness camps to contrived ones. Such preferences also may be an important value to another.

There are also risks associated with any of these experiences. We need to be frank about them in advising someone. I don't see that as a relative risk issue, as much as it is something about which to add to a traveling hunter's due diligence.

I think we get into really unuseful ground when we assert that "my choice" - whatever it is - is a better or smarter use of resources than your choice.

 

[revturbo9967]

A "wild" safari might cost twice as much as a SA hunt but what happens if the hunt is a bust? PH is a dud, weather is bad, game is gone, lodge overbooked ... lots can go wrong. So someone who saves up for a lifetime for one trip to "wild" Africa has a bad safari. Then what? At least in SA if the hunt goes south, he may have enough money left in savings for a second attempt.

This is probably one of the worst hunting arguments I’ve read on this forum. Many on here want to track wild animals, get busted and try again, fight throughout bad weather, maybe not get an opportunity till the last day, you know - hunting. True hunting has zero guarantees. To use a possible poor situation in a wild area as an excuse to go to SA instead just proves my theory, certain people want guaranteed satisfaction.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

This is probably one of the worst hunting arguments I’ve read on this forum. Many on here want to track wild animals, get busted and try again, fight throughout bad weather, maybe not get an opportunity till the last day, you know - hunting. True hunting has zero guarantees. To use a possible poor situation in a wild area as an excuse to go to SA instead just proves my theory, certain people want guaranteed satisfaction.

You have taken what I said entirely out of context. "Gauranteed satisfaction" is never a given no matter where the hunt takes place. And "satisfaction" means different things to different people. I have done the "wild side" thing: camped in grizzly country, fished with them on a daily basis, hunted alone for weeks on end, nearly paid the ultimate price at least four times. I guess I could pretend driving around in a fancy 4x4 looking for tracks or sitting by a wild waterhole is wild enough. Or I can enjoy the company of my PH and a variety of hardworking farm folk while hunting spectacular country with a lot of game ... for a lot less money. The latter works just fine for ME. Great experiences. Not necessarily satisfied with less ... just something different than you.

 

[Gerry Addison]

Alternative scenario, a person saves his whole life for a buffalo hunt and hunts South Africa. On the high fence property, Buffalo chase the truck looking for hay as they pull in. He notices there are only bulls on the property after a while, no cows. He takes a buffalo and realizes it has an ear tag hole. That’s equally disappointing as driving a National park boundary for an entire hunt hoping buffalo cross in. A low end South African buffalo hunt is $8000. I hope the park boundary hunt wasn’t more than $11,000 or $12,000 both expensive to someone who saved an entire life to go on them. A quality area in Zimbabwe with success rates above 90% will be right around $15,000. True self sustaining buffalo in South Africa appear to start around $12,000. A person needs to put the proper research in regardless what hunt they choose on both PH and area. Neither a park boundary hunt or a put and take hunt are acceptable to me.

Totally agree with everything you have said here. If the research is done correctly a SA hunt can be great as I had this year and my other experience in SA.

 

[Baghorn]

I was born in wild Africa, live there, hunted there and pretty much driven it flat at a pace that would have allowed me to see wild animals if they were there. Mostly they are not, they are concentrated in remnants that are afforded protection, and there they are poached mercilessly. I have absolutely nothing against the fenced areas of South Africa because those fences don't keep game in, they keep humans out. They protect the game. Sure high density game areas in unfenced Africa are very special, but they are only there because people like you are willing to spend a bit more to hunt there and do so. So if you value this sort of Africa go there and use it, so the extremely high capital cost of high electric fences can be supplanted by the recurrent lower cost of anti poaching activities. People risking their lives. Not all areas will survive, but some are doing well, like Save, Sengwa and Omay. They will only continue to do so if there is the critical mass of clientelle to fund them.

What a fantastic post Kevin...sums things up beautifully.

 

[raytraps]

Leaving today (july 6th) for the Caprivi. Will be there until August 1st. This is my second trip there with Omujeve Safaris. I will give a report when i return. God bless you all.