If this is lion hunting…. You can have it

[PARA45]

Who are we to dictate what South Africans should do or not do with their wild or bred in captivity animals? CBL or free-range lion, it's their business and it's ours if we want to participate or not. We have a choice! Thanks to our idiot leaders we can't import certain animals from certain countries. Let's keep this up and we may not be able to bring our kudu home.

We basically do the same thing here in the states where rich executives go and hunt a particular 200+ white tail in a TX ranch. They know exactly their pattern and what not. They mount that huge white tail over their office, and brag about it. Is it right, or ethical? A big NO, but it's not my business to bitch about it. It's done, but it's not made public for everyone to see.

The problem I see is that with the internet and YouTube and whatever else is out there, all these videos are seen by everyone. How many times have you shot at an animal and see him run and then pile up and kick until it dies. How do you think the Antis would react by seeing that? The percentage of animals dropping at the shot are very small. Yes, the animal was probably running dead, but the antis see a poor animal suffering by our hands.

In regard to this video, the PHs had an option to say no to this hunter. They had the option to back out and follow the lion on another day. Maybe they saw the $$$$ with the free advertisement from this video, I don't know. The PHs had the opportunity to not do this hunt at all. They had an option.

I've said it before and going to say it again. We are our worst enemy, and the antis see this and feed on this type of posting. I you don't like something on here, tv, or whatever, change the channel, turn the page or just don't read about it. You have a choice. But, since we are a very opinionated bunch, we feel we have to step in and criticize the hunt, and what not.

You will get criticized if you don't hunt with a control feed, Blaser rifle, dressing up in camo to hunt Africa, not using XYZ type of bullets, because all other will get you killed. Calling what we killed a trophy, not arguing with the antis. Hunting in fenced area, vs. open areas, etc, etc, etc. If we continue on this path, our grandkids will not be able to enjoy our sport.

Done with my rant.

 

[Frederik]

I'm not going chime in too much but it almost seems to me the lion was wounded first. The way he was bitting the dry branch and irritated. Normal irritated posture would be looking straight at the hunters lying very flat, growling and whipping his tail.

 

[spike.t]

The last part just starting before him firing the crossbow has been doing the rounds on WhatsApp....as it has already been said on an earlier post, to me it also looked like the bolt/arrow ( not sure which is correct) was dropping fast as it closed on the lion, and watched a few times trying to figure out where it hit...seemed to be high on the leg and also didn't seem to penetrate far....and is that one of those mechanical heads?...the one bow hunter we had years ago used them...I thought thet were shit as didn't penetrate much at all...but as I said know bugger all about bows or crossbows...

 

[sureshot375]

Different point of view. The lion was obviously pissed off, could/should the PH have told the client back off on him for later or shoot him with a rifle. Knowing little of Lion behavior it did seemed like a charge was inevitable, especially once shot with a bolt. What responsible does the PH have in this situation (btw PH made a great shot and think he did well under the circumstances).

This isn’t really an appropriate example to discuss in terms of lion behavior, or hunting dangerous game with bow and arrow.

No wild lion would react the way this lion did. The thing that makes CBL hunts dangerous is that the lions are not afraid of humans. Ordinarily a wild lion is not going to stick around in a situation like that to get shot in the first place. If you shoot a wild lion it is going to run. The danger with a wild lion is following up a wounded one after the initial shot.

 

[PARA45]

Let's tear this picture apart and criticize the hunter for not having a control feed 300 H&H rifle, and why he is using dogs to hunt. Oh, and how that spear will probably wound the animal and he'll suffer for the next 30 min while he bleeds to death. BTW, I'm being extremely sarcastic here.

 

[Red Leg]

You are well respected, have a tremendous amount of experience, a wealth of knowledge hunting the world, and always willing to give guidance when people ask.

This statement I have questions about. 1. The PH and staff have agreed to take the hunt on, they know better than anyone the dangers. 2. How many PH have we read about that have been shot by the client during a stock? 3. I'm not sure that I have read about any PH beening attacked after an arrow has been released (I know it has happened, I just don't remember reading about it). 4. How many PHs have lost their or been altered for live due to a client making a bad shot, we have read many accounts of that happening. 5. Would you not expect the same standard for a rifle hunter that made a bad shot? If you are not proficient with your weapon of choice you should not get a free pass.

I believe your stance has been, 375 the goal of the client is to make the first shot count. No matter what side of the fence you are on with cartridge, 100% in agreement 1st shot should hit the mark. The problem is, I have yet to meet an honest that has not messed up a shot. Mistakes happen, that is why we must have a PH with us hunting DG.

I say all that to say this, if we hold one group of hunters to a different standard...where does it stop? Is handguns next? Then single shots?

I feel the same type of thing happens with the gun control arguments. People who don't understand what an AR is because they do not see the need are quick to dismiss it. Why does anyone need one they think. Just because they don't understand it's uses and abilities does not mean it should be taken away from the millions of other law abiding Americans that enjoy them every day.

As far a CBL...we all have are feelings on this. Again it's a hard one, I have seen deer, bear, mountain lion all hunted with dogs. It is not something that I can see myself doing. I will not speak out against it, together we stand divided fall.

I think the statement accurately reflects what I was trying to say, and I frankly would be surprised if someone felt differently.

I absolutely would hate to live with the knowledge that another person was injured or killed due to either my incompetence or the inadequacy of my equipment. I honestly would be stunned that anyone else would feel differently regardless of my PH's or tracker's chosen profession.

Yes I absolutely expect the same standard for a rifle hunter. Of course we have all botched shots. But, I see that as reinforcement to do everything in our power not to botch what may be the most important shot of our lives. It is why, as you note, I seem to constantly harp on using a rifle with which one has the ability to most likely put an adequate bullet exactly where it needs to go.

Bad things happen far too often than they should. There is a young professional hunter in Mozambique, lucky to be alive, living the rest of his days with a partially working shoulder because a TV personality shot him through the back with his .458 during a buffalo follow-up. Another young man with whom I hunted some years ago in Namibia was attacked by a leopard a few weeks later and his client's follow-up shot with a .300 took off most of the PH's right hand.

I suppose people do indeed view these things differently. The TV personality expressed remorse on his show, but never contributed anything to the PH's medical care or rehabilitation. The Argentine client in Namibia paid all the uncovered expenses of his PH.

Finally, I think when we are considering lives, we also owe it to the animal we intend to kill to do that as humanely as we possibly can. If the animal in question is a lion, a starting place likely begins somewhere far north of a crossbow.

 

[BSO Dave]

@Wishfulthinker580

I was going to reply to each of your assertions where I take exception, but I figured it was a waste of time.. You seemed convinced of your assertions, without actually having had any personal experience with archery equipment or its efficacy on DG in Africa or elsewhere which is fine..

Part of the controversy is that those who watched the video assume this was a planned stunt for the purpose of eliciting a charge on video. And, because the weapon was a crossbow, that the resulting charge is the rule rather than the exception, which I can affirm through experience that it is not..! Let's assume that this was a stunt.. I will agree that provoking a charge is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous for any reason... The weapon used in the hunt is irrelevant to that argument of the irresponsibility.

You can tell in the video that the hunter is nervous and not confident about when and where to place the shot. Unfortunately, it seems that the PH picked up on this and chose not to intervene. A responsible PH would calm the hunter and tell them to wait until the perfect shot presented itself.. For whatever reasons, the hunter made a terrible, rushed shot resulting in a charge from an aggravated lion that was going to charge regardless unless the shot killed him instantly which also rarely happens on a broadside shot with a rifle.

Point being that all of the above in the video scenario is irrelevant to the crossbow being an inappropriate or unethical weapon for DG.. All of the assertions being made here questioning the use of a crossbow are from those who have no personal experience. Regardless, the limitations of any weapon along with the possibility of increased danger are components of reality that each individual member of the hunting party must consider for themselves.

I think even most experienced bow hunters (I haven't hunted African DG with a bow, but I took a lot of deer with one before giving up the practice twenty years ago) - regardless of tackle - would agree that the likelihood of a charge is greater with a bow than with a rifle. Were the "hunter" the only one at risk, then fine. But he isn't. Is he prepared to support the widow and family of the tracker if he is the one killed or maimed? Likely not.

I'll remind you that there is SUBSTANCIAL RISK IN ANY DG HUNT! Assessing the potential risk relative to the weapon, the proficiency, and the experience of the individual hunter is a personal decision each member must weigh out for themselves before committing to such an endeavor. Each individual has a responsibility to themselves in making personal risk assessments, and the option to not participate if they are not willing to assume any level of risk they deem excessive...

Furthermore, in making the assertion that the hunter needs to be willing to assume the moral obligation to compensate the family of any member of the hunting party who is injured or killed because of the weapon used is a convoluted argument.. Is a rifle hunter who fails to make a lethal first shot resulting in injury or death exempt from same moral responsibility based on the ideology that while DG hunting with a rifle is certainly dangerous, the hunter is not held to the same moral obligations because it is theoretically less dangerous than hunting DG with a crossbow? C'mon man!

 

[BSO Dave]

Finally, I think when we are considering lives, we also owe it to the animal we intend to kill to do that as humanely as we possibly can. If the animal in question is a lion, a starting place likely begins somewhere far north of a crossbow.

That is your opinion that you are certainly entitled to have.. I have a different one.. I place far more emphasis for achieving both a humane and efficient kill on the hunter than I do the method.

I am a bit confused by your statement.. Not to put words in your mouth but are you suggesting that archery tackle is humane when it comes to non-dangerous game, but not for dangerous game?

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

@Wishfulthinker580

I was going to reply to each of your assertions where I take exception, but I figured it was a waste of time.. You seemed convinced of your assertions, without actually having had any personal experience with archery equipment or its efficacy on DG in Africa or elsewhere which is fine..

Part of the controversy is that those who watched the video assume this was a planned stunt for the purpose of eliciting a charge on video. And, because the weapon was a crossbow, that the resulting charge is the rule rather than the exception, which I can affirm through experience that it is not..! Let's assume that this was a stunt.. I will agree that provoking a charge is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous for any reason... The weapon used in the hunt is irrelevant to that argument of the irresponsibility.

You can tell in the video that the hunter is nervous and not confident about when and where to place the shot. Unfortunately, it seems that the PH picked up on this and chose not to intervene. A responsible PH would calm the hunter and tell them to wait until the perfect shot presented itself.. For whatever reasons, the hunter made a terrible, rushed shot resulting in a charge from an aggravated lion that was going to charge regardless unless the shot killed him instantly which also rarely happens on a broadside shot with a rifle.

Point being that all of the above in the video scenario is irrelevant to the crossbow being an inappropriate or unethical weapon for DG.. All of the assertions being made here questioning the use of a crossbow are from those who have no personal experience. Regardless, the limitations of any weapon along with the possibility of increased danger are components of reality that each individual member of the hunting party must consider for themselves.



I'll remind you that there is SUBSTANCIAL RISK IN ANY DG HUNT! Assessing the potential risk relative to the weapon, the proficiency, and the experience of the individual hunter is a personal decision each member must weigh out for themselves before committing to such an endeavor. Each individual has a responsibility to themselves in making personal risk assessments, and the option to not participate if they are not willing to assume any level of risk they deem excessive...

Furthermore, in making the assertion that the hunter needs to be willing to assume the moral obligation to compensate the family of any member of the hunting party who is injured or killed because of the weapon used is a convoluted argument.. Is a rifle hunter who fails to make a lethal first shot resulting in injury or death exempt from same moral responsibility based on the ideology that while DG hunting with a rifle is certainly dangerous, the hunter is not held to the same moral obligations because it is theoretically less dangerous than hunting DG with a crossbow? C'mon man!

Video aside and generally speaking I still maintain it is an inappropriate way to go about things. You can continue to justify it and rationalize it however you want.

You are correct in that I only have my observations to go off of and I believe the only accurate information can come from PHs but that’s not going to happen for obvious reasons.

You are correct, we’re diametrically opposed on the subject which is frankly a tiresome one.

 

[deewayne2003]

If it were not required by law, how many DG bow hunters would do it without rifle backup?…..

Also while sitting in my glass shooting house; I do not hire 2 bodyguards to stand there with rifles while I throw rocks …… the rifles are obviously to protect my fragile ego and not the glass house itself.

 

[Red Leg]

@Wishfulthinker580

I was going to reply to each of your assertions where I take exception, but I figured it was a waste of time.. You seemed convinced of your assertions, without actually having had any personal experience with archery equipment or its efficacy on DG in Africa or elsewhere which is fine..

Part of the controversy is that those who watched the video assume this was a planned stunt for the purpose of eliciting a charge on video. And, because the weapon was a crossbow, that the resulting charge is the rule rather than the exception, which I can affirm through experience that it is not..! Let's assume that this was a stunt.. I will agree that provoking a charge is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous for any reason... The weapon used in the hunt is irrelevant to that argument of the irresponsibility.

You can tell in the video that the hunter is nervous and not confident about when and where to place the shot. Unfortunately, it seems that the PH picked up on this and chose not to intervene. A responsible PH would calm the hunter and tell them to wait until the perfect shot presented itself.. For whatever reasons, the hunter made a terrible, rushed shot resulting in a charge from an aggravated lion that was going to charge regardless unless the shot killed him instantly which also rarely happens on a broadside shot with a rifle.

Point being that all of the above in the video scenario is irrelevant to the crossbow being an inappropriate or unethical weapon for DG.. All of the assertions being made here questioning the use of a crossbow are from those who have no personal experience. Regardless, the limitations of any weapon along with the possibility of increased danger are components of reality that each individual member of the hunting party must consider for themselves.



I'll remind you that there is SUBSTANCIAL RISK IN ANY DG HUNT! Assessing the potential risk relative to the weapon, the proficiency, and the experience of the individual hunter is a personal decision each member must weigh out for themselves before committing to such an endeavor. Each individual has a responsibility to themselves in making personal risk assessments, and the option to not participate if they are not willing to assume any level of risk they deem excessive...

Furthermore, in making the assertion that the hunter needs to be willing to assume the moral obligation to compensate the family of any member of the hunting party who is injured or killed because of the weapon used is a convoluted argument.. Is a rifle hunter who fails to make a lethal first shot resulting in injury or death exempt from same moral responsibility based on the ideology that while DG hunting with a rifle is certainly dangerous, the hunter is not held to the same moral obligations because it is theoretically less dangerous than hunting DG with a crossbow? C'mon man!

I can honestly say that you have no need to "remind" me about anything. And where did I say that I held a rifle shooter to a lower standard than someone using a bow?

Of course there is danger involved. I simply would hope that most clients would have the good sense not to contribute more than necessary to that danger. The point I am trying to make is that a dangerous game hunt not only involves a personal risk assessment, but also how much the client is personally willing to put at risk the other members of the hunting team. I feel that is indeed a personal moral responsibility. The fact that the PH and tracker are paid to deal with a client's incompetence is irrelevant to that responsibility.

I frankly can't imagine the human being, whose botched shot with bow or rifle that gets someone injured or killed, who would then simply shrug their shoulders with no sense of responsibility for their actions.

To repeat what I typed above,

Yes I absolutely expect the same standard for a rifle hunter. Of course we have all botched shots. But, I see that as reinforcement to do everything in our power not to botch what may be the most important shot of our lives. It is why, as you note, I seem to constantly harp on using a rifle with which one has the ability to most likely put an adequate bullet exactly where it needs to go.

 

[WAB]

Morally, what is the difference between raising a cow for slaughter and raising a lion to be shot?

Ethics are a different matter entirely. Hunting ethics dictate that we use a weapon capable of a humane kill, and that we are proficient in its use.

My personal ethics would preclude my participation in this ‘hunt’. However, I would fall short of calling it immoral.

Judgement is also at issue here. Putting this out there on the internet shows an incredible lack of situational awareness and the judgement of a gnat.

 

[PARA45]

If it were not required by law, how many DG bow hunters would do it without rifle backup?…..

How many hunters go into DG hunt and the PH carries a rifle? Let's reverse it, and say, if it were not required by law, how many DG gun hunters would do it without the rifle back of the PH?

 

[BSO Dave]

You are correct, we’re diametrically opposed on the subject which is frankly a tiresome one.

If you find having an informative debate tiresome, maybe it's because you are taking opposing viewpoints personally? None of my comments were meant as a personal attack on you. Pointing out that your position comes from assumption rather than personal knowledge and experience with archery gear is certainly not a personal knock, just a self-admitted fact that you provided.

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

If you find having an informative debate tiresome, maybe it's because you are taking opposing viewpoints personally? None of my comments were meant as a personal attack on you. Pointing out that your position comes from assumption rather than personal knowledge and experience with archery gear is certainly not a personal knock, just a self-admitted fact that you provided.

Assumptions AND observations which are pretty easy to gather in the modern age. I have zero interest in archery so I will never gain that personal knowledge and experience.

Now who’s making assumptions? Not taking it personal.. We’re obviously not going to change each other’s minds and going on ad nauseam is indeed wearisome.

 

[BSO Dave]

I can honestly say that you have no need to "remind" me about anything. And where did I say that I held a rifle shooter to a lower standard than someone using a bow?

You presented a scenario asking if the bowhunter would demonstrate the morality of compensating the family of a casualty resulting from a DG game hunt, while making no mention of the responsibility of a rifle hunter creating the same result assuming that the bowhunter creates more liability than a rifle hunter? That's a different standard is it not?

Can you also address my last post asking you about the "humanity" of hunting non-dangerous game versus DG with archery equipment?

The point I am trying to make is that a dangerous game hunt not only involves a personal risk assessment, but also how much the client is personally willing to put at risk the other members of the hunting team. I feel that is indeed a personal moral responsibility. The fact that the PH and tracker are paid to deal with a client's incompetence is irrelevant to that responsibility.

I see this a bit differently.. I agree that any client, who is not proficient and experienced should not be hunting DG with any weapon under any circumstance for obvious reasons.. That's another component of hunting DG that should be addressed with the Outfitter/PH well before the hunt takes place. That, notwithstanding, the Outfitter/PH trackers do are not forced to deal with an incompetent or inexperienced hunter merely for the sole reason that they are paid to do so.. If they are motivated by money only, shame on them.. Their collective experience and judgment on these types of hunts should supersede any other in deciding to take the hunt if they were indeed an ethical, professional outfit.

 

[MarkB]

7 days direct from SAPA norms and standards that you reference
View attachment 529415

I stand corrected. 7 days is stated SAPA minimum. We were told release on the ranch/farm was 30 day minimum.

MB

 

[Red Leg]

You presented a scenario asking if the bowhunter would demonstrate the morality of compensating the family of a casualty resulting from a DG game hunt, while making no mention of the responsibility of a rifle hunter creating the same result assuming that the bowhunter creates more liability than a rifle hunter? That's a different standard is it not?

Can you also address my last post asking you about the "humanity" of hunting non-dangerous game versus DG with archery equipment?



I see this a bit differently.. I agree that any client, who is not proficient and experienced should not be hunting DG with any weapon under any circumstance for obvious reasons.. That's another component of hunting DG that should be addressed with the Outfitter/PH well before the hunt takes place. That, notwithstanding, the Outfitter/PH trackers do are not forced to deal with an incompetent or inexperienced hunter merely for the sole reason that they are paid to do so.. If they are motivated by money only, shame on them.. Their collective experience and judgment on these types of hunts supersedes any other in deciding to take the hunt.

We are talking past one another.

I believe you and I were both in professions where decisions can have very decisive consequences. I choose to believe that most people would find being responsible for initiating a set of actions that led to injury or death of another person, however much they paid him, a burden they just as soon would not have to live with for the rest of their lives. I believe we have a responsibility to do everything in our power to lessen the likelihood of that happening.

As I noted above, I have not hunted dangerous game with a bow, but over twenty years when I used one, I took probably 25 deer and half a dozen pigs. I think you and I would agree that the hunter in the clip had no business taking the shot he did with a bow of any sort. I think you and I would also agree that shot was imminently makeable with a .375 or .416. The lethality envelope is larger for a rifle whether hunting a Virginia deer or African lion or buffalo. I simply believe most people and the animals they hunt, particularly a DG animal, are best served by taking full advantage of that added capability.

 

[John Wasmuth]

 

[Rare Breed]

That is your opinion that you are certainly entitled to have.. I have a different one.. I place far more emphasis for achieving both a humane and efficient kill on the hunter than I do the method.

I am a bit confused by your statement.. Not to put words in your mouth but are you suggesting that archery tackle is humane when it comes to non-dangerous game, but not for dangerous game?

I have now hunted all my life. From recurves making my own arrows to compounds to cross bows. I have taken over 100 white tail deer with this combination. The big difference here to me is not will any form of archery kill DG…it is the clearly extra danger that can happen. I can completely understand @redkegs “come on man” comment. Can a rifle hunter bungle a shot on DG…yes. Does anyone really think any type of archery will drop any DG animal unless spine hit? Only my POV and I know will upset some on here…I just do not feel archery for DG makes sense. PG…have at it