The Often Discussed Question of Back Up Shots

[Tanks]

I’m pretty certain the client is responsible financially for any animal killed regardless of whether he shot it or the PH has to

That is absolutely wrong for self defense situations. Just a week before my hunt a client and a PH were charged by two cow elephants. The PH shot both of them. Other than filling paperwork nothing else was done. In the past I also have shot an elephant bull in self defense and all I had to do was the paperwork.

That is also another reason why each DG hunt is accompanied by a Parks Ranger in Zimbabwe so there is no doubt about the circumstances.

 

[Cam Moon]

Ok, so in reading the comments it looks like most people agree on a few things. In a hunt the PH should NEVER fire the first shot. The ONLY exception to this would be in the event of a charge where lives are in danger. Fine. We agree on this. But then what happens? Do you continue on our hunt? Or is it now over..... that animal that was shot (in self defense by the PH) is now YOUR trophy animal? I would suspect that it may depend on quotas/if more of the same species can still be hunted.
Here's an example: I save up (what is to me a small fortune) and go on a buffalo hunt. As we are approaching the herd, one of them charges and the PH puts it down. Great. But is that then automatically my Buffalo? Is my hunt now over? Or pants get cleaned, the buff picked up to be processed, and we carry on with my hunt with me having an exciting story to tell?
I know that this isn't really what the OP had asked about, and that the conversation is getting derailed a little bit to first shots rather than follow-up shots, but I'm curious as to what The opinions are of my fellow Hunters, as well as the Outfitters and PHs on here.

I fear I'm unfairly derailing the conversation so I started a new thread called

Did your PH just shoot your animal??​

I'm a bit too late to delete the derailing post I made, so my apologies. Perhaps we can just continue this aspect of the conversation on the new thread?

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

That is absolutely wrong for self defense situations. Just a week before my hunt a client and a PH were charged by two cow elephants. The PH shot both of them. Other than filling paperwork nothing else was done. In the past I also have shot an elephant bull in self defense and all I had to do was the paperwork.

That is also another reason why each DG hunt is accompanied by a Parks Ranger in Zimbabwe so there is no doubt about the circumstances.

Gotcha. I didn’t necessarily mean it was the industry standard BUT I have read it in the terms & conditions of one of AH’s Namibian sponsors that that is the case or maybe I misread it

 

[Nhoro]

Gotcha. I didn’t necessarily mean it was the industry standard BUT I have read it in the terms & conditions of one of AH’s Namibian sponsors that that is the case or maybe I misread it

Tanks is correct in a Zimbabwe situation. Your PH will be investigated by National Parks and then cleared. You would not pay in Zimbabwe. In fact, even you yourself are entitled to shoot in self defense and again National Parks would conduct an inquiry. They are pretty strict but fair- you wont get away with a 100 m shot at somethin and claim self defense but if you were about to get squished, you will be fine.