Would you be happy?

[steve white]

Everyone seems to be jumping straight to the worst-case scenario. Yes, DG hunting carries inherent risk—but so do preparation, judgment, terrain knowledge, and a competent, reputable PH with solid trackers.
The numbers tell the real story. Thousands of DG hunts happen every year, and yet the casualty count can usually be measured on one hand. If DG hunting were as deadly as some make it out to be, the bush would be littered with client boots.
With proper preparation, awareness, and a good PH, the odds of a fatal outcome are, in my view, comfortably under 1%. Respect the risk—but let’s not confuse calculated danger with certain doom.

A full blown charge already IS the worst case scenario...only exceeded when someone gets gored.

 

[SStomcat]

in 2024 I was charged by a wounded buffalo at 7 yards, once a charge happens, everyone shoots until the buffalo is dead, anything else is just stupidity.

Lost the point, a charge from 7 yards is very different from a no charge with a buff in the bush at 20-30 yards.

 

[SStomcat]

A full blown charge already IS the worst case scenario...only exceeded when someone gets gored.

Was there a charge when the PH fired for the 2nd time? Wouldn't it have been nice to back up after spotting the bull hiding or waiting, to give his client a shot?

 

[Hunt anything]

It looks to me that when the PH pointed out the bull in the thick and he didn’t get a shot off that the PH decided right then and there he was going to finish the job when he had a chance. He had lost all confidence in his hunter and wanted it over.
At least in the video the hunter didnt get a shot off but maybe he did just not on film.

 

[steve white]

It looks to me that when the PH pointed out the bull in the thick and he didn’t get a shot off that the PH decided right then and there he was going to finish the job when he had a chance. He had lost all confidence in his hunter and wanted it over.
At least in the video the hunter didnt get a shot off but maybe he did just not on film.

That's what I thought, but later in the video they asked him, "did you shoot?" and he shook his head no.

 

[Sabre]

@SStomcat - You keep trying to reiterate to me that there was no second charge, and you argue it to me as if I said there was. I never said there was, I asked earlier in the thread why you keep saying that to me. And you keep telling me to rewatch the video again to see that. Except, I have never said there was a second charge.

All I asked is: If you would be unhappy with the PHs shooting when the buffalo charged? You said you would be unhappy with that. That's fine, we just differ in opinion on it.

I do agree that it would have been nice of the PHs to try and let the client shoot on the 3rd encounter when they spotted it again. However, we don't know what conversation took place off screen. The client may have told the PHs that if they saw it again, to shoot it.

The buffalo had already charged once, almost getting at least one PH and knocking the client to the ground. In my opinion, that is enough of a reason to stop being overly polite and start just doing what is necessary to avoid life changing injuries or death from occurring.

In a short 5 minute video the client does many things that demonstrate he is out of his element, to put it very kindly. I would not fault the PH for losing faith in the client and taking the opportunity to put the buffalo down when they got the chance after the charge that occurred.

If you watched the video and the PHs are who you find the most fault with in the video, then we likely have an irreconcilable difference of opinions on this topic.

 

[Safari Dave]

OK, I find myself the A-hole again....

Elmer Fudd didn't have any business in that situation.

Rich old dude, with little competence with a DG rifle (probably a marginal .375) couldn't manage a lethal first shot.

PH+, had to do the job.



I'm not saying, that, under the circumstances I could have done better.

(Actually, NO - I could have done much better)



To answer the OP - Absolutely Not.
First of all, I never record hunts, because I know that things can get crazy.
And, I know when things get crazy, men need to become MEN!

When you have to kill BG animals one-on-one with a knife, you just need to do it.

If you have to hide in the Landcruiser while the PH, tracker, and staff handle the "dirty work", it should NEVER be posted on social media.

 

[Safari Dave]

Elmer was the forth person in line do deal with a buffalo charge and I don't think he fired a shot.

Why would anyone in their right mind post this on Youtube???


As an example of what not to do, maybe???

 

[CraigV]

I agree with Safari Dave. Lots of things wrong here. Wardrobe; who would actually wear this while on a DG hunt? Rifle knowledge/actions, limited. Shot placement, poor.

20+ years ago, I used to guide on a private ranch in NM. Most of our clients were wealthy TX oil men and bankers. All that they wanted was a trophy Elk on their wall. 80% had no business being on the ranch, other than paying the fees. I can't count the number of times we as guides (there were 5 per season), shot the requisite animal so that "Jo Bob" could put it on the wall of his office/study/etc and brag about it.

It pissed me off at the time, and I left when a client added a Bison to his list. We bought a Bison (Pedro) from a nearby ranch, and brought him out. Released him into the valley. The hunter was there, and upon release,, he shot him. The client expected us to revere at his skill. Most of us just walked away. I'm sure that mount is collecting dust in a storage locker currently...

I could go on, but the bottom line I suppose is, if you're incapable of performing the task at hand, maybe you shouldn't join in the activity.

 

[SStomcat]

@SStomcat - You keep trying to reiterate to me that there was no second charge, and you argue it to me as if I said there was. I never said there was, I asked earlier in the thread why you keep saying that to me. And you keep telling me to rewatch the video again to see that. Except, I have never said there was a second charge.

All I asked is: If you would be unhappy with the PHs shooting when the buffalo charged? You said you would be unhappy with that. That's fine, we just differ in opinion on it.

I do agree that it would have been nice of the PHs to try and let the client shoot on the 3rd encounter when they spotted it again. However, we don't know what conversation took place off screen. The client may have told the PHs that if they saw it again, to shoot it.

The buffalo had already charged once, almost getting at least one PH and knocking the client to the ground. In my opinion, that is enough of a reason to stop being overly polite and start just doing what is necessary to avoid life changing injuries or death from occurring.

In a short 5 minute video the client does many things that demonstrate he is out of his element, to put it very kindly. I would not fault the PH for losing faith in the client and taking the opportunity to put the buffalo down when they got the chance after the charge that occurred.

If you watched the video and the PHs are who you find the most fault with in the video, then we likely have an irreconcilable difference of opinions on this topic.

It appears, regrettably, that I committed the grave error of expressing an opinion that didn’t align with yours.

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

Happy to be alive and uninjured for sure. But if I were the hunter, I would have liked the opportunity to put in the kill shot, especially the 3rd shots, where both PH shoot.

IMO you loose that opportunity once you foul up the situation and create a wounded DG animal.

The PH provided the client the opportunity to put in a killing shot off the sticks. The PH also provided the client a 2nd opportunity at a killing shot (after fouling up the first one) and the client didn’t take it before or during the resulting charge.

You can be unhappy or mad all you want but the relatively low number of hunting deaths each year is attributed to the above logic. PH’s step in all the time on wounded DG animals and this keeps that number fairly low.

 

[375Fox]

It appears, regrettably, that I committed the grave error of expressing an opinion that didn’t align with yours.

For a guy that advocates following wounded buffalo with drones I’m surprised how offended you are the PH fires at a wounded buffalo that just charged, especially on an early season hunt where visibility is limited. The drone would ruin the experience for me. The PH firing does not.

 

[SStomcat]

For a guy that advocates following wounded buffalo with drones I’m surprised how offended you are the PH fires at a wounded buffalo that just charged, especially on an early season hunt where visibility is limited. The drone would ruin the experience for me. The PH firing does not.

Offended? LOL.
Remarkable how a hypothetical drone from years ago—raised in an entirely different discussion—still provokes more anguish than the actual question being debated: whether a hunter should be “given the opportunity” after a wounded buffalo had already charged.

I do admire the memory. Resurrecting old grievances clearly takes less effort than distinguishing armchair hypotheticals from real-world safety in thick early-season cover.

 

[Rare Breed]

@SStomcat - You keep trying to reiterate to me that there was no second charge, and you argue it to me as if I said there was. I never said there was, I asked earlier in the thread why you keep saying that to me. And you keep telling me to rewatch the video again to see that. Except, I have never said there was a second charge.

All I asked is: If you would be unhappy with the PHs shooting when the buffalo charged? You said you would be unhappy with that. That's fine, we just differ in opinion on it.

I do agree that it would have been nice of the PHs to try and let the client shoot on the 3rd encounter when they spotted it again. However, we don't know what conversation took place off screen. The client may have told the PHs that if they saw it again, to shoot it.

The buffalo had already charged once, almost getting at least one PH and knocking the client to the ground. In my opinion, that is enough of a reason to stop being overly polite and start just doing what is necessary to avoid life changing injuries or death from occurring.

In a short 5 minute video the client does many things that demonstrate he is out of his element, to put it very kindly. I would not fault the PH for losing faith in the client and taking the opportunity to put the buffalo down when they got the chance after the charge that occurred.

If you watched the video and the PHs are who you find the most fault with in the video, then we likely have an irreconcilable difference of opinions on this topic.

Sabre is correct. After the problematic shot and the charge the PH and client should have an immediate conversation about what will happen next. Just me if this is a PG no question I would tell the PH to not shoot and let me finish it. When it’s a DG it is not an exaggeration to say peoples life’s could be on the line so whoever can get a finishing shot should take it

 

[WAB]

Offended? LOL.
Remarkable how a hypothetical drone from years ago—raised in an entirely different discussion—still provokes more anguish than the actual question being debated: whether a hunter should be “given the opportunity” after a wounded buffalo had already charged.

I do admire the memory. Resurrecting old grievances clearly takes less effort than distinguishing armchair hypotheticals from real-world safety in thick early-season cover.

Did you start this thread just to start an argument? You obviously had a strong opinion, which you did not state in the OP. The vast majority of folks with actual DG experience disagree with your assessment. It’s probably time to move on.

 

[SStomcat]

Did you start this thread just to start an argument? You obviously had a strong opinion, which you did not state in the OP. The vast majority of folks with actual DG experience disagree with your assessment. It’s probably time to move on.

No argument was started — a scenario was posted. Disagreement happened. That’s how forums work. If there’s nothing new to add, moving on sounds reasonable.

 

[steve white]

Too many things we don't know: what was the type/wieght of bullet used--was bullet failure more at fault than placement, what was the caliber (presume 375), was there an edited conversation instructing the hunter to let the PH's handle it at the end?, was the gentleman on the ONE hunt he could afford in his life and just had to wear the hunting clothing he already had? It was colder, because he starts the film wearing only green, then adds the coat--and was it even his? What level hunting experience did the hunter have? On and on, and it is what it is. His wife really hugged him at the end--I actually hope she didn't see the charge.

 

[Rare Breed]

As with everything we discuss on our forum when hunting PG or DG communication with our PH BEFORE the sh!$ hits the fan is critical. When that happens in just my experience no disappointment happens except those caused by just myself. Good discussions everyone!

 

[SStomcat]

The discussion has naturally drifted across related topics—right vs. wrong, judgment calls, and differing philosophies—and that’s to be expected when experienced people engage passionately. A spirited debate doesn’t imply bad intent, nor does it justify questioning the purpose of the original post.
The core point I’ve been trying—perhaps unsuccessfully—to make is this: the hunter should have been given a third opportunity, in some form, before the two PHs opened fire around the 3:19 mark. Notably, during the actual charge, they did allow the hunter to take the shot, even though the moment was far too compressed for him to react effectively. That raises a reasonable question—why deny a third chance earlier, when the hunter was still right behind them and actively in the hunt? It gives the impression that the PHs may have already lost confidence in the hunter, though it’s not clear why.
Also worth noting is that the hunter’s first shot was not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be. It wasn’t ideal, but it clipped the top of the lungs, and had it not been a solid (pass-through), it likely would have caused significant internal damage. The photos speak for themselves.

 

[WAB]

The discussion has naturally drifted across related topics—right vs. wrong, judgment calls, and differing philosophies—and that’s to be expected when experienced people engage passionately. A spirited debate doesn’t imply bad intent, nor does it justify questioning the purpose of the original post.
The core point I’ve been trying—perhaps unsuccessfully—to make is this: the hunter should have been given a third opportunity, in some form, before the two PHs opened fire around the 3:19 mark. Notably, during the actual charge, they did allow the hunter to take the shot, even though the moment was far too compressed for him to react effectively. That raises a reasonable question—why deny a third chance earlier, when the hunter was still right behind them and actively in the hunt? It gives the impression that the PHs may have already lost confidence in the hunter, though it’s not clear why.
Also worth noting is that the hunter’s first shot was not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be. It wasn’t ideal, but it clipped the top of the lungs, and had it not been a solid (pass-through), it likely would have caused significant internal damage. The photos speak for themselves.

View attachment 735459View attachment 735460

Again, my challenge would be, if that was the core point you were trying to make, why did you not simply state so in the OP, instead of posting the video with a ‘what do you think?’

My point is, it seems somewhat disingenuous to post it in this manner and then come in on top of responses that disagree with your unstated point, telling folks how wrong they are.

You state that a hearty discussion is good for the forum, yet, IMO, you set this one up like an ambush.