South Africa - professional hunting

[SEshooter]

 

how is it a bit judgemental? The issue is whether or not this guy made a clean kill. Taking four shots is appalling - whether shooting with a high powered rifle or a bow. It smacks of someone who shouldn't be in charge of a weapon. The question then becomes how do you maximise your chances of doing the job properly, which includes the right tools for the right job. You still haven't given any details about the situation, but I imagine that your first shot is the one that gives you the best chance of making the perfect shot. The fact is that a high powered rifle gives you far better chances than a bow on shot one, two, three and four.

 

If it's all about close range, what's stopping you from getting into bow hunting range and using a rifle? If it's about skill with a bow, this guy clearly hasn't got it.

 

Shall we do some science? which takes longer - two shots or four? Even if you have to track down the animal because you didn't get a true head or heart/lungs shot the first time round, it's still quicker to take two than having to take four shots. If you can't kill an animal without taking four shots, you shouldn't be hunting at all - regardless of the weapon of choice or the prey.

 

At no point have I said that hunting for sport with a bow and arrow is okay, as you will appreciate if you read my posts. If it's through necessity, for food and lack of an appropriate weapon it's not great, but it's more understandable. But the fact of the matter is you have a responsibility when you're taking life - when you're hunting for food as well but especially for sport. The example of the hippo shows no respect for the animal at all.

Hit the nail on the head

[Blunderbust]

this one has val kilmer and michael douglas , may very well be the same movie...

 

Yep, that is the one mate, I agree it is a good movie.

[chrisjpainter]

I've asked three times for you to give details. You've said nothing, so it's hard not to draw conclusions as to why that is. I'm happy to be proved wrong, and you should be happy to prove me wrong by giving more details. So please, give us an account that explains what happened.

 

Yes when I've had to do follow up shots, the animal has suffered, but I was not happy about it. it annoys me and inspires me to do better. What I'm not inspired to do is post photos and use them as an example of how things should be done!

 

The problem is, you're now getting perilously close to suggesting that the idea is to get the animal to charge, as that is part of the whole experience:

'Yes, let’s do the science then animal weighing 1.5 tonnes charging at you versus a deer weight of muntjac 10 – 16kg which would not charge you by a long shot. One you need to take evasive action in the interest of self-preservation, the other you don’t. You are trying to compare apples with pears Im afraid….and that is not “good science” And again you don’t know all the facts……'

Aside from not really responding to the question of four shots being needed to kill the animal, you should notice that I'm NOT comparing it to any shooting examples, aside from saying yes I've occasionally screwed up shots, but that I have followed it up with a second, killing, shot as soon as possible. I have not compared the situation to shooting deer in this country, or even big game in Africa. All I have done is compare it to a standard: Killing an animal should be done with as little suffering as possible. What this guy has done is fail lamentably when compared to that standard. I appreciate that accidents happen, but using photos of it to show a good trip hunting is pretty poor. If you are saying that the standard is wrong, and that it's simply not possible to kill a hippo with fewer than 4 shots, then I would say that you shouldn't be hunting hippos at all. The fact is that we both know it's entirely possible to kill them cleanly as long as you are using the right tools for the job and have the ability

 

So, whether the animal would charge or not is irrelevant, because it doesn't affect the question of whether it is unnecessarily cruel to take four shots, unless these follow up shots are panicked shots to cover for the first or even the second not achieving what they were supposed to do. Or if it is relevant, it should be to force you to make as clean a kill as possible as quickly as possible so you don't get mown down by 1.5 tons of angry hippo. Unless the idea is to get the animal angry by deliberately taking a non-lethal shot. I'm going to assume THAT isn't the case, because if it is, that's outrageous. There is, of course the question of adrenaline. A mortally wounded animal can run on adrenaline, even when a clean kill has been made. That is a fact of life and I grant you that this is going to cause an animal to charge, potentially even if shot from bow-hunting ranges with a rifle. But that doesn't seem to be what this is. With cases of adrenaline, follow up shots aren't required as all the damage that needs to be done is done. No amount of firing off more shots into the right area is going to stop that explosion of adrenaline that is coursing through an animal. The fact that four shots were used is indicative of shot 1,2 and 3 all not being up to scratch, thus making 4 necessary for the kill.

 

I have not hunted with a bow for two very good reasons. 1) It's illegal in the UK and, more importantly, 2) I'm not good enough. My response to not being good enough to guarantee (as far as is reasonably possible) of a clean kill is that I wouldn't do it, even if I was in a country where it was legal. Does that mean I'm not entitled to an opinion? well no, because what it is a question of comparing what is theoretically, technically and realistically possible to that which was actually done and a question of ethics. It's clear that killing a hippo with one shot is possible. It can be done with a rifle and many people have. Personally, I don't see the point if you're not going to eat it, and they're not pests, but hey-ho it's not a big deal. So we come to the bow. If it's impossible to kill a hippo with one, two or three shots, then it should not be done - especially not for sport! If it CAN be done, but this guy didn't, then at best it's just a terrible advertisement for the sport and should never be presented on a public forum as a great experience. At worst it's barbarism and the guy should not be allowed to pick up a bow until he can do the job properly.

Edited September 23, 2014 by chrisjpainter

[TACTICAL SNIPER]

NOT SURE ON MY FEELINGS ON THE PICS.... HOWEVER I AM REALLY ENJOYING READING THE COMMENTS AND SEEING DIFFERENT PEOPLES VIEWS AND MORALS!

[chrisjpainter]

NOT SURE ON MY FEELINGS ON THE PICS.... HOWEVER I AM REALLY ENJOYING READING THE COMMENTS AND SEEING DIFFERENT PEOPLES VIEWS AND MORALS!

we aim to please

[TACTICAL SNIPER]

ALSO... SPARTON 7510, I BET YOU WERE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERING WETHER TO ORIGIONALY POST THESE PICS OR NOT.. I WOULD HAVE BEEN DEBATING WETHER TO CLICK DELETE STRAIGHT AFTER POSTING, YOU MUST HAVE KNOWN THIS WOULD CAUSE SOME SPLIT VIEWS LOL

[Penelope]

Chrispainter and Scully have it nailed IMO.

 

No problem with big game hunting, but the bow for hippo (or any large game) is a no, no, it's just not the right tool for the job, and the right tool should be used out of respect for the quarry, and they all deserve respect from Snipe to Elephant.

[Harnser]

There's only one word to sum up shooting hippo or other large game with a bow and that's , CRUEL .

 

Harnser

[malkiserow]

ALSO... SPARTON 7510, I BET YOU WERE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERING WETHER TO ORIGIONALY POST THESE PICS OR NOT.. I WOULD HAVE BEEN DEBATING WETHER TO CLICK DELETE STRAIGHT AFTER POSTING, YOU MUST HAVE KNOWN THIS WOULD CAUSE SOME SPLIT VIEWS LOL

But great advertising ......... No such thing as bad publicity

[Kes]

Couldn't justify killing a big cat unless in self defense, everyone to their own I suppose.

 

As for the hippo, I shudder to think how many times it was shot with a bow to kill it....

My sentiments and I hope the numbers of all those shot game are rising because Robert Mugabe e.g. would sell his grandmother and his country's birthright for a bent 5p.

[Rim Fire]

This IMHO is a good sporting picture

That's a sporting picture I think even BLUNKET could hit one of them

[birdsallpl]

That's a sporting picture I think even BLUNKET could hit one of them

As expected, you've completely missed the quality of the photo.

[Scully]

 

The challenge with a bow and arrow is not to get killed by a ****** off animal, your range and accuracy.

So the challenge ISN'T a humane kill, but to ensure you aren't killed in the process of inflicting as much pain as possible? The answer is easy; if you don't want to get killed by a ****** off animal, use a weapon that's up to the job.

[Kes]

So the challenge ISN'T a humane kill, but to ensure you aren't killed in the process of inflicting as much pain as possible? The answer is easy; if you don't want to get killed by a ****** off animal, use a weapon that's up to the job.

Agreed - bet there was a pro hunter watching with a double .500 nitro express to protect the guy with the bow. 60 yds range tops with a bow and hippos can do 38 mph doesnt really add up to a clean kill.

My own personal view but bowhunting big game is simply cruel and for me unconscionable.

[Mentalmac]

 

Weak how so? Inhumane slaughter - this is general practice in Halaal slaughter houses, whereas the examples you give concerning slaughter are not general practice.....granted the odd bolt misses its mark, but generally suffering is limited. Not so in Halaal slaughter, where this is the norm. As for kicking and punching animals - it can be agreed is not normal practice..

The FSA say around 88% of halal meat is pre stunned... So you can't argue that 12% is general practise...

Also you haven't mentioned kosher, same thing unless you just have an anti Muslim agenda? Lol.

 

At the end of the day, its not big or clever to shoot bows at a hippo just because the locals do it. Was this chap wearing the local attire when he did it? Did he struggle for food for a while before hand too? Did he even use authentic local weaponry? No - it was just simply a bragging right accomplishment that he killed a hippo with a now and arrow... Great.

I wouldn't moan if it was a 1 shot and kill or perhaps 2 shots as one would have been a follow up after not a clean first, but if you shot a rabbit/fox, deer, or even a rat 4 times with a gun and it didn't kill it, it's either not the right tool for the job, or the person behind it is a tool.

[flynny]

In these countries it's plain and simple:-

No hunting = no animals.

Canned or what it's no ones business apart from the hunter and organiser. As long as within the law and done as humanely as possible.

 

Correct,

 

Mods please close this thread,,

 

Spartan, nice interesting pics and post mate,

 

But you can't do right for doing wrong here sometimes, don't even bother with the holier than though brigade,

 

Just ignore em,

 

Atb

 

Flynny

[Scully]

Correct,

 

Mods please close this thread,,

 

Spartan, nice interesting pics and post mate,

 

But you can't do right for doing wrong here sometimes, don't even bother with the holier than though brigade,

 

Just ignore em,

 

Atb

 

Flynny

I don't think it's a matter of 'holier than thou'. All live quarry shooters on this forum kill animals for no other reason than we enjoy shooting, none of us are being forced, and personally I have no problem with the photo's. With me it's a matter of deliberately using a tool not up to the job when other options were available, and thereby giving no consideration whatsoever as to the animals suffering, simply because the bloke wanted to see if he could do it.

[sitsinhedges]

I don't think it's a matter of 'holier than thou'. All live quarry shooters on this forum kill animals for no other reason than we enjoy shooting, none of us are being forced, and personally I have no problem with the photo's. With me it's a matter of deliberately using a tool not up to the job when other options were available, and thereby giving no consideration whatsoever as to the animals suffering, simply because the bloke wanted to see if he could do it.

 

I feel this way when I see idiots shooting 50metre plus rabbits with sub 12 airguns.

[Kes]

I don't think it's a matter of 'holier than thou'. All live quarry shooters on this forum kill animals for no other reason than we enjoy shooting, none of us are being forced, and personally I have no problem with the photo's. With me it's a matter of deliberately using a tool not up to the job when other options were available, and thereby giving no consideration whatsoever as to the animals suffering, simply because the bloke wanted to see if he could do it.

I agree if numbers permit - i still would not do it but if killing a few saves many - ok !

Edited September 23, 2014 by Kes

[flynny]

That's not right mate, not having a go at you (as you didn't shoot it 4 times) but the hippo deserves a more humane demise don't you think? I know things are different in Africa but hunting something that big should be done with a large caliber rifle ( in my opinion)

Atb

Flynny

I don't think it's a matter of 'holier than thou'. All live quarry shooters on this forum kill animals for no other reason than we enjoy shooting, none of us are being forced, and personally I have no problem with the photo's. With me it's a matter of deliberately using a tool not up to the job when other options were available, and thereby giving no consideration whatsoever as to the animals suffering, simply because the bloke wanted to see if he could do it.

[jayDT10]

Correct,

 

Mods please close this thread,,

 

Spartan, nice interesting pics and post mate,

 

But you can't do right for doing wrong here sometimes, don't even bother with the holier than though brigade,

 

Just ignore em,

 

Atb

 

Flynny

totally agree, why the mods ain't closed this already is beyond me. There have been a few pics in so called sporting pictures that have not been tasteful to which no one batts an eyelid, eg setting a dead fox up behind a rifle ,

( what's that all about)

[Bazooka Joe]

totally agree, why the mods ain't closed this already is beyond me.

 

 

Why should they, all members are doing is given their opinions.

 

There was a post a couple of days ago bleeting on about the mods closing posts to early, I cannot see any reason why this one should close.

[shaun4860]

What they are doing is legal,

 

Admittedly not to my taste but legal non the less,

 

If it is bothering members so much then don't look at it

 

As stated above we get accused of being too heavy handed then people want legal threads closed,

 

It's like banging your head against a wall at times.

 

As said....IT'S LEGAL, BUT MAY OFFEND SO DON'T LOOK AT IT

 

[chrisjpainter]

What they are doing is legal,

 

Admittedly not to my taste but legal non the less,

 

If it is bothering members so much then don't look at it

 

As stated above we get accused of being too heavy handed then people want legal threads closed,

 

It's like banging your head against a wall at times.

 

As said....IT'S LEGAL, BUT MAY OFFEND SO DON'T LOOK AT IT

 

Indeed so sir, I'm happy the thread is open as it gives us a chance to engage with the debate. It's been pretty polite so far, personal insults haven't come up, so leave it open, I say

[birdsallpl]

I also think what is really good about these debates is that by reading other peoples views it opens our own thought processes and if good rational argument is forthcoming it may help us to change our views and preconceived ideals. They can be educational, so as long as everyone avoids becoming over emotive they are good, so please let it run.