“Human subtlety … will never devise an invention more beautiful, more simple, or more direct than does Nature, because in her inventions nothing is lacking, and nothing is superfluous” – Leonardo da Vinci (1452 – 1519)
I have come in for a lot of criticism over the years, predominantly from vested interests, for linking the drastic decline in overseas hunters visiting South Africa – from 16 394 in 2008 to 6 539 in 2016 (a drop of 60% in nine years) – to the canned killing epidemic and the intensive breeding, domestication and/or genetic manipulation of wildlife to produce animals with exaggerated horn lengths and unnatural colour variations, which have coincided with this period and done so much damage to hunting and, ipso facto, conservation in this country.
Admittedly, a lot of the criticism can be written off as of the, “Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?” kind of thing, ala the comments of Mandy Rice Davies when the English politicians involved with the call girl, Christine Keeler, denied any such involvement and I took the nasty remarks by certain canned killers and intensive breeders with the bucket of salt they deserved, although one did resort to violence and shoulder charged me into a wire enclosure at OR Tambo Airport cutting my hand. I was invited to press charges against the buffoon by airport staff but declined as, when you fight with pigs, the pigs enjoy it and all you do is end up dirty.
Other comments were more difficult to understand, including statements by Mr. Stephen Palos, CEO of the Confederation of Hunting Associations of South Africa, an amateur hunting body representing nearly 30 such organisations. Mr. Palos made the following statements back in 2015 and has continued to advocate them in his current position as CEO of this important hunting body. For example:
“I cannot join that man’s hypocrisy by simply condemning the breeding of lion to be hunted …” Although there is little or no hunting involved in the killing of most of these animals, the vast majority of which are domesticated beasts.
“What I know in my gut, and this experience proves, is that there ALREADY IS INDEED a demand for the hunting of colour variants, which will grow further as prices asked for them drop to meet prices more hunters will pay. Obviously as more of a certain variant are created, their value will drop taking them towards the point that hunting becomes an option. Once quantity/price factors make hunting viable, demand will start to stabilise the falling price. This is already the case with the likes of black or white springbuck. I do not think any investor in these animals thinks otherwise right now, and given the proven business acumen & sheer wealth of many of these investors, I think it’s an insult to say that they are falling fowl (sic) of a deliberate Ponzi scheme or even worse, creating one.”
And yet this is precisely what has happened. Because there has been little or no hunting demand for these unnatural animals – in fact the reverse as most hunters abhor this cynical practice – the prices for them have dropped like the proverbial stone. So much so that I have been reliably informed of one intensive breeder with a herd of some hundred ‘golden wildebeest’ who offered them free of charge to a well known professional hunter with a request that any profit the PH made from them be shared with the breeder. In another case I am aware of, black impala, previously sold for million of rands per animal, are now being offered for R5 000.00 ($420.00) each. If this is not the same as happened when the tulip bubble burst in the Netherlands, then I do not know what is.
“Breeding or managing animals to enhance trophy size is now commonplace. Selective stud animals, feed hoped to contain essential elements for horn growth and now even devices placed over juvenile animal’s horns to protect them from wear! For the answer to this I must call on the Serenity Prayer which says:
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, The courage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the difference.
There is no doubt that this practice will not be changed. It is here to stay. There are simply too many ranchers, too many ranches and too many animals for this to be police-able. To argue it would generate only heat, not light. But there may be consequences, and actions to take. The biggest tragedy of this practice is that it renders hundreds of years of history irrelevant as the record books stand to be inundated with new fantastic animals bred exactly for the purpose of making the book.”
No, the biggest tragedy is that more and more of the thousands of overseas hunters who, in 2016, paid on average R215 000 each for daily rates and trophy fees alone, will decided to hunt elsewhere and predominantly in our Namibian neighbour. If you take the average loss of overseas hunters over this period since 2008 at 7 000 per annum, a very conservative figure, then the losses to this country over the nine years since 2008 amounts to R13,5 billion in 2016 rands and, if you add to this monies also spent on airfares, accommodation, car hire, taxidermy, gratuities, gifts, tourist travel both before and after the hunt and so on, you can probably double this figure. Simply put, the country cannot afford to lose this massive amount of foreign exchange in order to satisfy the whims of a few selfish and cynical businessmen who do not give a damn about hunting or conservation but only their bank balances.
Talking about criticism of these practices, he said, “To my mind these attacks by hunters on hunters or other sections of the wildlife industry do far more harm by lambasting each other in our own hunting media, exposing huge discord and disconnect between ourselves, than what harm stems from any of the actual specific practices themselves”.
How disingenuous can you be? How out of touch with the reality of the damage done and being done to hunting and conservation must you be to equate criticism with the catastrophic results of canned killing and intensive breeding! How many overseas hunters must this country be reduced to before the damage done by these practices is seen as more serious than the mere criticism of it?
While I agree that washing dirty linen in public should not be a first choice, there is no alternative when hunting and the conservation on which it depends is being destroyed, along with the livelihoods and jobs of those in game ranching and the secondary businesses which depend on it in the predominantly rural areas where these occur. Especially if there is no benefit to conservation, wildlife and wildlife habitats from these disgusting practices. Especially if those that have benefit from these ugly businesses are so few and benefit no-one and nothing other than themselves.
I have just received the South African hunting statistics for the 2016 calendar year provided by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). As any businessman worth his salt will tell you, it is better to have information that is 90% correct soon, than information which is 100% correct too late. Not that I am saying the information provided by government in this connection is 100% correct. I have no way of knowing but I can certainly say that information provided nearly a year after 2016 has ended is history and not useful information.
The most important facts indicated by the belated statistics are the following:
- The continued deterioration in numbers of overseas hunters visiting South African. In 2016 these numbers fell from 7 633 to 6539, a further drop of 1 094 hunters or 14%, from those in 2015.
- Although revenue increased by 11%, I think this can largely be ascribed to the drop in the rand against the US dollar brought about by the disastrous machinations of Zuma and his government.
- In round figures, revenue derived from daily rates and trophy fees paid by these hunters amounted to R1,4 billion in 2016 versus R1,27 billion in 2015. The real reason behind the increase is the spend per hunter, which increased by a whopping 29%, from roughly R166 000 to R215 000 per hunting trip. Personally, I find this increase hard to credit but that is what the statistics show.
- On the other hand, these hunters shot slightly fewer animals – 27 241 as opposed to 27 298 the year before and, looking at the breakdown of the top ten animals by number, there were no surprises with impala, warthog and kudu leading the list.
- Limpopo Province earned the most, namely, R600 million – up from R480 million a year previously – or 25%.
- North West Province, the kings of canned lion killing, earned R90 million from the 291 lions shot there at an average price of US$21 200. Having said that, there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of canned lions killed from 622 in 2015 to 355 in 2016 – a fall of 43% – although the drop in revenue has not been as severe as these figures might imply and overall earnings from this disgusting activity fell a mere R12 million from R122 million to R110 million in round numbers. If you know anyone who claims to have shot a free range lion from this region, in all likelihood he/she has participated knowingly in a canned killing and, if they have, they should be held to account for their anti-hunting conduct by the hunting bodies to which they belong.
- Interestingly, at the same time as canned lion killings dropped, so too did the number of American hunters visiting South Africa in 2016. Numbers fell by 15% to a still significant 3079 in number, although it is the lowest number in ten years. Even so, North American hunters made up 61% of the total of overseas hunters with European hunters a distant second at 32%.
What with both Dallas Safari Club and SCI both coming out this year with statements condemning the canned lion and captive bred lion killing sickness, you can only hope that this activity will go the same way as the intensive breeding of unnatural colour variants – wither on the vine and disappear.
There is much anecdotal evidence to support the negative effects of canned killing and intensive breeding and the concomitant loss of overseas hunters. A game rancher wrote to me recently about the large drop in the prices offered for the purchase of live game this year. An outfitter called me this morning to tell me of a successful game ranching friend in the Dundee area who specializes in kudu hunts and who is battling to sell them because he has been undercut by recently discounted hunts for these game animals in Limpopo Province. I spoke to a second major outfitter who told me of a client who warned him that, if he shot an animal with a tag in its ear, he would never hunt with him again. And of another client who was going to bring a friend on a hunt but the friend declined because he did not want to go “on and old man’s hunt” because he assumed South African hunts were essentially for domesticated animals in a small paddocks, which guaranteed the end result. A highly experienced, well regarded South African outfitter and PH, who has recently returned from the annual hunting conventions in the USA, said it had become all but impossible to sell South African hunts.
Probably the biggest negative flowing from these developments, apart from the job losses in rural areas, is the fate of the new black game ranchers who will now find it difficult, if not impossible, to make a go of things in the current climate. To compound this problem is the demise of the independent professional hunter who, in the past, could have been relied upon to partner black game ranchers to help them market their operations both locally and abroad and the absence of whom further exacerbates an already dire situation.
I was also called recently by a well known and popular taxidermist to compliment me on predicting the current hunting trends, the effects of which he can see first hand in his business. He asked whether there was anything that could be done to reverse the current situation as he was aware of a number of game ranches reverting to domestic livestock, as evidenced by the large amounts of game meat on the market – shot to make way for the re-introduction of cattle.
This, of course, raises a further issue. How much cheap and healthy protein is being lost? Using the average loss of 7 000 overseas hunters per year since 2008, and assuming each hunter shot a conservative five animals per trip providing 30 kgs of meat per animal, this equates to a loss of 1 050 000 kgs of meat per annum. What will need to be done to replace it, especially from those game ranches in the arid or semi-arid regions which cannot be used to raise domestic livestock? How much land will need to be set aside to make up for the loss of this kind of healthy protein?
Let me say at the outset that it gives me no pleasure whatsoever to have predicted – along with a number of others – the consequences of canned lion killing and intensive breeding for South Africa. The answer to the taxidermist’s question, however, is that of course the dreadful current trend can be reversed. It will take the same things that gave rise to the hugely successful, quiet South African conservation revolution in the first place, which began some 60 years ago. In other words, a partnership between government, the private sector and amateur and professional hunting bodies. There is also the highly successful Namibian example to follow where government, hunting bodies (both amateur and professional) and game ranchers have combined both to protect hunting from canned killing practices and intensive breeding, on the one hand, and to actively promote hunting, locally and internationally, on the other hand.
But much more needs to be done and, although the Namibian model provides guidance, South Africa needs to embark on its own well thought out, three year, program, coupled with a public relations strategy, to re-introduce the romance of African safaris into South Africa, coupled with the rating of game ranches and professional hunters according to the standard of fair chase hunting offered by them. I believe we also need to move away from luxury, bushveld, glass and chrome mini-palaces filled with contemporary art and return to good, old fashioned, South African hospitality in our farm/ranch houses, to tented camps, bucket showers, dinner in the boma and coffee around the camp fire. We need to go back to our roots, to the things that made South Africa the hunting destination of choice on the African continent, that provided opportunities for all for over 60 years and which funded the wonderfully successful conservation revolution which swept the country.
In these days of political renewal and hope in South Africa, is it too much to hope that hunting and conservation will also have their Augean stables washed clean even if the President has also indulged in intensive breeding?
Hi Peter,
Thank you for this well-written article. Is there a website or journal article that I would be able to access that shows the above-mentioned figures (i.e. the trend in hunter numbers arriving in South Africa)? Thanks a lot
Not as far as I am aware, Matt. The stats are provided by the Department of Environmental Affairs.
Thanks again Peter, very interesting figures.
Hence if I understand well, overseas hunters represent about 12% of the revenues that are globally derivated from hunting in SA? Whist it is not insignificant, it’s not that big too and one can imagine that hunting could survive in SA without this. What is the trend for local hunters? Are the figures declining too? What is the futur of hunting in SA in your opinion? I’m not a hunter but I can see that the trend is globally towards less and less hunting and this poses the question of what the hunting areas will become once hunting stops. And these areas are playing a vital role for wildlife in many countries. Look at what is currently happening in Tanzania where many hunting areas are closing, because they are forced too or just because they can’t make money or are left with almost nothing to hunt… Whatever the context and the reasons, it’s important to understand how SA will respond to the current trend as this is definitely the biggest market in Africa and the solutions that will be developed here will impact the rest of the continent. In your post, you say that game farms are turned into cattle breeding… Is that what is going to happen?
Best regards.
Thanks a lot Peter for these detailed figures. I read in another post that there are around 9,000 game ranches in SA meaning that there are much more GR that foreign BG hunters visiting the country.. It makes the economics of this activity quite hazardous doesn’t it? Or can it rely on home market and SA hunters? Or as you say in your blog, the risk is to see more and more of these GR turn into cattle breeding or other activities?
Thanks again and best regards
You are correct, Geoff. There are over 9 000 game ranches in South Africa. According to Free State University, there are some 300 000 local hunters who spend, on average, some R34 000 per annum, which underpins the local market. However, if the country had just been able to retain the number of overseas hunters who visited the country in 2008 (16 394), then in 2016 alone the missing hunters would have spent an additional R2,1 billion (9 855 i.e. 16 394 less 6 539 (the number of overseas hunters in 2016), multiplied by R215 000, the average spend per overseas hunter on daily rates and trophy fees in 2016) or R235 425 per game ranch.
Kind regards, Peter
I would like to see Africa return to the tent safari days of old hunting wild and free big game animals .That’s real hunting to me and it’s the adventure of the hunt that you will never forget .Hunters must return to free and wild hunts because the general public totally hates canned hunts .The value of the hunt will greatly increase in your memory when you go on a real wild hunt .I learned this greatly by my 12 years hunting wild alaska .They even had pens there 1200 acres and had buffalo ,elk ,reindeer and Muskox and it looked like you were hunting wild alaska but it’s a small pen .You might not her something every time in the wild buy that’s why it’s called hunting .The value of the meat bad not just the horns plays a big part of the way nonhunters sees hunting .I saw in Alaska where huge moose horns were left outside for the squirrels to eat or sold by the pound bad the meat that feed their family was the main goal of the hunt .We must return to our original purposes of hunting to be seen as good stewards of our lands and wildlife .We also must get kids involved they are the future of hunting .My hero Teddy Roosevelt went across Africa on the greatest safari ever a huge tent safari that will never be repeated but I would love to see those kinds of wild safaris again .I want an adventure that you remember a life time .WE must save hunting today or it will be gone tomorrow before our eyes !
Thank you for your comments, Mike. I agree with everything you say.
Kind regards, Peter
Thanks for this very informative blog. I do believe (although I don’t have the figures) that the number of tourists visiting wildlife areas in SA has increased for the last couple of years, showing that security or political unpredictability do not deter the tourists from coming. But most probably the visitors are not the same and are not looking for the same things than 15 years ago. Would you know of the number of overseas big game hunters who are likely to coming to hunt in Africa today? Is this figure stable or declining and that would simply explain the trend in the number of hunters visiting SA, regardless of the quality of the hunting practice there?
Thank you for your comments, Geoffrey. You are correct and but for the ridiculous decisions made by the then minister for tourism, Gigaba, in 2015, tourist numbers have increased every year from 2008 when 11, 17 million tourists visited RSA to 15.52 million in 2016. These numbers are estimated to rise to 16.2 million and 16.75 in 2017 and 2018, respectively. So its is clearly not security or political factors deterring overseas hunters visiting RSA although Fritz hoenke, whose views I respect, did say in an earlier comment that, “there is very strong concern for political events in RSA that I believe is now impacting decisions on where to go. I hope and pray that justice, fairness, individual rights including property, safety, rule of law, and valuing all citizens regardless of background win out for all South Africans.”
Big game means different things to hunters from different countries. Here in Africa it refers to the Big Five but in, say, North America it can refer to deer species. Regardless, the statistics made available by the Department of Environmental affairs does not distinguish big game hunters from other types of hunters. Having said that, in my own humble opinion, for what it is worth, by far the majority of overseas hunters visiting South Africa hunt plains game and this is borne out by the numbers of plains game animals shot in 2016 (35 8110) versus members of the Big Five (1 528).
As regards the question you pose i.e. how many overseas big game hunters are likely to come to hunt in Africa today, I can only guess and say again that, in my humble opinion, these figures, with the exception of Mocambique, Namibia and Uganda, have shown a consistent downward trend over the last ten years but nothing like the drop in numbers experienced in South Africa from 16 394 in 2008 to 6 539 in 2016, a drop of some 60%. In addition, I suspect that the reasons differ from country to country from increased costs to corruption, to uncertainty caused by temporary/permanent cancellation of hunting by governments again for a variety of reasons. Kind regards, Peter
Unlike some who have commented in the negative, I’ve been to RSA to hunt 3 different times over the last 9 years. All of those times were on high-fenced properties. At no time that I can recall, did the fences come into play nor used for an unethical advantage. From memory, the properties ranged in size from 5000 acres to the 100,000 acre Sandveld Reserve.
The thought is to head to Mozambique for the next hunt, if for no other reason, is to simply go to an entirely different place. However, the crime in Jo’burg and with the political rhetoric against the white farmers and their property does cause one to consider the risk vs. reward of going to RSA.
Thank you for your comments, Rick. I agree with you and that has been my experience when hunting in RSA and especially when I travelled around the country hunting and filming Flack Hunts South Africa, a comprehensive, three hour documentary which, as the name implies, covers all aspects of hunting in it. Certainly a modicum of research and reference checking will ensure you have an excellent, free range, fair chase hunt on any number of the predominantly extensive South African game ranches. And remember there are over 9 000 to choose from. The new professional hunting body, Custodians of Professional Hunting and Conservation, formed recently by those who broke away from PHASA when it reverted to support for captive bred lion killing, should be one of your first ports of call. The core members are all excellent PHs and outfitters with many years of first rate service to hunters.
I hunted twice in Mocambique a couple of years ago. The first hunt was wonderful and the second not so good due to the effects of poaching and the unpleasant treatment by customs and immigration officials trying to shake me down for bribes – they wanted to arrest me on departure for illegal arms trading as they claimed the four Norma solids for my .375 I was taking back to RSA were armour piercing rounds – but the hunting was first rate, particularly on my first hunt in Niassa National Reserve. Please feel free to contact me if I can help with recommendations.
Actually, you’ve got it just backwards mate. The ONLY appeal of RSA over, say, Namibia, is that they *do* have CBL hunts. CBT (captive born tiger) hunts would be even better.
Funny! And, if you can believe it, mate, RSA does have tigers. My taxidermist has mounted two from the Nelspruit area – one for an American and one for a local man. The latter, when I queried what had possessed him to shoot the poor canned beast, replied rather shamefacedly, “Ag man, but it was so cheap and when will I ever have a chance to shoot a real one.” The price he paid amounted to R26 000 back then or a little over $2 300 in today’s money.
Then there is or certainly was a Chinese lady who was breeding tigers on a large, free range property she bought on the banks of the Orange River in the Free State for reintroduction to China. As I understand things, the tigers roamed freely and caught their own prey, predominantly blesbok, but I guess that’s another story.
We avoid the high wired fenced in Game Ranches irrespective of area like the plague, because you know the animal is in there before-hand. Unexpected trophies world wide in the Complete Wilderness for us and we have an allegiance to each other to maintain our compliance.
Respectfully,
Bernie
Thank you for your comments, Bernie and Terri. I commend you on your standards although I do not share them. While I love hunting in the wild, unfenced areas of Africa the most, the issue for me is not so much whether the area concerned is fenced or not but whether the hunt is fair chase or not. For example, you could be hunting in one of these areas and still use unacceptable practices. On the other hand, some of the larger game ranches and conservancies in South Africa are now so large you only notice the fence when you drive in the gate as Craig Boddington once put it. Some game – and here I think of one of my favourite animals to hunt, namely, bushbuck – have very small ranges and yet even though you know they may be there, are very challenging to hunt and success is by no means guaranteed. Having said that, I respect your right not to hunt behind a fence but equally find no problem with those who have fair chase hunts in areas which are fenced.
Kind regards, Peter
Peter a very well written article. It is a shame that canned hunting is still happening, and hunting behind the wire. Fair chase is what hunting is, I love fair chase as I lose quite a lot. I appreciate your honesty and willingness to share the truth with us overseas. I thank you for this and many other articles.
Thank you for your comments and kind words, Geoff. Kind regards, Peter
Thanks for the article. I want to hunt Africa but I will not do a can hunt or a high fence hunt! I lke the old time hunts. I do not expect to take a Boone & Crockett when I hunt just a good repsentive of the species! Keep up the good work. Dan
Thank you for your email, Dan. Good to hear from you. Your comments reflect the sentiments of many of the hunters I know. It is the fair chase hunt that counts and not the size of the animals’ horns. I disagree with you slightly, however, insofar as high fences are concerned where the properties enclosed are large enough that a fair chase hunt is possible and the game are able to and do exercise their natural instincts to escape from their predators, as is the case with many of the game ranches in South Africa. Kindest regards, Peter
Dear Peter
As one would expect from you , a very well written and accurate analysis of a growing and very concerning problem. I think that you are spot on re the exotic color variants and “canned hunts”. This likely is indeed impacting the numbers of hunters traveling to RSA, and your additional points regarding the “luxuryization” ( pardon the contrivance ) are also very inciteful. Returning to the roots of hunting and especially African hunting should be a major theme to recapture the traveling hunter and to re-center the sport and business. I think many of the operators are in an escalating spiral of perceived need to compete in luxury with one another, rather than purify the experience in a traditional direction. I have seen that in Namibia.
Also, there is very strong concern for political events in RSA that I believe is now impacting decisions on where to go. I hope and pray that justice, fairness, individual rights including property, safety, rule of law, and valuing all citizens regardless of background win out for all South Africans.
Sincerely
Fritz Hoenke, MD
Thank you for your comments and good wishes, Fritz. Much appreciated. With the disastrous and debilitating results of Mugabe’s cynical land grabs clear for even the blind to see, you would think it would serve as an example of what not to do when it came to no pay expropriation but apparently not. You would also think that, with the lack of a single positive example of land distribution in South Africa, that the government might first focus on what is required to develop successful, productive and profitable land distributions on the millions of hectares of land it already owns or on the millions of hectares of land it has bought over the past 24 years before summarily taking land away from their owners to give to others yet again who do nothing productive with it but, given that this issue is a political football, I suppose that is too much to hope for.
Kind regards, Peter
Stewart Dorrington
Absolutely true and exactly the way we see it. The CBL guys tell us about financial losses they are making but these losses pale into significance when measured against the losses to the entire industry due to their unpalatable practices. Nobody is as blind as those who do not wish to see.
Thank you for your comments, Stewart. Coming from the President of Custodians of Professional Hunting and Conservation, it is good to know I am on the right track. Kind regards, Pete
Gerhard von Hasseln
Dear Peter,
Many thanks for your informative article on so called hunting in South Africa.
The Impala on the first page is probably a northern species or is it perhaps one that has been fed special food to reach such horn length?
Your lines reflect my thoughts on today’s hunting in South Africa. The difference is that I am not as much of an idealist as yourself. Thus I am of the opinion that the situation cannot be rectified because you would have to change the character of the South African game farmer/breeder whose lack of ethics are to blame.
My favourite game animal is the bushbuck ram which I have hunted in the Eastern Cape with dogs in the traditional way. When this was banned we learned how to hunt the bushbuck stalking or from a stationary hide.
When I bought a farm in 1997 I made sure that there were no game fences. There were Kudu, Bushbuck, Impala, Mountain Reedbuck and other small antelope. I became an outfitter and Professional Hunter. Over a period of 10 years we catered for over 100 mostly German clients who were satisfied with our service and happy to see no game fences. It can be done with a bit of planning, keeping away from the boundary fence while hunting. Because of age (82) I have almost given up commercial hunting but my thoughts will always be with ethical hunters.
For your information have a look at Farmer’s Weekly article on bushbuck breeding https://www.farmersweekly.co.za/animals/game-and-wildlife/step-step-guide-intensive-bushbuck-breeding/
Kind regards
Gerhard von Hasseln
Dear Gerhard,
Thank you for your email. Good to hear from you. I have read the article you kindly attached. This describes the domestication and manipulation of bushbuck to produce animals – I do not use the word wildlife or game on purpose – to produce exaggerated horn lengths of 18 to 19 inches. In the book, Hunting the Spiral Horns – Bushbuck – The Little Big Buck, which I had the privilege to edit, bushbuck with this length of horn are occasionally shot but it has always taken huge amounts of time, skill and determination if that has been the goal.
Most fair chase hunters, however, are satisfied with an old, mature ram in the last year or two of its life, which will usually have representative horns in the 14 to 15 inch range and no-one I know would want to kill a tame/semi-tame bushbuck, regardless of the length of its horns, in some small paddock or even if the animal has been released into a larger area shortly before the hunt as is sometimes the case with canned or captive bred lions. Apart from anything else, the people who engage in such intensive breeding activities show a remarkable lack of understanding of what drives most hunters, as opposed to the aberrant few whose main urge is to kill an animal bigger than anybody else has done. While most hunters like to shoot big, old animals because they are usually the wily ones in the last years of their life, often on their own, who have not grown big by accident, those having really big horns have been the cherry on top of the cream on top of the cake. The cake has been the sheer joy of experiencing the challenge of hunting by fair chase means, in nature, in wildlife habitat for the wildlife that occurs there naturally, win, draw or lose.
I have assumed, rightly or wrongly, that the bulk of those involved in the intensive breeding business, for that is what it is, are business people or ex domestic livestock farmers who have no real understanding of hunting or hunters but have been misled by the emphasis placed on record books and trophy sizes by some hunting organisations, particularly the American organisation, SCI, which has had particular significance in South Africa because Americans have constituted the vast majority of overseas hunters visiting the country. I have made this assumption because the canned killing epidemic and the intensive breeding schemes, which have done so much damage to hunting and, ipso facto, conservation, are comparatively recent phenomenon which have coincided with the enforced changes to farming in this country since 1994, occasioned by gruesome farm murders, rampant livestock rustling, the loss of tax incentives and customs protection, to name but a few of the negative changes that have forced primarily domestic livestock farmers to adopt game ranching of one kind or another. Many of these people seem to have little or no knowledge of what the modern hunter is looking for but have been seduced by the imagined wealth to be won from North American hunters failing to understand that there is an increasing modern move to fair chase hunting of old, free range animals, regardless of horn length. If you doubt this, I would recommend you check out the Boone & Crockett website, the hunting trend setter and opinion maker in North America.
It sounds to me, Gerhard, that your “old fashioned” style of hunting is not so old fashioned after all but the way all fair chase hunters want to hunt.
Kindest regards,
Peter Flack
Peter,
Please would you provide the source of your figure of 16000 foreign hunters in SA in 2008. This figure seems way to high relative to the estimates before and after that year, which vary between 6000 and 8000. This is important because it is used to show that SA is losing market share to Namibia. Stats for Namibia are not consistent and I am not convinced that such a trend is real, or at least as severe as stated. Thanks
Good morning, Andrew.
Thank you for your email. The figure for 2008 is actually 16 394 and was provided by the Department of Environmental Affairs. They in turn are merely summarising the data provided by the various Provinces which, in turn, put them together from the professional hunters’ log books, which they are obliged to keep for each overseas hunter they guide along with other statistics.
The figure may be slightly overstated in this sense that, if an overseas hunter hunts in more than one province with more than one professional hunter, it would reflect as two overseas hunters in the statistics but I think this would not skew the figures unduly.
The original Namibian figures which I have quoted and since been used many times by others, usually without acknowledging where they came from, were provided to me by a highly placed Namibian who, at my reuest, obtained them directly from the Namibian government along with a host of other data regarding the numbers and types of game killed by overseas hunters. I have no reason to doubt the validity of these statistics.
Kind regards, Peter Flack
Craig Boddington
Peter, beautifully written and on the mark!
All best, Craig
Thanks, Craig. Much appreciated. Coming from the current Weatherby Award winner, it means a lot. Kindest regards, Peter