We received a response from Peter Gouws to our recent post – Custodians of Professional Hunting and Conservation. See his comment and my reply below.
FROM PETER GOUWS
I had the privilege to hunt all over Africa in its wildest form. Nobody still alive can say that about India. Yet India offered splendid hunting up until the early sixties. What happened then? Well, there was no wildlife breeding programs/game ranches like we have in Africa today. Game simply just disappeared in India and with it went one of the greatest hunting destinations of the planet. Also the Asiatic Lion disappeared. Of course the face of hunting have changed in Africa and hunting takes place on smaller areas that are fenced but at least we have plenty wild animals to pursue. How we wish to pursue them is still our choice. We can pursue them on foot or by car or a mix of the two. We can hunt them with bow and arrow or with a rifle fitted with telescopic sights. We can stay in tents or in more luxurious accommodation. It is our choice. ALL wild animals available in South Africa are bred for consumption and how we pursue them to eventually consume them is our choice. We hang horns on our walls and put skins on our floors to show off the success of our hunt and to be reminded of the pleasure to pursue them. The kings of ancient times also hunted animals that was captured and then released to be hunted by them on horseback, chariot or on foot with or without dogs and with a great array of weapons. We cannot deny that hunting is a blood-sport and the thrill lies in the killing of the beast, the pride in the trophy, the preparation of the meat, the creation of more efficient weaponry and mostly the admiration of the resistance the quarry offered by hiding,running, flying, climbing or fighting. All this comes in different ways for different people. To label some as cruel and others as fainthearted or some as good hunters and others as bad hunters is a dangerous path to trod on. To elevate yourself to the level of a custodian of fair chase and ethical hunting is in itself a daring move. Who, if I may ask, are the people that determine the ethics of hunting and where does this fantasy of a “fair”chase come from. What is fair? Compared to what is this fairness determined? We can dwell on concrete examples of what we perceive as fair but that is entering in a never ending realm of the word “ but “ . This brings me to capture bred lion hunting. Is this not the only way to ensure the continued existence of these magnificent warriors in a world where nobody really cares for their existence except the ones who want to do battle with them. There would be no use for racehorses if horse racing was banned since racehorses are to expensive to breed if they are not raced. Let us rather focus on the conditions of breeding and the way captured bred lion or leopard hunting is conducted. If we condemn it “per se” we are nothing else but self appointed hypocritical custodians that sometimes don’t think before we criticize. I have indiscriminately hunted more than 50 lion never giving a though for pride dinamics and implications of shooting the pride male. In our days there were many lions and we did not care. The same goes for many of us old hunters but now that I have learned the impact of indiscriminate wild lion hunting I can only say, that, as for Impala , Kudu, Roan and Sable the hunting of Lion can only be sustainable if they are bred like the others. I have absolutely nothing to do with captive lion breeding but cannot help to read in all the hunting magazines about the outcry against it from the “more ethical” group of hunters. This has led me to answer to Mr Flacks’s opinion on the new custodians of hunting. If ethical hunting is something you determine yourself then there are millions of different ethics out there and each persons’ ethics binds only him. Let me ask Mr Flack the following. Is game breeding an ethical activity if the purpose is to kill the animal for sport. Simple yes or no. I rest my case. Let us concentrate on good breeding conditions for these magnificent warrior so that we can be assured that our grand children can do battle with them and experience that blood chilling growl when he had enough and comes fast and low through the red grass.
Just to add on the “custodian issue” This morning as I woke up I was lying thinking about it again. What a noble sounding name. The “custodians” of hunting. Who are these custodians and what qualifies a person to be elected to join this club. Is there a sort of screening process to determine if you are worthy to join. Is it about money, prestige, or simply to be different. Would Frederick Selous, Bell, Jungleman Pretorius, Bvekenya Barnard, Gordon Cummings and other great hunters have qualified? Well sirs these characters would not have qualified if ethics was the measure stick. So who the hell is going to qualify? Who would have dared to tell king Nebuchadnezzar that he was not a ethical hunter when he pursued lion and leopard with a band of beaters and chariots and eventually subdued his quarry with arrows and spears. Even the great Nimrud himself did not hunt in the realm of modern day “ethics”. We will never convince the anti hunting fraternity with any argument about ethical killing. Let us rather find a way of breeding more animals and place simple breeding rules and hunting conditions in place. If we as hunters take one step back and condemn captive bred lion hunting we will never be able to justify any captive bred hunting of any animal for that matter. How? As a experienced and privileged hunter who could enjoy “free” hunting I also must guard myself not to sneer on young hunters of today posing with their trophies taken on small plots with high powered rifles, rangefinders, and shiny Landcruisers. But then I always remind myself of the word “nostalgia” and quickly change my mind and force myself to be positive about these young hunters and their quest to pursue their quarry on their terms. Whether it is with a Wesley Richards with iron sights or with a Howa with plastic stock… who the hell am I to tell him that my way was the right and only way and his way is wrong. In the end we both killed the beast and enjoyed the chase. I once shot a magnificent eland bull with a German client after chasing it at high speed with a open Landcruiser until about 20 meter then slammed brakes to give him a shot!! How ethical was that? Yet we talked for days about that chase and those 44 inch horns!! Was it more ethical because it was in south east Angola in the wide open jungle and the Landcruiser was a old FJ series and the rifle a Rigby 350? Come on you “custodians” who want to separate yourselves from us mere mortals. Take an oath not ever to break your own ethics and then see how long it last in the bush when the chase is on and the Adrenalin flows. If the leopard comes to the bait 1 minute after sunset but it is still light. Do you leave it or do you take it? What does your ethics tell you? Or do you take it in Zim where it is allowed but not in Zam where it is not allowed. Is it your ethics that decide your actions or the laws that decide your ethics? Free lion hunting is fading fast with all the CITES rules. Captive animal ( lion included ) breeding and hunting is the only way foreword. Let’s just leave this custodian crap and be hunters.
MY RESPONSE
Dear Mr. Gouws,
Thank you for your lengthy email. You have obviously given this matter considerable thought and taken substantial time and effort to reduce your thoughts to writing. As such, I feel you deserve a considered reply. Unfortunately, in order to do so, I am going to disagree with you fundamentally in a number of areas. In this regard, let me begin by saying that I found a lot of what you wrote both confusing and confused but I will do my best to address at least the major points raised. To the extent I do not deal with every point you make, however, this should not be construed as meaning I agree with that point. In fact, there is little if anything which you have written with which I agree.
Let me make the following points:
- While I have applied to join the Custodians of Professional Hunting and Conservation – South Africa (CPHC), as yet I am not a member and play no role, directly or indirectly, in the organisation. Like me, anyone can apply to join provided they complete the application form and agree to abide by the rules and regulations of the body as amended from time to time. I have forwarded your email to them and they may decide to reply to you directly.
- Fair chase hunting rules of one kind or another have been in existence for many years and those adopted by the Fair Chase Guild (before it was expelled from SA Hunters because they said everyone in SA Hunters was a fair chase hunter and therefore there was no need for something like the Guild), were essentially those drafted by the late Robin Halse and Chappy Sparks many years ago and which formed the basis of the rules governing the Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen. If I were to guess, I would say they were drafted over 30 years ago and, in my humble opinion, have stood the test of time.
- Hunting ethics, like morality, change over time and what might have been acceptable hunting ethics in the time of Nebuchadnezzar is highly unlikely to be acceptable today. Consider the ancient code of an-eye-for-an-eye “justice” from the time of Hammurabi and how it has been replaced by legislation, regulation, police, prosecution and prisons.
- No-one, however, let alone the drafters of these fair chase rules insists that anybody has to abide by them but merely that, if you want to belong to CPHC, then you must.
- Let me now deal with some specific points you raise, namely:
- You state that “ALL wild animals available in South Africa are bred for consumption …” Clearly that is nonsense. There is a substantial body of game ranchers who set aside land for wildlife habitat and wildlife for no reason other than that they are passionate about both. For example, a number of animals introduced to my own game ranch, such as caracal, African wildcat and Cape mountain zebra, to name but three, were allowed to breed and never hunted. In fact, it was game ranchers like these who began the quiet conservation revolution in the 1960s which swept across the country, caused the huge resurgence in game numbers from about 557 000 to over 18,5 million forty years later and built this country’s proud conservation reputation, which has been so sullied by the canned and put-and-take killings and intensive breeding, domestication and manipulation of wildlife to produce animals with exaggerated horn lengths and unnatural colour variations.
- You write, “We cannot deny that hunting is a bloodsport and the thrill lies in the killing of the beast …” Well, you may not be able to deny this but I and many others can and do, including the great Spanish professor of philosophy, Ortega y Gasset, who coined the famous phrase, “Hunters do not hunt to kill but kill to have hunted.” But then I must admit I have never chased an eland in a vehicle in order to kill it like you have. In addition, in my humble opinion, whatever that is – shooting, culling, killing – it has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.
- You ask, “Who, if I may ask are the people that determine the ethics of hunting and where does this fantasy of a fair chase come from.” Well, I believe that ethics, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and, when it comes to hunting, it is how you behave on a hunt when you are on your own and no-one can see what you do or do not do is what determines your ethics. You clearly have your own ways of behaving when hunting and, fortunately or unfortunately, they are completely different to mine. So, the answer is that each of us determines his own hunting ethics, just like we establish our own morality in life; what we believe is acceptable behaviour and what is not.
In the case of CPHC, a number of likeminded people have banded together to form an association and I am at a loss to understand why this has ruffled your feathers so badly. You do not have to join. In fact, I would hazard a guess that, given what you have written to me, you would not be welcome.
Considering that the number of overseas hunters visiting South Africa has dropped from 16 394 in 2008 to 6 534 in 2016, while the number of overseas hunters visiting Namibia during the same period has climbed from 6 300 to over 23 000, it is safe to assume that hunters have stayed away because they do not like the way hunting has been conducted by a number of people in this country and do not want to be tainted by or inveigled into this type of conduct, by the canned killings, put-and-take killings and the intensive breeding, domestication and manipulation of wildlife to produce exaggerated horn lengths and unnatural colour variants.
So, if I am correct, then if hunting in South Africa were to follow your proposals, I would anticipate that this trend of overseas hunters avoiding South Africa would continue. The result will be the closure of more game ranches, the reversion to crops and domestic livestock, the loss of thousands of jobs because game ranches employ more people per hectare than these alternative forms of land use, to name but a few of the disastrous consequences of your advice. - You ask the question, “Is game breeding an ethical activity if the purpose is to kill the animal for sport” and demand a simple yes or no answer. I will not be dictated to you by how I answer this question because the correct answer is, “It depends”. If the animal is subsequently hunted by fair chase rules, then the answer is, no, it is not unethical but the converse also applies.
- You ask the question, “Who are these custodians and what qualifies a person to be elected to join this club.” Well, I have answered this question in Paragraph 1 above. I do however detect the same concerns raised by you as were voiced by a number of supposedly fair chase hunters in SA Hunters. Their concern was that, if they joined the Fair Chase Guild their hunting companions might “out” them given their past unethical hunting conduct. On the other hand, if they did not join, people would say that they failed to do so because they were unethical hunters. In other words, damned if they did and damned if they didn’t and that was the underlying reason why some of these people banded together to have the Fair Chase Guild expelled from SA Hunters.
- I agree with you that hunting ethics will not convince the anti-hunting or animal rights brigade to approve of hunting but that is not the object of the exercise. I believe the formation of CPHC is, firstly, to provide a home for a number of likeminded hunters and, secondly, amongst other reasons, to persuade other hunters who may not hunt according to these rules that there is much satisfaction to be gained in hunting this way. In so doing, one of the side effects may be to persuade those undecided about hunting that, if it is practiced in this manner, it is something they may enjoy or at least allow others to freely enjoy.
- You state that, “Come on you “custodians” who want to separate yourselves from us mere mortals. Take an oath not ever to break your own ethics and then see how long it last in the bush when the chase is on and the Adrenalin flows.” Firstly, those of us who agree to abide by fair chase hunting rules do not want to separate ourselves from anyone. CPHC is not an elitist organisation. I say again, anyone can join. Secondly, it is precisely in a situation such as you sketch that it will be important to stick by the fair chase rules. After all, principles are unimportant unless they cost you something. Lastly, while one of the fair chase rules demands obedience to the laws of a country, such laws are not the determining factor of what constitutes fair chase. These ethical rules are there whether the law provides for a particular course of conduct or not.
- Lastly, you say, “Captive animal (lion included) breeding and hunting is the only way forward. Let’s just leave this custodian crap and be hunters.” It is clear Mr. Gouws that you and I can at best agree to differ. In my humble opinion, your route contains within it the seeds of its own destruction. Fewer overseas hunters, fewer game ranches, less wildlife habitat, less wildlife, fewer outfitters, fewer professional hunters and what is left of South Africa’s reputation as a conservation orientated country destroyed. We are already far down this path and, if left to people like you who appear to be living in the dim and distant past, the end will be certain and that much quicker.
I have said this many times – my passion is wildlife habitat and wildlife. I support whatever conserves them and oppose whatever does not. You, Mr. Gouws, do not!
Peter,
‘To elevate yourself to the level of a custodian of fair chase and ethical hunting is in itself a daring move.’ Gouws “ It is daring (certainly in this modern world and I completely agree and understand your sentiments Peter).
ALL wild animals available in South Africa are bred for consumption …” Gouws
PF end of response: ‘So, if I am correct, then if hunting in South Africa were to follow your proposals, I would anticipate that this trend of overseas hunters avoiding South Africa would continue. The result will be the closure of more game ranches, the reversion to crops and domestic livestock, the loss of thousands of jobs because game ranches employ more people per hectare than these alternative forms of land use, to name but a few of the disastrous consequences of your advice.“
PF : ‘Is game breeding an ethical activity if the purpose is to kill the animal for sport” and demand a simple yes or no answer. I will not be dictated to you by how I answer this question because the correct answer is, “It depends”. If the animal is subsequently hunted by fair chase rules, then the answer is, no, it is not unethical but the converse also applies.Fewer overseas hunters, fewer game ranches, less wildlife habitat, less wildlife, fewer outfitters, fewer professional hunters and what is left of South Africa’s reputation as a conservation orientated country destroyed.
We are already far down this path and, if left to people like you who appear to be living in the dim and distant past, the end will be certain and that much quicker.
Holger Jensen reply: Anti-hunters have always been there, but PHASA and their lion gang have now also managed to antagonize a whole specter of overseas hunting organizations, including the latest CIC, who just a few years back were grandly hosted by PHASA for their world congress in Cape Town. It should sound alarm bells in the local hunting industry, and sadly it also affects those of us trying to present REAL hunting to our clients.
These responses resonate with me as being accurate around ‘ethical’ hunting and the clear shift away from SA, based on this. I am glad with your disarmed comment in response to Mr Gouw’s reply – as I also understand where he is coming from and he makes a ‘wise’ argument generally (a comment meant for hunters not bunny huggers). His articulation gets a bit confused for me (and Peter nips this in the bud – without mercy) and I think I understand why. The hunting experience Holger speaks of is the benchmark of African hunting and needs to be ruthlessly defended and preserved. Peter holds credible position in this aristocratic realm – well earned. Peter Gouws recognises this in his response to Peter.
What worries me (and I only have a hunters heart) is that ‘ethical hunters’ and ‘hunters with different ethics’ including our ‘biltong sportsman’ and non-hunting game farms and wildlife/tourism oriented businesses need to at least be in the same ‘laager’. The assault on hunting, by the radical and well funded Animal Activist brigade is by far the greatest threat to conservation in Southern Africa (along with many of the large green NGO’s), and the fragmentations that have taken place in our ‘back yard’ – Peter kicked out of WWF, PHASA internals and split, even the disagreements between PG and PF and all the other comments included etc etc is an indication of the fragility of ‘hunting’, culling, harvesting, game farming and all the operators and staff and indirect beneficiaries. We all have our place in the ‘foundational hunting for conservation’ and we need to get the house in order. Captive bred lions and the colourful variants have a place – market supply and demand will determine their destiny. Lets clean it up and defend with one sensible voice. For me Mr Gouws sounds like someone who could catalyse that and I would support it. At the same time I will respect your position PF and it has to be ‘tarnish free’.
Mr Gouws can’t agree with ‘ Leopard will benefit tremendously from captive breeding since that can bring higher leopard numbers into game ranches that can control birds, rabbits, and small and medium antelope numbers. Certainly these leopards can be hunted with less of a fuss since there will be more leopards.
Not feasible (just by the nature of the cats) and the control part is nonsensical?) Come on boet!
Sincerely
Rodger Bruce
`All,
I fully support Peter’s position. Being an American, I am part of the problem as we (USA hunters) have not carried the load in promoting ethical hunting. Yes, we have the Boone and Crockett Club and many other “conservation” organizations that advocate free range hunting and non-freak breeding of wild animals – however, we have those very practices everywhere – especially in Texas in the breeding of whitetail deer for freakish antler growth.
What I think has happened to some extent is that the hunting public and hunt providers fall back on the capitalist model of – if there is demand, then we can create a supply. The free enterprise mentality is alive and well in the hunting business – from all of the odd calibers, to AR platform guns that serve no hunting purpose, to scopes that will wipe your bottom. The free enterprise system/philosophy has become such a “god” in USA culture that we forget why we have it. In principle, laws/controls/government interference suppressed creativity and personal freedom to “pursue life, liberty and happiness”. We grafted “free enterprise” into that thinking and hence – we have the motto – “if someone will buy it, we will provide it” – regardless of ethics and a host of other boundaries.
So, hunters want a record book animal or a big animal – if we will buy it, someone will provide it”. We have lost our moral compass on this. I believe Teddy Roosevelt and other heroes of conservation “past” would abhor what we are doing in some arenas.
How do we find our way? Through education and a method to decrease demand for the offending practice. We tend to hold the “god” of free enterprise higher than ethics. However, if we can impart the wisdom of ethics or a moral compass, then the demand will likely disappear.
Dear Peter,
the discussion here is an interesting one, it seems I have been travelling back in time. It gives me reason to think, that with all the human – nature conflicts we still have people like above, who have not yet understood the fine balance of an ecological system.
First of all, I fully agree with your various comments and analysis. The approach is a sustainable one and also a logical one.
Maybe I can add, that ethical hunting has been the basis for hunting in Europe since the middle 1850’s. In Germany in particular, it is the basis with which we interact with nature. A system of sustainability, of sowing seeds and harvesting it, has proven to create a balance between nature, mankind’s interests. Farmers, forestry and other industries are dependent on income from and the success of their industries. The hunting laws and ethics provide a system, so that these very different interests can successfully be viable and coexist.
As you state, ethical hunting is a basis derived from our occident culture, which defines our morals. Different systems will have different morals, e.g. a confusion values may be more flexible compared to the “good or bad” systematic of Christian culture. As hunters, we are obliged to respect nature, which provides us with all our resources. That is why most indigenous cultures have ethics in their hunting traditions. It is a system of give and take. Ethics provides the basis so that this system can work. Generally, morals and ethics on this kind of issue are more or less the same in different cultures (Buddhism, Christianity, Confusionism etc.)
When I hear that some fellow hunters are chasing Eland from a 4×4, I wonder if he has not read about the buffalo in the wild best being shot of trains. Where is the nobility and moral in such a slaughter? Hunting cannot be put on a level with a slaughter house, where cattle are mechanically and industrially slaughtered . Here, there is no respect for nature, no balance of give and take, no sustainability.
As Mr. Voew correctly points out, morals change, society changes, scientific knowledge is gained, views are different. However, the final goal, to sustain and to protect nature does not. Therefore the approaches may differ in time, but the objective stays the same.
Thank you so much for your erudite explanation and convincing argument, Christian.
Dear Peter
Thank you for writing to me. I know you tried through your whole hunting life to uphold the values of the fair chase as blurred as it became in the modern time. You contributed to hunting tremendous time and energy and have battled numerous attacks from the anti groups. Your literature have become prestigious and well respected by everybody that knows about the real pursuing of exotic and quality heads. You have received praise from the knowledgeable and criticism from the ignorant. I honestly do not wish to question your motives or ethics since they speak for themselves. Admiring my honesty, well sir I don’t think honesty should be respected it should simply be expected. I have realized what role semantics play in hunting these days. If my writing and your and others’ response have attracted the attention of a few people and stimulated them to revisit their ideas it can only be for the better.
I do not have any friends left in hunting circles and follow it from reading only. My notorious eland hunting friend from Germany (78years) will visit me in June and we will visit the KNP ( relax, not to hunt ) and I will tell him that you though us to have acted unethical when we chased that eland with the Toyota. I remembered that I made a mistake in my writing. He shot it with a 9.3 x64 Breneke not a .350 Wesley. He was the bugger who acted unethical I was merely doing the chasing. But I can assure you that taking into account how many trees I had to avoid while swerving to get to that eland herd the chase got fairer by the meter and as my friend said by the time I slammed the brakes and he jumped out to shoot, the hunt could be declared a “fair chase”
Take care and best regards
Peter
Ethical issues are here to stay – the new trend overseas is not the amount or size of trophies, but the fact that they were indeed hunted fair chase. Peter is 100 % right, when he claims that the decline in overseas hunters to SA is caused by both canned lion shooting (please don’t use the word hunting in the connection) and the artificial breeding of various species and freaks. To be classified as a game animals, the species in question must at least have been able to feed and breed naturally, and that automatically excludes all hand-bred lions.
I look on in disbelief when I see what is going on in the local hunting industry – caracal’s caught in traps are being sold to hapless overseas hunters, and buffaloes and rare antelopes transported in trailers to small fenced camps and off-loaded, whilst the gullible US clients are enjoying their breakfast. That is how low our profession has gone – it seems there are no values left. Our industry has been infiltrated by con men and money greedy business people, who are not hunters in any sense of the word.
Anti-hunters have always been there, but PHASA and their lion gang have now also managed to antagonize a whole specter of overseas hunting organizations, including the latest CIC, who just a few years back were grandly hosted by PHASA for their world congress in Cape Town. It should sound alarm bells in the local hunting industry, and sadly it also affects those of us trying to present REAL hunting to our clients.
I left PHASA years ago, when they distributed offers of lions and crocodiles delivered to your doorstep in their newsletter. I’ve now found a new home in CPHC-SA among like-minded people, and I’m forever grateful that you’ve supported this important new development. We will be met with open arms by many overseas hunting organizations – most of them will say that it’s high time for us to put the brakes on the down-slide of the South African hunting industry.
Thank you for your pertinent comments, Holger. You are spot on! And, as regards your concluding paragraph, as my Jewish friends like to say, “from your lips to God’s ears.”
Hi Peter
I think Mr Gouws comments are somewhat incoherent and rambling, without any real purpose or intent. He seems very keen to antagonize and put forward his viewpoints regardless of what anybody else may think, blustering almost. His comments about “hunting 50 wild roaming lions etc” seems to me to be a serious case of self aggrandizement.
With regards to what constitutes moral ethics, I think we all agree that this is up to each person to decide for him/her self. And the fast changing times that we live in means that we will also have to change and evolve as circumstances determine. What is considered acceptable today may not be the case in a few years time. Furthermore if there was no organisation like the Fair Chase Guild.or similar, to come up with some rules and moral codes that we can all voluntarily agree to adhere to, then where and how would this all begin?
For what it’s worth, I agree with all your sentiments and wish you well going forward.
Lastly, Mr Gouws seems to me to be a rather shallow type of character, and he definitely would not be welcome around my camp fire.
Kind regards,
Michiel
Thank you for your comments and support Michiel. I suppose we should view Mr. Gouws’s comments from the age and experience from whence they came. Kind regards, Peter
I am really impressed with the replies to my posts. Mr Flack exibited that he really wanted to take me on. I especially like the Hammurabi part, me using Nebuchadnezzar. Dr Verdoorn wrote a excellent reply as well, not playing the man but the ball as where Mr Flack played man and ball which is understandable since he felt that I was making unfair comments on his initial writing. I also presume he has (had) a reddish tint to his hair. Mr Flack you belong to the aristocracy of hunting. Very few hunters have achieved even ten percent of what you have achieved and experienced on the African continent. Your books and commitment to hunt all species fair in their habitat is a massive achievement that only very few could achieve in the modern time after Maydon and Mellon. I take your comments serious. You need not fear that I will try and join any organization and neither do I fear rejection since my age is past hunting. . I have hunted from the sixties and although I haven’t hunted for decades I still buy magazines and follow the sport. Dr Verdoorn is actually right when he says that hunting is not a sport but rather a state of being although pitting your skill against that of a animal is certainly the only reason we hunted otherwise we would be observers and not hunters. I still do not know what exactly is meant by ethical hunting since Dr Verdoorn went as far as saying that anybody “shooting a animal from a vehicle or a hide is unethical and there is no morality in them. Strong words Dr Verdoorn. Are we not technically shooting any animal from a hide when we crawl through the grass to reach a tree or bush where we can conceal ourselves in order to get a better shot at a close distance since the objective would be to kill it with one clean shot. Thousands of springbok are shot from vehicles all the time for the venison industry. Is that unethical or immoral? Many people make a living from hunters visiting their farms for hunting for venison. Certainly this is also a form of hunting and I remember as a child my father and uncles use to hunt around the Usutu river in Swaziland purely for venison. To them that was hunting and they planned the trip for months. They shot some animals from the vehicle and the word ethical was never mentioned around the fire that evening. They however never ever overshot their quota and was meticulous with abiding to the law. They would however not waste a bullet on a wounded impala but simply step on the horn of the dying animal to keep them from being impaled and slit its throat with a VERY sharp knife. The horns of exceptional size was admired but seldom kept. All hunting was with Lee Metford or 7×57 Mauser with open sights. Marksmanship was exceptional. As my hunting experience straddled that era and the modern era of game ranching and telescopic sights, reloading ammunition, rangefinders, cammoflage clothing, modern hunting vehicles with everything that opens and closes compared to the era of iron sights, non 4×4 vehicles with wheel chains, tented camps and dry ice the picture really get blurred. Game ranching added another dimension to it since government land and hunting licenses became something of the past in countries like South Africa and SWA. In Angola and Zambia hunting continued on government concessions but with more advanced equipment, vehicles, airstrips and light aircraft flying in hunting clients. Hunts of 21 days became 10 day “mini safaris” for buffalo etc. the hunting industry had to speed up to keep pace with the speed at which life was happening. Old style made place for commercial so that more money could be made in a shorter time. The clients could simply not afford long periods away from their high power businesses. Was hunting becoming more unethical? Taking leopard and lion over a bait from a blind became the norm for 90% of cat hunts in the concessions of Africa. Tracking them simply took to much time and low success rate. Was all this hunting unethical and immoral ? We were using our vehicles more and more to get to the waterholes faster and earlier so that tracking could start early for the buffalos. Plains game was hunted by spotting from the car and stalking and shooting over the sticks. All this was within the law of the country. But, the question remains. Was hunting becoming less ethical as equipment evolved and man advanced. Like I said in my blog we must not confuse nostalgia with ethics. Ethics in the hunting world is not a black and white issue as some nostalgics want it to be. Like the old family doctor doing house calls when needed and having the time to enjoy a cup of tea with the patient have faded and made place for medical schemes and impersonal medical staff so also have the old type foot safaris make way for the modern way of hunting. We may join a muzzle loading club and do some black powder on foot hunts as some people offer but we simply don’t have the time. Time to walk, time to load and running the risk of wounding due to poor performance and lack of accuracy.
On the captive breeding issue I carefully read mr Flack and Dr Verdoorns reply. As a good laywer will Mr Flack really climbed into my mistakes and I did make mistakes. One mistake I will not make again is to use the word “all” Let me rephrase: 90% of all game hunted in South Africa is captive bred. This simply mean that they are depending on artificial water sources in the winter and cannot roam further than a average of 5km due to fences. Due to lack of predators their population have to be artificially controlled by relocation, hunting, shooting or call it what you like. Not withstanding other facts these facts alone makes for the word “captive” to be applicable. One can bring in fine nuances to try and bluff oneself but for heaven sake we have to admit they are captive or controlled bred. To call them self sustainable is completely wrong. If the rancher do not pump the water from the borehole they will die because they can’t roam. If they are left without predators they will multiply and decimate the grazing and all die because they are fenced in. These things are happening around us and you and I know that these animals are no different than cattle or goats when it comes to self sustainability. Please don’t give me a few examples of very big game ranches but let’s talk majority game farms. I am not referring to color variants. On that debate I am a unwelcome ally to Mr Flack and Dr Verdoorn since I myself absolutely do not see the place for it and time has proven us correct. Trophy breeding is the lesser of the two “evils” but even that is naturally coming to an end as predicted. If some had fun out of it Or made money I am happy for them. The party is however over. For the rest of the millions of huntable animals in SA the word captive or controlled is applicable. If anybody have hunted such an animal he has participated in a captive bred animal hunt and is therefore unethical and immoral. This brings me to lion and leopard. Leopard will benefit tremendously from captive breeding since that can bring higher leopard numbers into game ranches that can control birds, rabbits, and small and medium antelope numbers. Certainly these leopards can be hunted with less of a fuss since there will be more leopards. Now for the big one, Simba. What do we do? Stop hunting him altogether? Or do we breed him to reach huntable numbers like we did with all other animals. It is more complicated to release them on game farms but “why not?” I have extensive experience on lions in the wild. They simply follow their next meal and water source. They will do perfectly well on a 1000 ha if they have prey and water. You will seldom see them although your game numbers will dip for sure. Why can’t Simba be treated in this way. Just like other smaller predators. Why can he not be hunted in this enviroment? He will pose the same challenge if you hunt him on foot. Gentleman the question is rather how the animal is kept than how he is hunted. In the end the vast majority of hunters want to kill the beast with one clean shot. Allthough seeing a big maned lion die is not a pretty sight for even the cruelest person it is a short time in comparison with how he was kept and cared for before he met his end. I agree with Dr Verdoorn that wild lion hunting has almost no place anymore except next to parks with sustainable populations. Captive bred lions like all captive bred animals is unfortunately the only way forward IF there is to be lion hunting. To jump on the ethical and moral high horse is going to become a wild horse and many people will be thrown. I still struggle with the word “custodians” since it has a college fraternity ring to it and personally I never was a fraternity type. But in the end I have to admit defeat to Mr Flack and Dr Verdoorn who had more information and clear arguments than me. Maybe on another issue another day I will be back. But like your hunting style Mr Flack I wanted to take you on in your habitat. Of course I knew you and the other blog readers would come for me. I will now retreat and lick my wounds. No need to reply on this posting.
Dear Mr Gouws,
I am not going to reply to your email in detail as, for the most part, I will merely be repeating myself, although I would like to point out one thing, namely, that there is a world of difference between culling and hunting in my humble opinion. I will leave it to other readers of the blog to reply to you should they see fit.
What I will say, however, is that I admire your honesty and appreciate you are informed by your past experiences. Of course, writing nice things about your opponent is also a disarming tactic and, in this, if nothing else, you have partially succeeded. As the Americans say, “I can see where you are coming from,” even if I disagree fundamentally with a lot of what you write.
Kind regards,
Peter Flack
Dear Peter
Thank you for your concise and truthful reply to Mr Gouws…unfortunately there are still many people that reason along the lines of Gouws, and as you remarked, this will be the demise of the little hunting that is still available.
Best regards
JM
Mr Gouws expressed his thoughts openly and precisely so I will do the same albeit in short format.
The claim that all game in South Africa is bred for hunting is not true, Breeding is an explicit human activity involving the propagation of plants or multiplication of animals for particular purposes and that is patently true for most livestock and poultry as well as game animals that are selected and purposefully bred for certain traits such as large horns aberrant coat colour. The wild animals on a private game reserve and on many game ranches in South Africa are self sustaining meaning there is no human intervention in their population dynamics. Hunting on such reserves or ranches by the fair chase principles is what some of us strive for. It is vastly different from the trophy hunter who do anything get a maximum sized trophy animal and that is very often offered by game breeders who breed animal purposefully for massive trophy size. On such a place the hunter is guaranteed a trophy animal and often shoots that animal from a vehicle – that I guarantee is not what hunting is about. Trophy hunting as concept created this dilemma and the total commercialization of hunting aided the growth of this captive animal shooting market.
The world is tainted with human rights and I abuse it also by stating that it is my human right to cry out against the shooting of purposefully bred animals including ungulates and predators. It is also my right to distance myself from such practices and call myself an ethical hunter as I obey a code of conduct that remains unrecorded to this namely to pursue my quarry with the utmost respect for it, to expend all efforts to outwit the animal in its own habitat, to often leave the animal to flee even if it is within my ability to drop it with one shot and to ensure that the species survives for time immemorial. If someone else regards shooting animals from a hide, the back of a vehicle, or by luring them to food as ethical then so be it. I see no morality in that. Full stop.
The canned lion industry has paid a hefty price for their immoral practices yet continues to breed lions in often desperately appalling conditions because “there is a demand for lion hunting”. My personal opinion its that the earth has reached a point where hunters have to stand back and say no more lion hunting because the remaining population cannot sustain take-off; well, some may argue that the few wild lions that are hunted won’t crash the population amidst all the other anthropogenic impacts that lions are facing. Nonsense. Hunters should step back and do something really tangible to restore wild lion populations. It is not too late but requires a mammoth effort and if you are an ethical hunter you should partake in such a restoration effort. The canned lion industry is not about hunting nor about conservation – it is a business driven by greed and sick ego’s and if you don’t agree with me so be it. I regard it as an abomination.
A true hunter is de facto a custodian – it is not the task of the conservation agencies or pure conservation NGOs to take care of wildlife. The true ethical hunter will leave no stones unturned to ensure that biodiversity survives and I use the term biodiversity because it encompasses all forms of life and not just those that we hunt. Or do you believe that someone else must ensure that the kudu maintains a healthy population? Or should the WWF make sure the habitat of the oribi is not destroyed for short term open cast mining? It is my duty as much as that of the conservation NGOs because I a custodian of wildlife! I have never owned a farm but I have worked over hundreds of thousands of hectares with landowners to make sure wildlife is conserved although I would never hunt it. Yet, when I go hunting the onus is on me to make sure all is well for all biota hence I can never support a ranch where the habitat is destroyed in order to make small camps for so-called valuable animals. That roan antelope is of less value to biodiversity in its 1 Hectare camp than the ground squirrels on a ten thousand Hectare Karoo farm!
Maybe I am part of a dying breed of hunters but I would rather not hunt than to hunt any other way than fair chase of free roaming animals. It is not about the killing of the quarry – the thrill is far better in those moments of flushing a pair of honey badgers or seeing a martial eagle taking a helmeted guineafowl than the thrill of pulling the trigger on an impala. In fact for me a dry hunt where I walk and stalk but don’t shoot is as good if not better than real hunt.
Fact that hunting is a sport for some, even a blood sport for many but for me it is not a sport. I don’t compete against anyone or anything when I hunt. I hunt, therefore I am.
Gerhard Verdoorn
Conservationists-hunter
Hi Peter,
This is a very well written reply. I am glad that you applied for membership with the Custodians. You have a wonderful way of explaining what conservation is and what the role of ethical hunting plays. Our actions as hunters will never convince the anti – hunter, but we can convince the general public, who is the biggest group and who might be undecided, that we do hunt in an ethical way. Unethical practices must be stopped, we must speak out against it else non participants, the general public, will decide out fate.
Thanks for all your efforts,
Kind regards
Jaco
Thank you for your comment, Jaco. I agree one hundred per cent with what you have written.