Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
thetexaskid

buffalo hunting in mozambique?

106 posts in this topic

going late june to mozambique buff hunting and was wondering if anyone has info. camp will be about 3 miles from zimbabwe border north of kruger. should be a good area if quess to see decent #'s of buffalo. any info appreciated

 

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Texaskid,

 

Your profile says, you are a first time visitor to Africa - so, are you going on this hunting trip for the first time or first ever trip to Africa?

 

May i ask, what is the draw? i.e., what takes you on this trip ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will you b shooting with? Nikkon or Canon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can suggest a few locations where a barefoot hunter armed with a spear might have an exciting encounter with a dagga boy or two. You should try it. I'll direct you to a photo in one of my albums of a braver hunter than you who tried her luck with a dagga boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

touche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anti-hunters are so uninformed its funny

 

bye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thetexaskid,

 

I have one phrase for you................jog on.

 

I am sure that you are going to try and engage us in some debate of all the money you generate and how you control overpopulations of certain environements. However, in most cases, hunters have diminished areas throguh their excessive greed. It is common to find them overshoot qoutas etc. Not to mention the damage they do to Lion pride dynamics etc. I am sure you are going to cite Dr Packer, but I would argue for the safari club if paid enough. Actually, no I wouldn't. Because I don't support people on some ego trip. I would suggest you look at the article below, regarding the greater financial benefits of photographic over hunting:

 

http://www.wag.co.za/Canned%20lion/The%20M...onservation.htm

 

I would also point out, that those prices per bed night are pretty conservative comapred to todays pricing. Still, the revenue of running at 50% outstrips the income derived from hunting. The last time I checked, somewhere like Duba plains was running at least 70% occupancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what made texaskid post this question on safaritalk? Does a google search for hunting trips, lead here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anti-hunters are so uninformed its funny

 

 

That's an extraordinary thing to say when, by your own admission, you're only a first time visitor to Africa. How on earth can you claim to understand the complexities of the hunting debate in Africa, when you have not even been on the ground here?

 

A common mistake made by people (such as yourself, I assume) is that the hunting debate here in Africa is the same as it might be in the USA or Scotland, for example. Here there are different dynamics at play, which - providing you keep an open mind and are prepared at times to find your preconceptions corrected - you may learn to understand and appreciate in time. Only then can you really join the debate, armed with real knowledge and an understanding of both sides of the argument.

 

Russel - great post - I second your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder what made texaskid post this question on safaritalk?

 

Sometimes people like to see what reaction they will get by posting a question that does not fit in and thetexaskid got the reaction he was expecting.

 

Does a google search for hunting trips, lead here?

 

not necessarily!

He is just an individual who has nothing to do with his time and just wanted to rock the boat a little bit...

 

Ross

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ross - that's probably it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I smell a troll too.

 

^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So did I but I was in such a delicate state that I couldn't ignore him.

 

Four days ago, a friend and I were in the bush in the middle of nowhere, wondering how to put a badly injured kangaroo out of its misery. It jumped into the side of our vehicle, went under a rear wheel and received shocking injuries, but was mobile enough in its panic-stricken state to avoid our attempts to despatch it with a tyre iron. Oh how we wished we had a rifle! In the end, we had to leave it to die a probably slow and agonising death.

 

Then we get this bloke talking about shooting wildlife like he was going on a picnic. I bet none of his buffalo victims will need mercy killing, not unless he's a lousy shot. I also bet he won't be thinking 'conservation' as he smiles for the camera, rifle in one hand and foot on the neck of his victim.

 

I hope he does meet a dagga boy without a rifle in his hand. If he survives, he'll have to change his name to 'the texas skid'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, maybe we should launch an initiative to even the odds a little. After all, animals are defenseless, so I suggest...

 

- hunters can hunt animals

- but animals can hire conservationists to hunt the hunters

(for the record, nobody shoots the conservationists, as I said, they're only there to even the odds)

 

Hunter-hunter, now that's a job I'll take!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another little side note; in the papers yesterday there were the results of a study to link hobby with sexual behavior (yes, they have money for this believe it or not). I'm not gonna write down all the weird results here, but one fact stood out for me:

 

The women of hunters seemed to be very unfaithful. The paper worded it like this; while the hunter's shooting animals outdoors, somebody else is "shooting" his wife indoors. I thought that was very funny. Also made me think; do hunters do what they do to compensate for something else... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now thetexaskid has gone on his merry little way totally happy that his thoughts on "Bunny Huggers" are correct.

 

Another great divide between the two factions, hunter & conservationist!

 

If every time a hunter approaches us, we ridicule his interest we will never be able to open a dialog & influence his attitude.

 

We may never agree but as long as we offend we will never have influence & we will never make a difference in conservation.

 

So are we just happy to sit at our 'puters, being self righteous, blah! blah! blahing away about conservation & doing little to help.

 

Surely we need to spread the conservation word?

Not blast away at those with different views!

B):angry: :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely we need to spread the conservation word? Not blast away at those with different views!

 

Nappa, for that you get two thumbs up!! B)

 

I actually sent thetexaskid a pm in which I described what safaritalk is about and also encouraged him to get involved with discussions but it's not what he was after.

 

It is very easy to get involved in duscussions and arguments about who is right and who is wrong but doing so is like banging your head against a brick wall and which does not get you anywhere.

Lets just spread the word around without actually having people looking at us like we are weirdoes or something...

 

Ross

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Nappa and Ross, but I also think that just because we are anti-hunting, this should not mean we are automatically labelled "Bunny Huggers" which has the unfortunate connotation of lacking in realism or seriousness of thought.

 

There are many of us here whose views on issues such as hunting are formed as a result of a lot of experience on the ground in Africa, and seeing different wildlife management policies working and not working. This is what has formulated our ideas, and we do not deserve to be dismissed as "Bunny Huggers."

 

By the same token, there are plenty of us on this forum who are anti hunting in Africa, and who are actively involved on a daily basis with conservation efforts and are not simply sitting self-righteously behind our computers doing nothing about it.

 

I agree engaging someone in discussion is the best way to bring people around to our side of the argument, but in this case I feel thetexaskid was out of line in telling us that we are uninformed. The members here often have different opinions, but we respect each other's opinions, and do not label the other 'uninformed' just because they don't agree with us on a particular point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My use of the term "Bunny hugger" was as seen in the eyes of thetexaskid,

I do not class myself, or others as "Bunny Huggers"

 

My point was that we should have tried to nurture a dialog instead of poo pooing him & his ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez Nappa, I was just having some fun with the guy. Just like he's having fun with his trolling here. You actually believed I was dead serious? This is the internet!

 

So lighten up.

 

---

 

I do have a personal opinion on the last posts though. Its actually about the term "bunny huggers" too...

 

The thing is this; we seem to think that everyone is interested in discussing conservation matters. The truth is that the vast majority just doesn't care. Including the vast majority of hunters. The latter's opinions can almost never be changed.

 

So my advise is this; pick your fight (OK, wrong expression in this context but I think you understand).

 

This "texasredneck", or whatever his name was, is not the person you should spend your time on imho. These kind of people call us "bunny huggers" just because to them all we seem to do is "blah blah blah" instead of resorting to macho behavior like waving a gun around (what they think is the norm). To them we are wimps. We are sissies. That will never change.

 

The only thing you can do is to knock them off their macho soap box by saying "you think you're a big shot? I'd like to see you wet your pants when you feel the bullet go into you". And that is the exact thing I tried to accomplisch by my post. Nothing more.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again; please stop projecting the image of the "intelligent hunter that cares". Yes they exist. But no, they are not the norm. A lot of them are very selfish, and have an under-developed EQ (which is not not IQ, mind you). The fact that they can pay to go to Africa does not mean at all that they are "intelligent" either. Running a succesful business? Maybe. Then again, a plumber can also be succesful.

He actually may not be succesful at all. He may be a hunter who saved all his life for that one-time trip to Africa, with just the simple (in many ways simple!) dream to bring home the skin of a leopard or the head of a buffalo. And most of these people are also looking for the "best deal", just like any average "consumer" would. But the difference is that with their "hobby", getting the most bang for the buck (now that's an expression that fits!) also means: not sticking to the rules. Or: going to countries where rules are bent most easily.

 

You want to make a difference? Start with the "masses that don't care", not with the "hunters that don't care", like texasfart. Right now, I'm organising a photo expo + fundraiser for a jaguar project in Brazil. I already showed some "average people" what I have prepared. They can be convinced. For example; if I tell them that for every parrot that arrives healthy in the pet store, 50 others have died (during transport or while capturing them), then their eyes open.

Try that with a hunter, and he will say that the money made from his "hobby" keeps away poachers. The fact that other hobbies can achieve just the same has never occured to him. Nor has the fact that you can even send money without getting something in return. They will never think about putting down their gun.

 

End rant, I guess.

 

Ciao,

 

J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would make the following point about conversation and hunting. Look at the many great white hunters who shared this similar attitude. Many of them though, seeing the destruction the trade has caused, now mainly support non-consumptive use. Norman Carr being a perfect example.

 

I think of it in this light:

 

Many hunters choose to become "bunny huggers". There is one documented case, where after watching a trophy male in all its glory, the client turned round and said that he could not shoot it.

 

On the other hand, I don't see many people taking up hunting to champion conservation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say there is a big difference between people interested in conservation and "bunny huggers".

 

In my experience, the term "Bunny Huggers" is used for people who are generally interested in the cute and cuddly wildlife (cheetah cubs, lion cubs and the like) or who let their emotions make their decisions rather than looking at the facts.

 

To use the anti elephant culling debate as an example, there are people who argue that there are better alternatives or that the scientific justification for culling is weak. These arent bunny huggers, but there are also people who's only argument is purely emotional "we must not kill elephants as they are intelligent loving animals" - I'd class them as bunny huggers.

 

Texaskid is right that many anti-hunting people are poorly informed, but equally many hunters are poorly informed too. Both sides have established strong positions and supporters on both sides tend only to know the arguments that support their point of view, without looking into the facts or the arguments of the opposing side. I am happy to say that Safaritalk has had some good discussions on the subject without them degenerating into slanging matches.

 

The hunting issue will not be resolved by arguments - it can only move forwards by rational reasoned discussions.

 

My view is that the biggest issue with hunting is the issue of controls or lack of. There is a huge difference between a well run system without corruption and with proper checks, and one where corruption is endemic and checks aren't carried out properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got a point, Russell.

 

Some turn 180%. And no conservationist ever would turn to hunting. That does indeed say something.

 

Still, those who do turn 180% are exceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are definitely hunters who care. It may be hard for us non-hunters to accept that people can hunt and still care about wildlife, but in some way many hunters do.

 

We had one case where a radio collared desert lion was shot by a trophy hunter in Namibia. Unfortunately the shot also destroyed the radio collar, which was later recovered.

A report on our website mentioned this, and a few weeks later we were actually contacted by the hunter who had shot the lion, and he then paid for a replacement collar, which I certainly hadnt expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


© 2006 - 2017 www.safaritalk.net - Talking Safaris and African Wildlife Conservation since 2006. Passionate about Africa.