I know I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I have hunted in Zimbabwe. The questions that come to my mind are:
1) Why use a booking agent, if he isn't held responsible (either financially or otherwise) when things go wrong?
2) Why, after the hunts that went sour previously with this particular hunting outfit/PH/whatever Tim Shultz is, did the agent continue to book hunts with him?
3) How were the previous hunts with Schultz that went bad addressed by the booking agent? For example, did the booking agent respond positively and work out an mutually acceptable with the previous clients, or were their complaints felled on deaf ears?
I had a wonderful hunt in Zimbabwe with HHK Safaris. It was in a great conservancy, huge tract of wild lands and so much interesting wild game that I was in awe the whole time. My agent held monies and made sure I was satisfied before reaching a "close-out" agreement with the outfitter/PH.
If the booking agent is only a portal to send money to the PH, which I don't believe they are, then why not arrange hunts direct and save the booking agent's fee? I used a booking agent because I knew I had a written contract with him if something went wrong I had legal/financial recourse here in the USA, and someone would be held responsible.
Without someone being liable for a truely f'ed situation, I can see no reason to go through a booking agent... Booking agents make money from outfitters/PHs by handing over clients to them without the outfitter/PH having to mess with the communications and paperwork. However, for the clients paying the premium of using the agent, there should be some responsibility on the part of the agent to insure the client isn't sold a bridge in BFE without delivery. When previous clients start having problems and those are either ignored or otherwise cast aside, any future bookings by the agent seems to be an accomplice in the fraud to future clients.
