Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa Hunting for the experience, not trophies?

Ok, I'll agree… a red herring. But at least I tried

Chip, you don't need to explain where you fall, and neither do the guys at the other end of the spectrum. I believe any place along the line is OK and doesn't require an explanation.

Understood. The point was, we are a divided bunch (sportsman) and it's important to remember which team we are all on.

I'm guessing your in the vast minority of hunters with opinions like those posted here Chipper. Are you and SCI guy?

Ooyyy....another Campfire topic over which, it seems to me, that reasonable men may differ...

In reading this thread, I searched the internet for a definition of "trophy", and,aside from the term's Greek/Latin origins, naturally enough found numerous references to the preservation of animal parts (and particularly the mounting of heads),serving as momentos of the hunt, or achievements associated there with. To wit.,..."anything taken in war, hunting,competition,etc.,especially when preserved as a momento".

And further,..."a carving,painting,or other representation of objects associated with victory or achievement . A keepsake,remembrance,reminder,souvenir, or token.

Could this include a portfolio of photos? I fail to see why not.

I saw nothing saying that it has to take a particular form,or that it had to cost a certain amount of money. It seems to me that we are entitled to spend as little,or as much,on these "trophies" as our means allow, or that we see fit,so long as they remind us of the experiences we attained in their acquisition.We are free to choose how we go about this because the animals is owed a duty of honor only by the person lucky enough to have killed it.We honor it in our own way.

Hunters are comprised from a broad spectrum of socio-economic backgrounds and a bighorn sheep is no less valuable, nor diminished because it was taken on a solo back pack hunt in a special draw unit by a working guy than it was if killed on a $30,000+ hunt by someone who worked hard to afford the hunt. If the solo hunter chooses not to mount the ram,gives the cleaned skull and horns an honored place in the loading room to remind him of the hunt,the significance of the experience is not reduced and neither is the ram. It's remains are reminders of the experiences that resulted in its' killing.....the same goes for an 8 point whitetail from a Wisconsin woodlot or a Lord Derby eland from Camaroon.

If, OTOH, the hunter chooses to spend $8-$10,000 on a fully mounted Alaskan Brown bear or Desert Sheep, who are we to judge his motives?

In the end, after the hunting is over,all we really have are the memories anyway.No amount of money will replace them. Preserve them as you will. Just my opinion on the matter.

It has been quite awhile since I read Gassett and do not remember it all.But my own interpretation of the famous phrase is that with hunting we are engaging in a predator /prey relationship with the quarry.And if we do not have the purpose and intent of killing it we are engaging in observation only,not hunting. Those folks who have done both understand the difference, and those who only observe will never understand, no matter how we try to explain it.

Well said Bob.

Agreed Chip! I had to go back and re-read the thread though, for a minute there you almost had me convinced that I was the one who'd said that hunters who don't get heads mounted are "killers only" and "walking away from their responsibility" and "thrill killers" engaging in "repugnant behavior."

I'm just glad to know we're on the same team.

Wow, tough crowd. I have no problem standing behind those statements. I said it, I own them.

Regards.

Steve

No, not a tough crowd at all Steve. I can't speak for the others but for my part it's just that this whole subject of the ethics of hunting is one that keenly interests me. I'm always looking to understand different points of view on the subject.

So it's good to hear that you stand behind what you said, I'd be interested in hearing the basis of your opinion:

Well, I'm not as cerebral as Gassett, but I read O'Connor and Keith and fully understand them.

Most of us aren't, that's why we're talking about what he said long after he's gone.

Chip,

It's great that you can do multiple extended African hunts and bring all the trophies home. You must have a large trophy room. But most folks are not able to do that. Those of us that can't may need to use other approaches if we want to do a number of African hunts.

I brought home a number of trophies (all European mounts) on the one hunt I did in Zimbabwe and it was a great experience. But like many others I don't have lots of space for trophies. I love the African experience and if I go again I probably won't bring home many trophies. The most valuable things from my trips in Africa (I've done others where I didn't hunt but was out in the bush) are the memories of the experience.

For me, having mounts on the wall is far less meaningful than my memories of the details of the hunts. That may be true for you as well. In any case, I think your view is pretty narrow. I would personally feel bad if the animals hunted were not eaten by someone and of course that always happens in protein-poor Africa. But beyond that, I think it's up to each person to decide how they want to approach their hunt.

I've done lots of deer and elk hunts and don't have many trophies from them. But that doesn't mean that I don't remember and value those hunts. When I ate the meat I would often think about the the animal that provided it. I don't think those animals were devalued any more than I think an African animal that was taken and not mounted is devalued.

Of course this is all just my opinion. I hope you continue to enjoy your African hunts.

photos often work as well. And are a part of all my hunts.

But if taxidermy is expensive, and it is, taking to long just gives you time to get it paid for IMHO.I think that would be a plus.

At this point I"ve zero desire for Africa, but can see folks getting enamored with it for sure. It certainly is not as cheap as folks think it is from what I've seen.

I have 2 african animals that interest me and thats not enough to pay for a hunt and the flights and time off etc...

I could be just as happy at some point, in our older age, to simply do a photo safari.

So what you are saying is that you married every woman you've slept with?

No, he just mounted her.

maddog

I was hoping someone would hit that slow pitch.

That wasn't even a pitch, it was T-Ball.....

Lotsa kritters have been harvested throughout time with no thought to there headgear.Hunting doesn't have to be about trophys anymore in Africa than it does in the USA, but it can.

I meat hunt here in the U.S.A and occasionally I harvest a trophy. To hunt in Africa and bring home no trophy's can't be any different. The hunter gets to experience the sights, sounds, culture and wildlife of a new place. The animals harvested are sent to market and all is good.