"hunting" from the back of a bakkie,opinions

[Dimitri]

Shooting off the back of the bakkie (whether you are able-bodied or not) is NOT hunting as there is no hunting skill involved. The only skill you require for this is to be a good marksman.

Shooting from a hide over water/food/salt (whether you are able-bodied or not) is NOT hunting as there is no hunting skill involved. The only skill you require for this is to be a good marksman.

Both of the above are unethical within the realm of hunting which, to me is fair-chase, walk & stalk, using hunting skills as well as being a competent marksman.

Within the realm of game management it may well be that the farmer does not take off enough animals through walk and stalk hunters alone. If that happens he would compromise the entire ecosystem, not to mention his livelihood, if he does not find a way to reduce the game numbers. Live capture gets the farmer less $$$ per animal compared to someone shooting the animal. So as a game management tool used by farmers shooting from the bakkie, at the hide and using professional culling teams are all legitimate, legal and ethical forms of GAME MANAGEMENT provided that the shooters can place their shots accurately and are using the right equipment for the job. If they can't then they are unethical shooters. NB THESE FORMS OF HARVESTING ANIMALS / GAME POPULATION MANAGEMENT ARE STILL NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH HUNTING - THEY ARE NOT HUNTING.

Leopards and lions etc ambush animals wherever they have the best chance of successfully making a kill which is essential for their survival. Modern man does not need to hunt / kill game animals in order to survive. Our supermarkets full of beef, pork, lamb, chicken, farmed ostrich, fish and many other forms of protein. Those of us that do it recreationally CHOOSE to kill animals - we are not doing it for survival. We can choose to HUNT or we can choose to SHOOT (from the hide, off the back of the bakkie). But please don't say that you hunted an animal when, in fact, you just shot it.

To labour the point even further: bakkie shooters and people who shoot from hides do play an important role in keeping many game farms going which, if they relied solely on the revenue from ethical fair-chase hunters, may not be viable because not enough game is taken off. The bakkie shooter, hide shooter and professional culler are probably essential parts of the whole game ranching environment but, they should not think that, nor claim that they are HUNTING.

[Skaaphaas]

I have a question(Pandora's box) for you Harm, if we agree that hunting implies tracking, stalking etc, then is hunting with a PH hunting. He does most of the important stuff and tells you when to pull the trigger(shooting again).

And to add to the conundrum, when is hunting in an enclosed space (game camps) ethical hunting, and when is it canned animal shooting?
As was said above, the lines aren't very distinct at all. I prefer to hunt on foot, tracking, stalking, using the wind etc, but I recently hunted in a smallish camp and I wondered if it was still hunting.

Shooting from a bakkie, for me personally, is not hunting. Yet it happens, and we cannot wish it away. The use of aids has become very commonplace. If I showed you a telescope a 100 years ago on a modern rifle, do you think they would have agreed that the 300m shots can be called hunting, when they had no choice but to stalk closer to take a shot?

I think we should be careful to not too readily dismiss everything as unethical. I mean, I would feel very unethical with my .30-06 compared to a San in the Kalahari with a quiver and a 6lb bow.

Point is, a bakkie is merely an aid to bring you closer to the animal. A telescope is merely an aid in accurate shot placement. One is ethical, the other considered not to be.

[harm]

Interesting points for consideration.
Messor,I have hunted with a tracker,not a ph,and I believe that skill is still required,since I still have to be cautious and aware of the conditions.
Now,I'm not forcing my ethics on anyone,but I still don't see how shooting game off the back of a bakkie can be considered hunting.I'll accept that it has to be done in some sitautions,and I'll accept that method as harvesting.
Let's not get personal and upset,and agree to disagree

[Black-ops]

If I grew up in the south of Namibia or the Kalahari I would have mostly hunted with a bakkie and would have accepted that as the norm. My dad taught me that way and I think it is correct.James in the city is taught by his dad that only walk and stalk is correct.Hans in Germany hunts only from a hochsitz as killing the animal with one shot is the ethical way - that is how he has been brought up.Who has set their norms? - it is tradition, land topography etc. There is no act of parlaiment that determines your behaviour when you are alone. Your conscience guides you. You are now so arrogant as to pronounce that only your method is correct. None are wrong as long as the method is legal and does not cause excessive suffering of the animal - this would then exclude snaring. We are discussing hunting methods and not killing by necessity.

outfuckingstanding post

[driepootx]

I think my posts have tried to show that ethics are very personal and one must be careful not to judge. Different strokes for different folks.

One chap on Jaracal referred to a diesel stalk - driving till you see the prey and then continuing on foot.

Our ethics are under threat by the way that we live. Time is scarce and to get a bit of biltong you have to force a relaxed hunt into 2 days and then it becomes a case of harvesting.

The art of accurate shooting takes practice - I therefore see this as ethical to ensure one shot fatal shots.

[JS4]

no grudge in agreeing with you about the mobility issue at all.But neither the leopard or the lion have the advantage of a rifle.just saying.I have no problem with people who use a blind for hunting it's just not something I would choose to do.

I was just joking mate.

Yes, neither the leopard nor the lion has a rifle. By the same token I do not possess the required teeth, claws, senses and camouflage.

In my view voorsit and hiding myself at a place the game frequent is just two more tools in a hunter's arsenal.

Oh, and I sure need to hunt to survive. I'd go crazy if I couldn't. ;o)

People really need to stop being so judgemental. If you've ever seen the tears in the eyes of an old hunter with the heart of a lion but a body that's let him down, after bagging an animal from a bakkie... You go and scornfully tell him it's just shooting. :o(

[Springer]

Everyone to his own. Personally i prefer being on foot and working for the shot. If it means not getting what I came for because the game is not where I thought it was, I will miss out. But I will still be richer for 3 or 4 days in the bush.

And by the way, it's not being judgemental, the OP asked for opinion?

[Messor]

I have shot(from a bakkie) thousands of animals, but I enjoy hunting(on foot) them a lot more. Having done both of them plenty of times I cannot now go and bullshit myself by saying that shooting off a bakkie is hunting. To have experience in both disciplines is the only way for someone to comment on this thread. Is shooting from a bakkie fun, sure, but name the advantages, less time, more animals, more economical(faster traveling, greater area), less physical(human), is that the trades of the hunter or the one who wants to make money from the hunter.

Shooting is a discipline, yes, but I like to think that there is more to hunting than just shooting, if not then we might as well scrap the word hunting and only use shooting. I have seen "hunting" clips where people took animals up to 1km, hunting or shooting? If shooting was the only requirement during a hunt I would let the farmer of a Freestate farm drop me smack bang in the middle of the camp with my 338 LM and shoot from my comfy chair in a 1km radius, sending someone gps markers to go and pick up the animals. So, personally for me there has to be other elements to hunting besides shooting to make it a hunt, or to justify using the word "hunt".

[driepootx]

The word "I" is repeatedly used in all your replies. That means it is how you personally feel or experience the "hunt" That is what I have been trying to emphasize.

You want the hunt to be according to your value system - then accept someone else's system as well. Bakkie hunting is here to stay - I personaaly will avoid it till I am not physically able to do the walk and stalk - I however do not condemn it as just shooting.

[gertjie87]

What makes hunting hunting? Skill involved? Difficulty of the hunt? suffering caused to the animal? Speed of the hunt? I have been on farms where on foot hunting is very easy compared to bakkie hunting. Know, because those animals do not at all mind being approached on foot and you can walk up 50m and shoot them right there is that also unethical hunting? ethics is a completely personal thing and does not feature in my oppinion hunting discussions, it is to personal and differs to much based on to many variables. Do it the way you want, the way that feels right to you and the way you were brought up and do it legally.