| Cazadero |
| (.375 member) |
| 28/07/14 02:58 AM |
Re: Are we less than we were?
|
Quote:
At the turn of the 19th century Europeans, Americans and others went to Africa for the "Great Adventure" and often to seek a fortune or a better life.
Malaria prevention was drinking gin and tonics, solar spine protectors kept the noon Sun fevers at bay, and the back up if things went wrong wasn't often there at all.
Now we have luxury safaris, medivac planes, PH's who shoot your elephant for you and fences to keep the eating beasts out of your tent.
Alright the Zimbabweans are doing their best to drive their country back to the stone age except they will this time have no animals but so far almost all clients have come and gone without any serious personal danger.
But we still have fears to go there or elsewhere.
While a lot of this is now unavoidable as hunting is now a business and an export industry for these countries I wonder how many of us would set out to say Zimbabwe or East Africa if the conditions were like they were in 1910?
Just a comment for discussion.
Here's another interesting old post that unfortunately didn't generate many replies way back in 2003. It might have been interesting to see any micro-shift in opinion (if any exists) that might have presented itself between 11 years ago and now.
For comparison's sake - 11 years ago I bought a new truck that was top of the line. Among other things it was equipped with a CD player and a cassette deck. This week I bought a new truck to replace it - also well-equipped but now with blue-tooth enabled phone link, navigation system, MP3 auxiliary port, satellite radio, back up camera, remote start, tire pressure monitors, fuel consumption readout including averages and miles to empty, endless other on-demand statistical information, rear seat air conditioning, power folding mirrors, multiple power points including a 110 volt accessory power point, etc, etc, etc.
But ultimately what I wanted both times was a Ford truck with four doors and four wheel drive.
In blue.
Will I use all this extra stuff? Maybe.
Do I need it? Not really.
Is it nice to have? Of course.
Last year I read several articles by Boddington (and others) that touched on the subject of changes in Safari hunting over the years. With respect to the safety, speed and efficiency of travel and disease prevention, there is to me no question involved, though if I had nothing but time and money I'd probably be content to take the long way there (and back.)
But other things exist that the individual hunter can and maybe should hold onto with regard to the actual hunt itself. These come down to an individual's choices.
Did you use some sort of electronically-sighted weapon to kill that animal? From maybe a half mile away? Did you stalk that leopard with camera traps? Did that lion now in your den live his entire life behind a fence? Did that buffalo grow up eating alfalfa hay? Did the PH shoot your elephant? Did the tracker carry your rifle? Did you hunt from the vehicle? Did you wear the latest scent-covering camouflage or did you actually watch and work the wind while you stalked?
Are we less than we were? Maybe not. Maybe not all of us. But it's probably easier to be so. The question is one for each individual to answer to himself.
The political chaos of Zimbabwe and places like it is the modern equivalent of the tse tse fly. Hunting as in the days of old can survive for a while as long as economic development is checked, but if and when the political climate is gotten under control, industrial for-profit hunting will drive what's left to extinction.
Would I have gone back then? I'd surely like to think so.