Wynnwood,

Only you believe hunting buff with a bow or an inadequate rifle makes you a superhero.

Don't forget that according to you the mere mortals who choose an adequate weapon need to hide behind distant trees with relieved PH's.

For all your talk about it being your dime and anything legal you want to hunt with...The 45/70 isn't legal. Rather than focus on what an inexperienced guy like myself should deem to be a sufficient weapon how 'bout we just rely, for the minimum weapon, on the parks and game department of Zimbabwe? Or Namibia? Or Tanzania?...

If you're not looking for some reafirmation of your superhero status for using inadequate weapons why keep bringing it up on the three or four forums as you have?

On my inexperience, I figure to get to seventeen buff by the time I'm fifty, which isn't a decade away, unfortunalely. Til then I'll rely on the vast experience of fellows like Selous or Baker or Woods or Robertson passed on in print or on the likes of Ray or 500grains or Saeed or Keith Atcheson or Bodington here and on other forums and media who have that experience and from the point of the hunter too. You have slim company from the experienced group. If the thrill of the hunt fades or my respect for the quarry fades whether its deer or ducks or buff I guess I'd have to hunt something else, but with an adequate weapon.

JPK

PS the diference between the guy who camera hunts and the guy who uses an inadequate weapon is stark. First is that a bad camera shot captures the brush and thats it. A good shot captures the bull. In neither case is the bull actually involved. Not so when the goal is to kill him. Also if there is no PH and no tracker than the camera man is only putting himself at risk and only relying on himself, gotta respect that.