Jump to content


Bowhunting rights restricted

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Rowdy Yates

Rowdy Yates

    Never Logs Off

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,632 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 February 2007 - 02:01 PM


I wonder what ripple effect this will have throughout our hunting community as one type of hunting such as with A bow and arrow is limited like these new regs of South Africa.

What's your take on this?
"Keep the sun forever at your back, the wind forever in your face, and may forever God bless you out there on the trail."

#2 Jeremiah


    Hunting Resource

  • Owner/Admin
  • 3,087 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western Pennsylvania
  • Interests:God, Family, Hunting, Archery, Outdoors, Computers, Website Development...

Posted 26 February 2007 - 04:02 PM

I'm not sure what to think. I thought things were going well in South Africa for the bowhunter. Our former forum owner, DW, was part of a group of hunters invited by the gov. of South Africa to promote/demonstrate that bowhunting was a viable means of managing game a few years back. I believed they had done a god job demonstrating African big game falling to archery equipment and that things were looking up for expansions of bowhunting into new areas. Now this... :(

PA IHEA & NBEF/IBEP Instructor


#3 bonecollector34


    Never Logs Off

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,569 posts

Posted 28 February 2007 - 07:48 AM

Personally I believe it to be about the $$$, plain and simple, a rifle hunter can knock alot more animals down thus more $$$.

Best to see how it hashes out before getting over excited. Our constitution has no bearing over there and we have no rights to anything unless that country says we can. Hunting period in any other country has always been a privilage.

I hope it works itself out, but my initial understanding was it was geared toward thick skinnned game(elephant, cape buffalo) and animals initially on limited quata or cites(simitiar horned oryx, bontebok etc)



#4 Leo


    Hunting Resource

  • Administrators
  • 3,155 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Carolina

Posted 01 March 2007 - 08:33 PM

The $$$ argument is there Marty. I see your point. But it's not always the case.

Huck killed more animals with a bow on our ten day safari than any of the guys who were just rifle hunting.

There will be hunters boycotting RSA after this ruling goes thru. In the long run they are turning away $$$ IMO.
Posted Image

#5 iamyourhuckleberry


    Can Charge Rent

  • Authors
  • 944 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 March 2007 - 05:55 PM

Thinking out loud and among friends...

Ouch...now there's a slap in the face to me and everything I've accomplished in Africa. Makes me wonder why I needed that conservation officer along on my lion hunt. Was I working under the wrong information? I thought the CO was there to certify that my hunt was, indeed, fair chase...hmmmm. He signed the papers to that effect. :huh: My signature was right next to his :angry:

My feelings towards Marthinus Van Schalkwyk, the Environment Minister.

I wish the minister could have been there to see the broadhead blast through my lion and skip down range 50 yards. He might have been impressed by the fact that the lion never took another step! I say "might" because this man's selection of words pretty much tells me which side of the fence he's on-it is not the hunter's (as some have claimed). It was definitely "abhorrent"...and I'm sooo cruel! Can you say IDIOT!

Boys, The tenicles of the anti's are long...

When they come, we need to grip onto our hunting rights with the tenacity of a bull rider. Sadly, I have no voice in Africa and the best I can do is support those organizations (like SCI) that do. It pains me to think that I will be one of the last to hunt lion in RSA with archery equipment.

Keep in mind, there are only six countries in Europe which allow bowhunting. European influence has a way of trickling downstream. It has found its way into Africa, let's keep in out of the USA!

It is hard for me to believe that after three years of studying, RSA came up with these regulations.

There could have been alternatives rather than an outright ban. Take Alaska for example. If a bow hunter shoots a big bear, and the guide (required by law) deems the shot unethical or non-fatal, the guide is then required, by law, to dispatch the animal. We all know do-do happens...and when it does, the above example would have been an easy fix (to the best of our human abilities). It would have been favorable to all those involved (I, as a bow hunter, screwed up, the lion needed to be killed, I accepted the risk-knowning that this is/was the law). RSA did not need to close the door on those hunters willing to take it to the next level. It's sad. They will lose a whole bunch of money...but I do not think they care!

Is it about the money?

It's not about the money...as Leo has so kindly pointed out. In the minds of many, it's about what is "right" and what is "wrong". Some people do not feel killing animals is "right" (doing anything to animals for that matter)...they have expressed themselves. Moreover, these are the people in control of the government at this very minute! They have stated their intentions...animals like lion, cheetah, leopard, elephant, etc are first on the list. They will be followed by plains game later. It is the old "win a few battles" tactic...you know, "eventually you may win the war"! Makes me wonder how many anti-hunter's are under the minister's desk this very minute. I'm not kidding.... Neither are they!

Yep, it's sad...

I hope the landowners win thier law suits! I'll be rooting for them!
Posted Image

Lurking in McDonalds near you!

Confidence makes the hunter, PSE makes the bow.

#6 Larry $

Larry $

    Totally Addicted

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,449 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 March 2007 - 11:19 PM

Huck: Kimosabi speak truth :yes:
Elk: it's what's for dinner!

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users