Trophy Size: Should Price be a Factor?

In some recent "back of the truck" discussions with a couple of PH's, the issue of package hunts and trophy sizes came up. One PH said that when people are getting a package deal - paying less than the normal trophy fee for the animals - they should not expect to be steered towards the largest trophies in a particular area. He said the best trophies would normally be kept for those paying full price.

Now both PHs were equally clear that if a client wanted to take a particular animal that was found, even if it was the largest in the area, they wouldn't not stop him from taking the shot. But equally, they wouldn't say "let's wait, we can find something bigger" if an average size trophy presented itself.

I have never been on a package hunt, and I was a bit annoyed with this at first, but the more I thought about it, the more I could see the point. When I book a hotel on Priceline, I don't expect to get the best room in the hotel when I arrive. Same with an airline. If I've bought a discounted ticket, I expect they'd offer upgrades to full fare passengers before they offered one to me.

Should package hunts be any different? What are people's expectations when they book a package hunt? Is trophy size ever mentioned?

Inquiring minds . . . .

When I book a package hunt I would expect to take animals that are similar to the pictures on the outfitters website. If the outfitter uses trophy animal photos to sway my decision to hunt with him then I would expect to have an opportunity to hunt animals that size. I shouldn't be penalized for booking a package hunt at a price that he offered.

The problem with those pictures is that, often, (1) they're generic (provided by the web site designer or some other source) and (2) they're usually the best things that have been shot in the past greater of lesser number of years. For example, with elephant, there are lots of pictures of 60 pounders +, but if you ask what can reasonably be expected, often you're looking at 40 pounds.

Pictures can, even unintentionally, be deceptive.

When i do package hunts i normally play around with the day fees/ include animals on certain consessions where there is to much of a specific animal and the land owner gave me a discount! Trophy quality should never be lesser on a hunt because the outfitter discounted it!! It stays a trophy package and nothing less should be expected! If the outfitter is planning on taking of smaller animals offer a cull package!!

I look at this way, a PH should hunt for the animals in the package deal. If a client says is this an average animal? The call should be made immediately. I think every PH should assess the trophy status of every animal glassed in the hunt. The PH should be pointing out exceptional game for the client to shoot. And if the animal is one of the biggest animals on the property, it should be pointed out to the client. I think if PHs are steering away from certain animals because they have been told to by the land owner .....then there is a problem. As a client I would be angry, I would want to renegotiate the terms of the contract.
Happy clients are return clients. They post happy hunt reports and give good references to friends and family.

Hank2211 said:

In some recent "back of the truck" discussions with a couple of PH's, the issue of package hunts and trophy sizes came up. One PH said that when people are getting a package deal - paying less than the normal trophy fee for the animals - they should not expect to be steered towards the largest trophies in a particular area. He said the best trophies would normally be kept for those paying full price.

Now both PHs were equally clear that if a client wanted to take a particular animal that was found, even if it was the largest in the area, they wouldn't not stop him from taking the shot. But equally, they wouldn't say "let's wait, we can find something bigger" if an average size trophy presented itself.

I have never been on a package hunt, and I was a bit annoyed with this at first, but the more I thought about it, the more I could see the point. When I book a hotel on Priceline, I don't expect to get the best room in the hotel when I arrive. Same with an airline. If I've bought a discounted ticket, I expect they'd offer upgrades to full fare passengers before they offered one to me.

Should package hunts be any different? What are people's expectations when they book a package hunt? Is trophy size ever mentioned?

Inquiring minds . . . .

Click to expand...

What something is worth is what someone else is willing to pay for it. Most people I know will pay more for the best and not feel bad for having to do so.

The flip side of that is we all want to get as much as we can for our money.

I would feel cheated if I found out that I made a package deal at the agreed upon price and I later found out they were intentionally steering me away from "the best" they know of in the area but other than that no hard feelings. As long as we're all clear on what we're doing ahead of time no one has any reason for hard feelings.

I would say the PH's you were talking with sound like straight up guys.

Have to agree with Mr Enysse .
Its a long way to go and a lot of expense to have a hunt of a lifetime .
Im not a tape measure man , never have been !
But unless I'm culling I want to hunt the best animals there are in any place I hunt .
I would be pissed to find I was steered away from top animals because I had done a package deal with an outfit .
I also refuse to to hunt with anyone who has different prices for different size animals !!!
Now that sucks !!!

This is easy, never measure your trophies I never did, measure my trophies on experience not inches. Wish the word trophy hunting never got used, even if you after the biggest ones. It gets thrown in hunters faces all the time. If you are hunting in Norway, you excactly that. Doesn?t matter if it`s a doe or a buck. you`re simply hunting

svinejakt said:

This is easy, never measure your trophies I never did, measure my trophies on experience not inches. Wish the word trophy hunting never got used, even if you after the biggest ones. Doesn?t matter if it`s a doe or a buck. you`re simply hunting

Click to expand...

I like your way of thinking!!!!

I personally don't like a price by size hunt, I don't like having a negative incentive not to shoot a exceptional trophy. Hunt and what you get is up to the luck and to the hunting gods!

I feel you should hunt the same on that ranch if a package or trophy fees. That being said must deals maybe on certain ranches with good quality but maybe not the best the outfitter has. If the outfitter works with many landowners he gets different pricing from them all. Must maybe with in a range he can offer hunts on them all for everyone.
If he has an owner who charges more for a higher quality cant blame him for not taking all hunters there.

I think somethings fall on the hunter to know what is a good animal. Your ph will tell you size and if a shooter but I like to know myself what is say avg. size for each animal. I don't think a package hunter could be mad if he takes say a 28" blue wildebeest and sees a 30" later. To me a package hunt is a hunt for good animals with a chance for great if you have some good luck.

When you doing a typical package of 5 to 7 days with 5 to 7 animals there is not the time to pass on animals. The goal of the ph is to get your animals and make sure they are mature also. It a double edge sword for the ph really. He does not get all the animals on the list he is going to hear it or he could even hear it if they are not what some think are trophy class.

I have always asked each place I hunted with what the avg. size I could be looking to take. I have found most to have been very honest with the numbers they gave me.

To me it comes down to having some common sense and knowing what your buying. Anyone thinking if you buy a package your getting all record book stuff is crazy because you may not even do that on trophy list hunt on the typical days that come with a package. I think packages can be great for a first or even second hunt. After that it is time to go to something made just for your goals of that trip.

If not any or all regardless of size, it better be disclosed that I'm not going to be allowed to shoot the 'best available' because a discount to daily rates or trophy fees was negotiated. I would be quite animated in my displeasure if I found out I was guided away from an area in the concession where the 'big guy' hangs.

I think this goes in tandem with the idea of shooting a mature animal every day while on safari - an unrealistic expectation. But, often the marketing that I see here and elsewhere. If I'm willing to put in the days (5, 7 or 10) for an Elk here in the U.S. why shouldn't it take a similar number of days for each trophy in Africa?

When I go Mozambique in October, I will be very happy to get a buffalo and sable in 12 days. If I get anything more, that is icing on the cake.

If you can just go out and "buy" the biggest, why even have a trophy book in the first place? Why not just post up your net worth in a book and we'll all know how big a trophy you can afford. We are already under the microscope and the label of "trophy hunting" has such negative connotations in the nonhunting world, that things like charging based on antler size (or weight, or whatever) smacks of "cheating". Do we all need to be reminded of the negative outcomes from the "Cecil" debacle a year ago? Are we really that short sighted? Please notice I said "nonhunter", not antihunter......you will never change an antihunters mind about hunting/game management, but the nonhunter is the one who we need to court........seeing things like "well, this animal costs more because his antlers/horns are bigger" will push them over the fence into the antihunting ranks. My figures might be wrong, but I believe that last time I looked the antihunting forces made something like $750,000,000 off of this one incident (shooting Cecil) alone.....that's 750 MILLION dollars!!! That's a lot of money (of which not one cent will go to habitat, research, etc......just into more propagada) that we hunters have to fight against.

Hunting has certainly changed from when I started back in the 1970's.......deer weren't as plentiful, and if you managed to bag a buck with a nice rack, everyone slapped you on the back and said "congrats" to your good fortune and antlers were considered "gravy"; it was the meat that was the primary goal of hunting.
Now I find deer carcasses dumped in the ditches while hunting with their heads or antlers removed; some of them may have just the backstraps taken out, but for the most part they aren't even gutted out. We've fallen for the "cult of the antler', were the only thing that matters now is how big a rack does the deer have that you shot. Don't believe me? Look at all the hunting shows and videos that are out there right now.....and they are selling!!!

This thread has got me to rethinking my bidding on certain hunts at the various foundation dinners (Rocky mountain elk, etc)........should I now think that, since it is a 'donated' hunt, my chances of getting a decent animal will be less? Maybe it would just be wiser to keep my dollars in the billfold and save them up to get a "decent" hunt? Also, most hunters in Africa don't know a 56" kudu from a 62" kudu.....what's to prevent a PH from telling him that "naw, it's not a great trophy; maybe we can find something bigger" and saving that 62" animal for a client that is coming in later in the year and the PH knows he wants a big kudu? Really puts a negative spin on the whole deal for me.

Trophies? I don't have a problem with them......but they should be trophies because they were from your first trip to Africa or out west, or because it was a first kill, or because it was the dog's first find or first retrieve, or from a trip you shared with a child or good friend.......not just because "it was the most expensive I could afford"

.....anyway, here endeth the rant!

You buy a donated hunt from a good outfitter you will get a good hunt. They are used for marketing and not many want the hunter not happy in the end. The goal is to get you back or to tell friends. Plus they hope you take more when there to off set the cost of the donation and a unhappy hunter sure would not take more.

Bottom line a PH should get the hunter a solid representing animal. That being said as Bill mentions a hunter should have some understanding of what that animal should look like. I also think a PH should not allow a hunter to take an animal that is not mature.

Bos en Dal Safaris said:

I like your way of thinking!!!!

Click to expand...

Thank you and !

I've said in the past in regards to looking for a hunt that I don't like the idea of turning it into a shopping experience similar to shopping a new t.v. or underwear or whatever, going out looking for the absolute best deal, choosing whose shelf your going to pick up your product off of. The reason for that being is that IMO it cheapens and dilutes the overall experience of the privilege and opportunity to spend time hunting in such a special place.

Having the pricing structure of pay by the inch/pound in my opinion only promotes this "shopping" mentality. And it promotes the culture that exists among some hunters that it's all about who got the biggest trophy and therefore who holds the bragging rights.

Whether it be an auction/donation hunt, a negotiated deal or someone paying full price off the price list, once the agreement has been made, I believe the PH/Outfitter has the obligation to put his client on a mature animal exhibiting good trophy quality. It may be a 54" Kudu or it may be a 60" Kudu. If the PH does this, in my opinion he's done his job as even the 54" Kudu is a solid trophy. If the client wants to hold out for even bigger, that's certainly their prerogative and the PH I think should continue to look for what his client wants regardless of the trophy fee being paid.

From the outfitters point of view, if he/she has managed his property to have superior trophies then he certainly has time invested and also has limited how many animals he's taken. So if that outfitter has managed his herd to take only Kudu of lets say 56" inch or greater bulls over the last so many years with clients reporting sighting of lots of 54-55", well that's great. You're now in a position to be able to say your offer superior Kudu hunting. But instead of charging by the inch, I'd be more inclined to say just charge a higher but still flat rate than the average. You've put the time into developing the herd, you declined revenue through taking higher numbers and now is time to get some payback for that effort.

I think every hunter has the right to self educate themselves before they go to Africa to hunt. I looked at a ton of pictures, went to a lot of hunting shows and truly defined in my mind what I wanted to do when I got to Africa. Sadly Bill is right a lot of hunting is about a price point. This is what hunting has boiled down to in todays world with computers and high tech gadgets. I try to ignore some of it daily but yes it can be a problem with some operations.

Lucky for me the only measurement that matters is dressed weight !

enysse said:

I think every hunter has the right to self educate themselves before they go to Africa to hunt. I looked at a ton of pictures, went to a lot of hunting shows and truly defined in my mind what I wanted to do when I got to Africa. Sadly Bill is right a lot of hunting is about a price point. This is what hunting has boiled down to in todays world with computers and high tech gadgets. I try to ignore some of it daily but yes it can be a problem with some operations.

Click to expand...

I think every hunter has the RESPONSIBILITY to educate themselves ... and AH is helping those who take the time to look. I too clicked through every posting that I could find about hunting in the Eastern Cape after I booked an Eastern Cape hunt. I looked at my outfitter's webpage daily as they included daily photos. I looked at AH sponsor's websites from the Eastern Cape. I studied the "judging" trophy quality and shot placement guides for every animal that I could reasonable expect to see and/or shot.

I also think that every outfitter has the RESPONSIBLITY to educate the clients PRIOR to booking and continue through to the last day of the hunt. I don't have a problem paying more ... for more ... upfront. I have no desire to go a pay for the inch or a hunt for a single kudu over 60" on one of my concessions. But, I will gladly pay more for a package hunt if it has the potential to have higher quality animals. That is where the outfitter has the responsibility to communicate what they are selling. I knew going in that I was paying on the high end of the Eastern Cape "Spiral Slam" (kudu, nyala, and bushbuck) ... but the outfitter was known for both the quantity and quality of kudu so I was willing to pay a little more.

I was keenly aware of the quality of animals that were historically harvested on the property that I hunted. I shot one animal that was significantly better than average for the farm and the Eastern Cape, two that were average to slightly better than average for the farm and better than average for the Eastern Cape, and one that was slightly below average for the farm and the Eastern Cape. The stalks for all four animals were unique and different from countless memorable unsuccessful stalks. In the end, I knew the quality of the experience and the trophy when I pulled the trigger and was VERY happy with both. I am certain that there was every effort for all of my trophies to be above average ... but that is pretty hard to do anywhere except fairy tales.

I think there is a place in the industry to charge more for better experiences ... as long as both sides are fair and honest about expectations!!! I can't expect to find the cheapest hunt on the internet and kill the largest animals ... or have an
East African tented camp/Serengeti experience on a 1000 acre concession in South Africa. And an outfitter can't market animals/experiences that they cannot produce and expect clients to be happy when the trophy quality/experiences don't match.