Let me state upfront that I personally am not in favor of the concept of being charged by the inch (or charging by the inch for that matter).
But the reality is that it is the prerogative of the landowner to charge what and how he wants for the animals on his property.
A 60" + kudu bull with breeding potential can easily reach $10 - 25K and even more on a wildlife auction... How many clients would be willing to pay that amount of money to hunt a kudu bull?
So the stance some landowners take is that they can either hold on to their large kudu bulls for later sale at game auctions at significant profit or allow them to be hunted at a premium. And with this in mind they introduced a tiered pricing structure. Some charge X for below 60" kudu and Y for above 60". Some break it down more and have pricing for <55", <60" and 60"<.
The questions are: "Where does this leave us as Outfitters? Should we refuse doing business with Landowners who charge by the inch? What if all Landowners started charging by the inch?"
Acquiring hunting rights on quality properties with quality game is one of our prime objectives and to refuse hunting a landowner's property because you don't agree with how he charges for one specific species doesn't make business sense. The same landowner who has a tiered pricing system for kudu might have other species with great trophy potential on quota at really reasonable prices... As Outfitter - I cannot tell a landowner that I will "buy" his whole quota available for the year with the exception of kudu. Because behind me there might be 5 other Outfitters in line willing to buy the entire quota and if I don't buy the quota I may lose the concession forever.
Many clients are happy with a good representative of the species but the vast majority of clients want the best possible specimen they can get and some have specific requirements such as: "at least 55" for kudu, 24" for Impala etc..."
A trademark of a good PH is to find his client the best possible specimen of the species his client is hunting. But If the Outfitter has a fixed price for Kudu and is charged per inch by the landowner it would make better financial sense to have the client shoot a smaller rather than bigger Kudu because he stands to make more money by shooting the smaller specimen as opposed to the larger one.
Let's say the landowner's asking price is $1,700 for a kudu under 55" and $2,000 for a bull larger than 55"... And let's say that in the market the Outfitter is targeting, potential clients would be prepared to pay $2,500 for a kudu bull but charging more could make the difference between a potential client's booking with him or choosing another Outfitter so he decides to charge a flat trophy fee of $2,500... Wouldn't it make sense for the PH to shoot the first 50" kudu bull he sees instead of waiting for a 55" bull? And wouldn't it make sense to pass up on the 58" bull you see on day 1 and wait for a <55"? What would those who
"refuse to book with an Outfitter with a tiered pricing structure" do if they could choose between making $500 or $800 on a trophy?
Some of the landowners I deal with charge me a fixed price for kudu - irrespective of size. When I hunt on these properties I charge a fixed fee for kudu. Other landowners have introduced a tiered pricing structure and when I hunt on their land with clients a tiered fee is applicable. Clients who book with me are made aware of these facts from the outset and have a choice as to whether they want to hunt on land with a tiered trophy fee structure or not.
To semi-quote another Outfitter's response to a similar thread on another forum:
"I might be able to buy a 2.2 liter diesel 2 wheel drive, single cab Ford Pick up for $15,000 but the 4X4 version with 4 doors that I need for my job sells for $40,000... Should I "refuse to do business with the dealer because he won't charge me $30,000 irrespective of whether I choose the 2 door or 4 door version? Both are Fords after all..."
