NAPHA distances itself from rhino cow hunter

[AfricaHunting.com]

THE Namibia Professional Hunting Association this week distanced itself from a professional hunter who was involved in a hunt during which a rhino cow was shot in the Mangetti National Park a year ago.

Professional hunter Peter Thormählen is no longer a member of the Namibia Professional Hunting Association (Napha), after he resigned from the organisation in 2011 in the wake of a disciplinary investigation, the chief executive officer of Napha, Dietlinde Mueller, said in a statement on Monday.

Since his resignation from Napha, the organisation's disciplinary committee has received numerous complaints against Thormählen, but the disciplinary committee cannot take any action against him, Mueller indicated.

She added that Napha “deplores the fact that time and again the image of trophy hunting is marred by reckless, irresponsible or immoral actions of a small minority of professional hunters”.

Napha was reacting to a High Court case in which Thormälen's company, Thormälen & Cochran Safaris Namibia, sued the minister of environment and tourism as a result of the shooting of the rhino cow by an American client of the company. The case was settled out of court last week.

Thormälen & Cochran Safaris Namibia was asking the court to order the minister to take all necessary steps to give effect to a contract in terms of which a client of the company was given permission to hunt a black trophy rhino. In the alternative, the company wanted the minister to pay it N$3,2 million so that it could refund its American client, sandwich take-away chain owner Jimmy John Liautaud, and cover the expenses of the hunt Thormälen had arranged for Liautaud.

Thormälen & Cochran Safaris Namibia bought the right to hunt one black rhino bull from the Ministry of Environment and Tourism for close to N$1,3 million in July last year.

However, the hunt that was subsequently arranged went horribly wrong when Liautaud, who had paid N$3 million to hunt the endangered animal, instead shot a black rhino cow in Mangetti National Park on 28 September last year. The cow was the only female black rhino in the park.

In documents filed with the High Court it was claimed that Liautaud shot the cow in a situation of sudden emergency when the animal charged at the hunting group, which was following the tracks of what was thought to be a rhino bull. The hunting group included two game wardens from the ministry, Thormälen, and a big game professional hunter. It was also claimed that the group had been informed that the rhino cow in the park kept to an area far to the east of the area where they were following tracks.

In a plea in response to the company's claim, the minister's lawyer stated that the terms of the contract between the ministry and the company were “substantially fulfilled” since the hunter who had paid to shoot a rhino bull in fact shot a rhino cow. The trophy of the shot animal is available for export as previously requested by the company, it was also stated on behalf of the minister.



Source: the namibian

 

[enysse]

Wow, what a mess!

 

[Dragan N.]

So the cow rhino which allegedly normally keeps to an area far to the east of where it was shot ends up getting shot in a charge and now the PH is suing the Namibian government and has resigned from Napha. I don't quite understand why? As unfortunate as it is for the park to lose its only female rhino and it will have a neg. impact on the population how is this anyone's fault? This looks like an unfortunate set of circumstances and I doubt anyone wanted this. Unfortunately this is one of the aspects of hunting and one that will inevitably happen with dangerous game- if an animal you do not want to shoot is committed to a charge and thus puts people in the party at risk, it has to be shot.

 

[richteb]

This seems one of those cases where just because you can afford it doesn't mean you should do it.

 

[spike.t]

so they bought the right to hunt the rhino for 1.3 million and sold the hunt for 3.2 million i presume, as that is what they sued for.....difference if my calculator is working is 1.9 million...................one namibian dollar to one rand , so 190,000 usd approx. even after pumping up the trophy fee over the 1.3 buying price a shit load of expenses they ran up!!!! he left NAPHA in 2011 after disciplinary investigation, but this was last year.........................i remember in the mid/early 1990`s around lusulu in zim being told there were 2 or 3 black rhino and if you bumped one which we did, you basically gapped it or found a tree!! and under no circumstances could you shoot, as the shit you would get into was not pleasant...........

 

[Royal27]

So the cow rhino which allegedly normally keeps to an area far to the east of where it was shot ends up getting shot in a charge and now the PH is suing the Namibian government and has resigned from Napha. I don't quite understand why?

It doesn't seem that resignation from Napha and this incident are related? Resignation occurred in 2011 and was related to some other issue, according to this article.

What I don't understand is how it is the government's fault that a female rhino was shot? Is this guy trying to make case that it is the government's fault because they didn't know where the rhino was on that day?

Enysse is right - what a mess.

 

[enysse]

I think it does make us hunters look as irresponsible, they were told what to shoot and not shoot. Granted, there was a possible human life in danger.
This same company lost a PH to a elephant hunt that went terrible wrong too around time frame

 

[richteb]

I suspect the client panicked and started shooting.

 

[Dragan N.]

It doesn't seem that resignation from Napha and this incident are related? Resignation occurred in 2011 and was related to some other issue, according to this article.

What I don't understand is how it is the government's fault that a female rhino was shot? Is this guy trying to make case that it is the government's fault because they didn't know where the rhino was on that day?

Enysse is right - what a mess.

You are right my apologies, I missed that the date of resignation was in 2011. Would be good I suppose is the article explained why he resigned when they bring that up...

I think it does make us hunters look as irresponsible, they were told what to shoot and not shoot. Granted, there was a possible human life in danger.
This same company lost a PH to a elephant hunt that went terrible wrong too around time frame

I suspect the client panicked and started shooting.

Yes it is odd that the client shot a charging animal before the PH did, you would expect that the PH whose a pro would have reacted first if it was a danger.

But one question I have enysse is do you know when the elephant killed this particular companies PH was it before or after this rhino hunt? As if it was before the client could have been justified as perhaps this company's PHs give the animal to much time and well that can end in tragedy like it has. I don't really think it was irresponsible in that if there is a danger to human life, especially when dealing with an animal that is so big and dangerous it is better to be safe than sorry just my opinion. Especially sometimes with charges it can be a second's decision, its surprising how fast these large animals can move...

I doubt anyone would do this on purpose as a black male rhino is a more valuable trophy than a female one. If the opposite had occurred ie they had a permit for an old past her prime black rhino cow and instead shot a large trophy bull and say it "charged" and the client could keep the trophy then foul play would be more likely.

 

[CAustin]

Interesting situation.

 

[richteb]

Another possibility is that the PH didn't shoot because he new the chances of a non Nambian national going to jail for shooting the wrong animal were less then for the PH. Also what were the statements from the game scouts. Not sure what the situation is in Namibia but I know in Zimbabwe some of the game scouts will take every opportunity to report PH's that break the rules.

 

[enysse]

I guess I was wrong on the time frame of when the PH was killed. Time flies by but it was year and half ago, I actually thought it was over years ago. He was really nice PH. I bumped the post to the top about the incident.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Alright, Life was threatened you defended yourself.
Hunted an animal without a permit. Lacey Act violation??
Replace the female Rhino. Problem solved.
Government maybe should bring a lawsuit.

 

[Rainer Ling]

1.) The rhinos in Namibia neither belong to Mr. Thormaehlen, nor to MET or NAPHA- they belong to all Namibian citizens, they are a national resource and asset! This implies that every Namibian citizen has the right to be transparently informed about the sustainable use of these endangered species.
2.) Why the secrecy- why a clause in the out of court settlement, that denies anybody from the public, the access to the said settlement details ? Who wants to conceal what ?
3.) In a recent SMS in a Namibian daily the urgent appeal was done to the press to investigate the whole controversy- let transparency prevail !

 

[Bert the Turtle]

I agree the rhinos belong to the people and that transparency should generally rule the day. However, I can understand why the government that manages the rhinos on behalf of the people might very well want to keep things under wraps.

Here are my thoughts. What the government cannot do is bring the rhino back to life. All the government can do is make the best of the situation, and do what it can to ensure the health of the rhino population moving forward. The only practical thing that can be done is for the government to arrange some sort of economic support for rhinos and move on.

If it were an absolutely clear case of shoot or be killed, the client did what he had to do and then the question comes up why did the PH not shoot? Bad press for the Namibian hunting industry if the way this gets reported is that Namibian PH's are afraid to shoot even in defense of the client because the penalties are so high. A large amount of the hunting income comes from plains game areas and a large part of that comes from Americans. Americans have an inherent distrust of government and the economic loss exceeds the value of the rhino if it gets interpreted in such a way that people decide it is too dangerous to go to Namibia because the Namibian government cares more about rhinos than peoples lives. The truth of the matter can get easily lost in the dramatic headlines that play right into American prejudices about Africa. For the vast majority of tourists going to Namibia, defense against dangerous game is completely irrelevant, so why risk creating doubt about a problem that doesn't exist in the first place.

Now what if the circumstances were that the client should not have shot the rhino? I'd be the first to be yelling to lock him up. After all, that is what would happen if a Namibian citizen had shot the rhino for no good reason, and it is entirely reasonable to do so. But, again pragmatic economic considerations come into play. If he gets locked up, the headlines here would read "American defends his life from rampaging rhino only to be imprisoned in Africa." While it may well be the just thing to do, it costs the government money to imprison him, has the potential to cause real economic harm to the hunting industry (and by extension the rhinos) and does nothing to help fix the damage he caused.

So, if the government negotiates a generous economic settlement, they avoid bad press and do something good for the rhinos. But, that can get misreported as well, and the next thing you know, the government is dealing with an onslaught of wealthy Asians who figure rhinos are available for the right price in Namibia. Or they are dealing with a rightfully pissed off group of Namibians who are pissed that an American has been allowed to illegally kill one of their female rhinos and go home with the trophy just because he has money.

In an ideal world, things would be different, but in this world there are always pragmatic considerations. Perhaps this is just one of those situations where there are no good answers, just some that are less bad than others and it is in the interest of everyone involved if a deal is made and it isn't spoke of again.

 

[James.Grage]

Now that we have a situation that should have never happen in the first place. SCI and DSC should be investigating the situation. The case should be brought by Namibia officials to SCI and DSC for disciplinary proceedings.

A couple things do not ring true here. If the Black Rhino was charging, did the PH shoot? If the answer is no, then i read this to be straight out poaching. On Dangerous game hunts the hunter is behind the PH and tracker or trackers most of the time until they set up to shoot, I have been even when we were tracking a wounded cape buffalo. Exceptions were when we had a group huddle to discuss what was on going.

NAPHA - Should be talking to SCI and DSC to have "Thormälen & Cochran Safaris Namibia" booted from the organizations and black listed.

I do believe that Thormälen & Cochran Safaris Namibia used a tracker or two to locate and track the Black Rhino, the tracker and PH should know the difference between a cow and bull rhino. If the trackers and PH are that poor in their job duties to put a client in danger that is failure of duty in by eyes. Both of these is a good reason for hunters to not book with them.

The client should have never been in danger if the trackers and PH were doing their job correctly.

All i know is that i have had Thormälen & Cochran Safaris Namibia company on my never book with list. And this further support what i have read in the past.

 

[cwkirchh]

The cow was shot, because it had the longer horn.
I know Peter Thormählen personelly, he does not have a valid big game PH license in Namibia,
but he always has a lawyer with him, so , if anything happens, the lawyer will cut him out of Trouble, including some ...........
officials from Namibia Government?????
Anyway, a good Story:

If he gets away with this Story, it smells like corruption....

by the way, did anybody controll the last purchases of concessions by Peter Thormählen?
What was the quota in the auction,
and what is the quota now?

Does someone has a 11-year - old to do the mathematics before and after????

I was in Namibia this year, with T&C Safaris.
I was in Mangetti National Park ( 6 X 6 km square/ 3,7 X 3,7 miles square).
I spoke to some hunting People there, and the Story goes, that the Rhino cow was shot, because it had the longer horn than any of the males there.
The Story, that the cow charged is a joke: you do not track the cow's tracks , when you already know, where it lives.
Also: Try to get the judges to find out about the real case:
Who shot, which angle, where was the PH?
T&C's only big game PH with a NAMIBIA-PH BIG GAME license is Abiliu Hihuilepo (1953 ),

It is just big fraud that the horns of a cow shot like this, are free for Export.

Namibia must be the only Country, which allows to Export trophies from illegaly shot animals---- or do you all know other countries, which allow this?
I would allways be "attact" + "charged" by animals with enormous trophies , which are not allowed to be shot!!!

Where are we here ? In Gods own land? Or in Hell, where other People controll, what is law???

 

[James.Grage]

cwkirchh

Welcome to AH.

Good Post, i must say...

 

[enysse]

This post just got very interesting again, if the above information is true........

T&C have a lot of explaining to do and should be banned from DSC and SCI.

 

[James.Grage]

This post just got very interesting again, if the above information is true........

T&C have a lot of explaining to do and should be banned from DSC and SCI.

Along with some other story's that i have read from hunter(s) that hunted with them in the past 3 years in Namibia, i would have to strongly agree with you...