Royal27
AH ambassador
I don’t take making this post lightly and have put much time and thought into it before deciding to do so. At the end of the day though, I’ve decided that this is information that should be shared and hope that it can help others, both client and outfitter, in the future.
So as anyone who read my Tootabi hunt report is aware I hunted blue duiker while there, in post 36 (Day Six) I reported wounding a blue duiker, but without blood being found.
http://www.africahunting.com/threads/south-africa-tootabi-with-the-wife-a-family-affair.22604/page-2
Tootabi’s wounded animal policy is very clear and stated below:
Wounded/Harvested Trophies
Any animal wounded/hit (where blood is drawn) and found OR lost will be deemed as taken. The full trophy fee will apply.
In the case of the blue duiker this policy was not followed by Tootabi, but rather a judgment call was made by the PH and dog man based solely on the animal’s reaction, as no blood was found. I agree fully that the duiker reacted to something upon the shot. That is not the issue. The issue is that under the contract I did not wound the animal, regardless of how it reacted.
In retrospect, I should have fallen back to the contract to decide whether or not the animal was wounded. I wasn’t thinking clearly and told Loodt afterward that I would pay the trophy fee as charged based on the judgment call. This is where I personally made a mistake. I should not have told Loodt I would pay the fee. Loodt is aware that if I had it all to do over again I wouldn’t have agreed to the trophy fee and would have used the wounded rule within the Tootabi Contract to make this determination. That is after all why the rule is there. But, I told Loodt I would pay the fee and felt (and still feel) obligated based upon that alone. So I have paid the fee in full.
As a client though, it bothers me that rules were used by the outfitter during the hunt that directly conflicted with the written contract. If different wounded rules had been discussed and disclosed for blue duiker due to the size of the animal and a shotgun being used that would be different, but they weren’t. In my opinion this is where Loodt didn’t act as I would expect a premier outfitter to act. Loodt should have followed his own contract, or at least suggested a discount due to the lack of information given on his part. Instead, I was still charged the full trophy fee and Tootabi still made full profit from it.
The second issue I had was when it came to the bill. Extra charges had been added, including additional observer days and Tootabi merchandise. Both of these were removed upon dispute, but never should have been there in the first place. We had agreed upon the days and rates as part of the preliminary invoice and no dates changed, but extra days were still added after the fact. Fortunately I kept the pre-hunt invoice and had it for comparison. I was given the merchandise for which I was charged upon arrival. I didn’t ask for it, or expect it. Had Loodt told me there was going to be a charge I would not have accepted, nor worn the merchandise. I understand that billing mistakes can be made. I don’t however; believe that a mistake was made in this particular case as everything had to be added to the bill after the fact.
I’ve tried to lay out the facts here as I believe them to be, and invite @Tootabi Hunting Safaris to tell the story from his side. Then each individual can draw their own conclusions as to what happened, or should have happened.
Moral of the story from my point of view:
1. Don’t agree to things outside of a contract in the heat of the moment. Give yourself some time, or it could cost you money, or more.
2. Know the contract and ensure that you stick to it. Only you can protect you, others may not.
3. Always check your bill closely even if it should be straightforward. Not doing so can again cost you money.
Royal
So as anyone who read my Tootabi hunt report is aware I hunted blue duiker while there, in post 36 (Day Six) I reported wounding a blue duiker, but without blood being found.
http://www.africahunting.com/threads/south-africa-tootabi-with-the-wife-a-family-affair.22604/page-2
Tootabi’s wounded animal policy is very clear and stated below:
Wounded/Harvested Trophies
Any animal wounded/hit (where blood is drawn) and found OR lost will be deemed as taken. The full trophy fee will apply.
In the case of the blue duiker this policy was not followed by Tootabi, but rather a judgment call was made by the PH and dog man based solely on the animal’s reaction, as no blood was found. I agree fully that the duiker reacted to something upon the shot. That is not the issue. The issue is that under the contract I did not wound the animal, regardless of how it reacted.
In retrospect, I should have fallen back to the contract to decide whether or not the animal was wounded. I wasn’t thinking clearly and told Loodt afterward that I would pay the trophy fee as charged based on the judgment call. This is where I personally made a mistake. I should not have told Loodt I would pay the fee. Loodt is aware that if I had it all to do over again I wouldn’t have agreed to the trophy fee and would have used the wounded rule within the Tootabi Contract to make this determination. That is after all why the rule is there. But, I told Loodt I would pay the fee and felt (and still feel) obligated based upon that alone. So I have paid the fee in full.
As a client though, it bothers me that rules were used by the outfitter during the hunt that directly conflicted with the written contract. If different wounded rules had been discussed and disclosed for blue duiker due to the size of the animal and a shotgun being used that would be different, but they weren’t. In my opinion this is where Loodt didn’t act as I would expect a premier outfitter to act. Loodt should have followed his own contract, or at least suggested a discount due to the lack of information given on his part. Instead, I was still charged the full trophy fee and Tootabi still made full profit from it.
The second issue I had was when it came to the bill. Extra charges had been added, including additional observer days and Tootabi merchandise. Both of these were removed upon dispute, but never should have been there in the first place. We had agreed upon the days and rates as part of the preliminary invoice and no dates changed, but extra days were still added after the fact. Fortunately I kept the pre-hunt invoice and had it for comparison. I was given the merchandise for which I was charged upon arrival. I didn’t ask for it, or expect it. Had Loodt told me there was going to be a charge I would not have accepted, nor worn the merchandise. I understand that billing mistakes can be made. I don’t however; believe that a mistake was made in this particular case as everything had to be added to the bill after the fact.
I’ve tried to lay out the facts here as I believe them to be, and invite @Tootabi Hunting Safaris to tell the story from his side. Then each individual can draw their own conclusions as to what happened, or should have happened.
Moral of the story from my point of view:
1. Don’t agree to things outside of a contract in the heat of the moment. Give yourself some time, or it could cost you money, or more.
2. Know the contract and ensure that you stick to it. Only you can protect you, others may not.
3. Always check your bill closely even if it should be straightforward. Not doing so can again cost you money.
Royal