Back at it . . . for a bit!
5. Red Duiker, Eastern Cape, May 24, 2015; Cameroon, Jan 21, 2019
The name “red duiker” can be confusing. For most of us, it refers to what is also known as the Natal red duiker or red forest duiker (cephalophus natalensis), with a range from the eastern coast of South Africa up to Kenya. But there is another “red” duiker, more properly known as the red-flanked duiker (cephalophus rufilatus), which is found in the “forest’ or jungles of west and central Africa. To make things worse, they also look very much alike.
Red forest duikers are small, with a typical shoulder height of 43 cm (17 in), and an average weight of about 30 lbs. Both sexes have short, straight horns about 21/2 inches long (with smaller horns in the female). One challenge is that they also have a ‘ruff’ or tuft of hair on the head which can cover a substantial length of horn, making horn judgment difficult.
The Natal red duiker's appearance is its hunched back, with its front legs shorter than its hind legs. The longer hind legs are often crouched, which lets the duiker jump quickly if it feels threatened.
I was actually hunting for a red duiker in KZN in 2015 near Mkhuzi Game Reserve (a park in KZN). We’d driven to a hunting area about an hour from the park, where we were staying. We began by driving, trying for a spot and stalk, but we weren’t having any luck. Our guide/tracker recommended we slowly walk some cut lines made for power poles. It didn’t take long before we saw a red duiker some distance away feeding slowly. Because I had a .416 Rigby with me that day (can’t exactly recall why), I wanted to close the distance somewhat, so we walked inside the trees, poking our heads out from time to time to verify that our quarry was still occupied with the grass.
Finally, we got to about 100 yards, and I decided to take the shot. It was hard to tell what the result was - he certainly jumped, but as if he was running away. No buck, no flinch. We moved to where he’d been standing, and found no blood. We were near a boundary with another property as it turned out, and if my duiker had run onto that property, we’d likely have lost him. I was starting to get worried when our tracker said “there” - words I love to hear. And there he was, quite dead, with a small hole through his vitals. The 400 grain bullet had gone through, as I’d expected it would, leaving only two very small holes, but some blood had appeared.
The Natal red duiker is technically the red duiker which forms part of the Tiny Ten, but I include the red-flanked duiker because frankly I couldn’t see (or remember) any difference when I shot the red-flanked duiker four years later in Cameroon. The Cameroon hunt wasn’t really a hunt. We were driving along some roads, slowly making our way back to camp, with my PH, Guav Johnson, and I sitting on the back. Guav saw the duiker and stopped the truck. We jumped off but didn’t move very far - just set up the sticks. I recall a brief exchange - Guav telling me to wait until I had a shot - and my taking a shot, with Guav asking me why I had taken it. To kill it? I replied. He said it wasn’t a good shot to take. I pointed out that the duiker seemed pretty dead to me, and if so, how could it have been a bad shot to take. That led to a discussion of the difference between a good shot, and and a good shot to take, the utility of which frankly escaped me at the time, since the little guy was entirely dead on the spot where I’d shot him. Having said that, in hindsight, I can agree with Guav that just because a shot is successful, it doesn't mean it was a good shot to take, but it certainly trends in that direction . . .
In any event, herewith a red-flanked duiker, which is not a red duiker, and therefore not part of the Tiny Ten, but looks an awful lot like the one I shot in KZN.