Shot Opportunity - What is that exactly?

[BRICKBURN]

The wording around some hunt offers about Trophy fee refunds has me investigating this notion.

Most of us get the wounded policy. You shoot and blood is found, you pay. Fair enough.

But this new twist on refunds seems a little fuzzy to me.

All of these offers assume the trophy fees are prepaid.

Not taken is pretty darned clear to me. Killed or wounded, it's taken.

"refund is $8,000 if no cat taken."

"Refund of trophy fees for animals not taken.
Refund if not shot
Buffalo $5500
Hippo $4750
Leopard $5500"

"refund if leopard not taken, 4500$."

What is this?

"$4000 refund if no opportunity at trophy leopard"

 

[mrpoindexter]

I suppose that is to wiggle out of the refund if the client decides to pass because he wants a bigger buffalo/leopard, etc and a better one does not present itself.

 

[rookhawk]

I'd interpret that through the lens of a couple people I know personally:

"Hey narcissistic banker that thinks the world owes you, when you pass on four trophy leopards over 135lbs holding out for a 190lb cat and it doesn't show....you owe us full fare"

A fellow I know stalked over 15 different herds of buffalo with a bow before he took his shot. Sounds fine, except he brags about that and the fact that the daily rates were nothing so he just ground the PH into the dirt for a month Hunting and not killing.

So, that's my take. It's another verbiage to protect the African PH from America's "best and brightest".

 

[BRICKBURN]

That sounds like a nightmare prick for sure.

 

[K-man]

Without knowing the exact meaning and wording, I would take it to mean if you have a leopard on bait, and a shot opportunity in a tree, and you decide to pass on the shot, you have had an opportunity. Certainly something to discuss before booking. Would seem the outfitter/P.H. had done his job and the client passed? I had an opportunity on a mountain lion hunt on a treed male the first day, but he was not mature. It would have been a legal animal, I declined the shot and the outfitter agreed. We continued hunting and eventually got a mature male. I am not sure I would book with someone who had this policy.

 

[BRICKBURN]

............... I had an opportunity on a mountain lion hunt on a treed male the first day, but he was not mature. It would have been a legal animal, I declined the shot and the outfitter agreed. We continued hunting and eventually got a mature male. I am not sure I would book with someone who had this policy.

One more set of words to be defining. "Legal" , "Mature"

 

[K-man]

Would be interesting to see who gets to define "shot opportunity" - the client or outfitter? I have had the good fortune of hunting with outfitters/P.H.'s who had to hold me back from shooting, not the other way around. Too bad some clients need treated this way. In my case, any male mountain lion was considered legal by the state. Basically, wipe the milk from its whiskers and it could be legally shot.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Exactly. We don't hunt in a vacuum.
The previous hunters all taught the Outfitters something. I think we would all be in for a rough go if you were the guy hunting after Rookhawk's example client.

 

[JamesJ]

Dealing with this day to day, it gives both parties some wiggle room when it comes to the trophy fee
If you as a hunter are in a situation where the outfitter is trying to get you to take a sub standard animal or no animals presets itself, you can pass and at least get a refund as some consolation.
As an outfitter if you have a client who just keeps passing looking for a monster till he goes home empty handed, he legitimately had opportunity and just passed, The outfitter keeps the trophy fee.
There is a third situation however, where people get cold feet, I had this happen last year, they got cold feet and refused to shoot after the outfitter worked very hard to get him a shot, is he (client) owed a refund when a trophy is 80 yds solid broadside and he passes.
Sometimes the client just decides he does not want to spend the money and having hunted the animal to a point where they could have taken the shot but chose not to are. In their mind they took the animal and that is good enough. Are they do a refund?

Its a fine line and one you should make sure is clear before booking.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Interesting ideas. Thanks for the input.

...............
If you as a hunter are in a situation where the outfitter is trying to get you to take a sub standard animal ....... you can pass and at least get a refund as some consolation. .....................

I guess that is the nightmare I envisage as a hunter.
If the Outfitter is willing to push you to take an inferior animal, perhaps you'll be fighting for the return of your money.
"There was a Leopard and you chose not to shoot. No refund."

How do you adequately describe the expected trophy and "shot opportunity" itself to avoid this conundrum?

 

[JamesJ]

Good point, you could always use and agent that holds those monies in escrow here in the states. Its easier to get a refund that way. LOL
On the other hand as an outfitter, a client comes and takes a truckload of animals and then you fight to get your trophy fees paid, sometimes taking weeks, even months to pay.

Adequate time and a reasonable distance.
If an animals presents a fleeting glimpse at 1000 yds, obviously not a shot opportunity.
I think most outfitters expect clients to be able to make a shot within 200yds in under a minute or two.
But depending on skill level you may need 5 minutes or its just not an option to shoot that far. Good outfitters take this into consideration and work with clients, assuming they are not being total butt heads

The "no shot opportunity" leaves a lot of room for interpretation on both sides. On something like that I would want low daily rates and high trophy fees, putting the onus on the outfitter to work hard and earn his pay.

 

[siml]

I will give you a few examples of what happened just this last season.

1. I put a client on a monster sable 10 times, didn't take a shot, eventually he took the shot, got a dream trophy. If he hadn't shot, would I have charged him....................NO!!

2. We had seen several average bulls could easily have taken shot, but had seen some much bigger, but just couldn't get the shot. Client insisted on paying trophy fee, said the hunt in his eyes was a success even though he didn't get his bull.

3. I knew the client was wanting 40 plus inch sable, we were on the sticks several times for 38-39 inch sable, again didn't take the bull as we had seen the ideal bulls, just not be able to shoot. No charge on sable. First morning we could have taken 2 sable easy over 42 but chose a eland standing with them.

On all these hunts each client could have shot at least 5 bulls over ROWLAND WARD, but wasn't what we were looking for.

All PH'S have different standards or ethics, I feel if a client hasn't taken a shot, no payment on the trophy fee. I will say I haven't had a client that didn't want to pull the trigger, but if I did, he would quickly learn walking for days on end is no fun.

 

[BRICKBURN]

.................
The "no shot opportunity" leaves a lot of room for interpretation on both sides. On something like that I would want low daily rates and high trophy fees, putting the onus on the outfitter to work hard and earn his pay.

Good point.

 

[BRICKBURN]

.................

All PH'S have different standards or ethics, I feel if a client hasn't taken a shot, no payment on the trophy fee. I will say I haven't had a client that didn't want to pull the trigger, but if I did, he would quickly learn walking for days on end is no fun.

Going for long strolls will certainly create an adjustment in attitude. In the end you will still be out the trophy fee, but you'll be fit.

I can envisage making several choices on Sable bulls in a great hunting area. It's the cat thing where this issue seems to be cropping up. You don't get to look over multiple Leopard very often.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Good point, you could always use and agent that holds those monies in escrow here in the states. Its easier to get a refund that way. LOL ................

This is certainly an area where an agent holding the funds could be of benefit.

 

[siml]

On something like that I would want low daily rates and high trophy fees, putting the onus on the outfitter to work hard and earn his pay.

I disagree with this statement, it costs me the same to have a client in camp whether we take trophies everyday or none. We have costs in camp that need to be paid all year round. Here you need to compare apples with apples. We all have a different take on what is low or high.

On the leopard situation, there's no quick fix to the decision, I guess communication before the hunt will be best. If you have booked with a PH, then you should trust his call.

 

[jeff]

In bowhunting I,very been told by some hunters that they have been pressured to take shots that they weren't good, front quartering or too steep of quartering, so it could differ on who thinks a opportunity was presented!

 

[jeff]

Simon, often you book with a outfitter and you get assigned a PH.

 

[siml]

@jeff , that's true, but if using Brickburns scenario on leopard, insist on who is guiding you, it's not like we shooting tons of leopard.

 

[JamesJ]

I disagree with this statement, it costs me the same to have a client in camp whether we take trophies everyday or none. We have costs in camp that need to be paid all year round. Here you need to compare apples with apples. We all have a different take on what is low or high.

On the leopard situation, there's no quick fix to the decision, I guess communication before the hunt will be best. If you have booked with a PH, then you should trust his call.

Mainly I was talking about leopard, there is a cost of doing business and maintaining camps cars etc. assuming you book a cat hunt for 25k USD with a 4K refund with for no cat. On. In most area on a 14 day hunt , it does not cost the outfitter $21,000 to operate the hunt. So even with a refund of 4K he has made a fair profit from your unsuccessful hunt.

I would rather the outfitter cover his cost of doing business with a modest profit but make the lions share of it through the trophy fee.