Africa or Alaska?
03-18-2015, 08:33 AM
#11
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,227
Originally Posted by CalHunter
Both someday I hope. With the cost of the big 5 in Africa, I probably wouldn't hunt those species.
03-18-2015, 08:43 AM
#12
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 18,247
Agreed. From what I've seen, the plains type game would be a lot of fun and much more affordable. The lion would be a dream come true but not at that price level. I will likely have to settle for one of our American mountain lions and then get frustrated with California's stupid laws about not being able to bring the trophy into the state. Grrr..
03-18-2015, 08:56 AM
#13
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,952
Originally Posted by flags
I've hunted both and I'd take Africa any day.
First off, in many areas you can hunt Africa cheaper than a fully guided trip to AK. Some of the package hunts in South Africa or Namibia can be done for less than $5K for 5 or 6 species with extras species added on for the cost of trophy fees. Compare that to a guided moose and caribou hunt in AK. Even if you want to hunt on your own, AK is expensive and you can do unguided hunts in both Zimbabwe and Cameroon if you don't want to use a PH.
Second, there are a lot more species to hunt. AK game is actually pretty limited when you get down to it. There are less than a dozen huntable species and you can legally hunt over 200 different species in Africa.
Third, the safari industry is well established and the representatives in the states take care of everything including airfare, visas, firearms permits, trophy shipping, customs clearance etc... It is a very simple process and is handled without extra fees or hassles.
Fourth the people in Africa are great and it is good to be exposed to different cultures.
First off, in many areas you can hunt Africa cheaper than a fully guided trip to AK. Some of the package hunts in South Africa or Namibia can be done for less than $5K for 5 or 6 species with extras species added on for the cost of trophy fees. Compare that to a guided moose and caribou hunt in AK. Even if you want to hunt on your own, AK is expensive and you can do unguided hunts in both Zimbabwe and Cameroon if you don't want to use a PH.
Second, there are a lot more species to hunt. AK game is actually pretty limited when you get down to it. There are less than a dozen huntable species and you can legally hunt over 200 different species in Africa.
Third, the safari industry is well established and the representatives in the states take care of everything including airfare, visas, firearms permits, trophy shipping, customs clearance etc... It is a very simple process and is handled without extra fees or hassles.
Fourth the people in Africa are great and it is good to be exposed to different cultures.
ATB
Last edited by Mickey Finn; 03-19-2015 at 04:19 AM. Reason: Forget I said that.
03-18-2015, 09:08 AM
#14
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,227
Originally Posted by Mickey Finn
But aren't you talking canned hunts in SA, and Namibia. Not many of us like the high fence approach. I don't passed judgment on those that do. But I'd take Alaska, over Africa.
ATB
ATB
Africa is a big, big place and you can't discredit the whole continent simply because there is some canned hunting or high fence hunting on the continent. That is like doing the same thing here in North America for whitetail deer. Just because some places allow hunting for pen raised deer doesn't mean that all the deer hunting in the entire continent of North America is that way does it? Does a high fence operation in TX for whitetails have anything to do with deer hunting where you are in MI? Of course not. So why do you think such a thing would apply to Africa?
Last edited by flags; 03-18-2015 at 09:14 AM.
03-18-2015, 09:17 AM
#15
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Midlo, Va
Posts: 558
Right now in this day of unrest in many places I would go with Alaska for many reasons. It is easier to travel to, travel is much cheaper to get there and far less hassles to hunt there and bring the meat home. Also far less chance of a political or religious uprising from happening. Yes Sfrca would be a dream place to hunt BUT also has far more problems than Alaska.
03-18-2015, 09:18 AM
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by Mickey Finn
But aren't you talking canned hunts in SA, and Namibia. Not many of us like the high fence approach. I don't passed judgment on those that do. But I'd take Alaska, over Africa.
ATB
ATB
In Namibia the fences are usually just low cattle fences that game can easily go over, under, around, or through. Some of the Namibian hunts are conducted on 250,000 or more. That is fair chase in anyone's book. The Botswana properties are often huge with either a low cattle fence or none at all.
It is not for everyone. Travel is tiring and expensive and international travel with firearms gets harder every year, however I think it is worth it. My wife enjoys the trip and likes to see the different places, people, and culture.
03-19-2015, 04:17 AM
#19
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,952
Originally Posted by Big Uncle
Very few SA hunts would be rightly called "canned", except for possibly lions in SA. Even the high fence operations usually have 10,000 or more acres, some are 100,000 or more. That is a lot of acres of thorn brush.
In Namibia the fences are usually just low cattle fences that game can easily go over, under, around, or through. Some of the Namibian hunts are conducted on 250,000 or more. That is fair chase in anyone's book. The Botswana properties are often huge with either a low cattle fence or none at all.
It is not for everyone. Travel is tiring and expensive and international travel with firearms gets harder every year, however I think it is worth it. My wife enjoys the trip and likes to see the different places, people, and culture.
In Namibia the fences are usually just low cattle fences that game can easily go over, under, around, or through. Some of the Namibian hunts are conducted on 250,000 or more. That is fair chase in anyone's book. The Botswana properties are often huge with either a low cattle fence or none at all.
It is not for everyone. Travel is tiring and expensive and international travel with firearms gets harder every year, however I think it is worth it. My wife enjoys the trip and likes to see the different places, people, and culture.
ATB
03-19-2015, 07:07 AM
#20
Fork Horn
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 162
Africa all day long. Alaska is amazing all on its own, but to choose between the 2, Africa is by far more remarkable.
that said, it comes down to what im hunting. if this is a free hunt then its hard to choose. being able to hunt a cape buffalo or a dall sheep, or lion or a grizzly is a hard choice , even a kudu or a moose. now if we are talking dollars to dollars, where a price of one moose can get you almost 10 animals. id choose the African species
that said, it comes down to what im hunting. if this is a free hunt then its hard to choose. being able to hunt a cape buffalo or a dall sheep, or lion or a grizzly is a hard choice , even a kudu or a moose. now if we are talking dollars to dollars, where a price of one moose can get you almost 10 animals. id choose the African species
