This Field Room exists to provide a clear and accurate understanding of what hunting solitary big cats with hounds involves, and what it does not. It is intended for two groups: • Individuals considering a big-cat hunt who want to understand the realities before committing • Booked clients who intend to arrive prepared, realistic, and aligned with how these hunts are conducted in the field Big-cat hunts are not uniform activities. Leopard, Jaguar, and Lion occur in different environments, operate under different legal frameworks, and present different operational constraints. Outcomes are influenced by factors that cannot be controlled, predicted, or corrected through effort alone. This Field Room exists to address those constraints directly. What this space is, and is not: This Field Room is a reference environment intended to reduce assumption and misunderstanding. It is designed to establish accurate expectations. It is not a guarantee of outcome. It is not a promotional platform. It is not a debate forum. It is not a substitute for field experience. How to use this Field Room: Read thoroughly before posting. Questions are appropriate where clarification is required. Delays in response should be assumed to reflect field activity. Preparation and alignment prior to arrival reduce friction in the field. They do not guarantee outcome.

This section exists to establish ecological context for decisions made in the field. Leopards (Panthera pardus) are solitary, low-density apex predators whose behaviour, movement, and distribution are governed by territory, prey density, human pressure, and intra-specific competition. They are not behaviourally uniform across their range, nor are they ecologically fragile by default. Here we document: - Core aspects of leopard ecology relevant to detection, selection, and harvest - Peer-reviewed scientific literature, with emphasis on field-derived data rather than theory alone - Observed behavioural patterns across different habitats - Where scientific consensus is strong, where it is conditional, and where uncertainty remains This is a working reference intended to share our accumulated knowledge of spoor, movement, age structure, and behaviour. Where appropriate, publications will be linked or summarised. Field observations will be clearly identified as such and separated from peer-reviewed findings. Begin here. Subsequent posts will address specific ecological variables individually rather than as generalisations.

The pursuit of solitary big cats is not a modern invention, nor a regional novelty. It is a specialised discipline that has emerged repeatedly wherever large, elusive predators occupied vast country and where men were prepared to accept long periods of uncertainty in exchange for a moment of consequence. The practitioners who mattered were not generalists. Over time, their lives narrowed toward one focus: understanding, locating, and engaging big cats on their own ground. Sasha Siemel represents one of the clearest early examples. Operating in the Mato Grosso/Pantanal region, Siemel became known for jaguar hunting in dense country where visibility was limited and control was minimal. His reputation rests less on storytelling than on the underlying principles he embodied: reading sign, accepting uncertainty, and acknowledging that the cat, not the hunter, sets the terms of engagement. Tony de Almeida belongs to that same South American jaguar lineage, but from a different angle: not as a mythic figure, but as a documented professional guide for jaguar in the Mato Grosso and Bolivia. His book, Jaguar Hunting in the Mato Grosso & Bolivia (With Notes on Other Game), is consistently described by publishers and specialist booksellers as a definitive modern jaguar-hunting account, often explicitly framed as the most substantial jaguar-hunting book “since Siemel,” and presented as the work of a highly successful jaguar guide operating in remote jungle systems. What matters for legacy is not the era-specific details, but the constants: long distance, administrative friction, low encounter probability, and the necessity of operating within the animal’s timing rather than a man’s schedule. Del Cameron represents the parallel lineage in the hound world: a practitioner whose emphasis was not on the event of the kill, but on decades of breeding, testing, and selection to produce functional hounds capable of operating under pressure in hard country. He is widely profiled as a long-time houndsman who bred and trained his own strain of hounds specifically for lion and bear work over many decades. His relevance here is not geography; it is the principle that hound capability is not assumed, it is built, proven, and maintained over time.

Hound-based big-cat hunting is not defined by the presence of dogs alone, but by the long-term development of a working animal suited to a specific task under specific conditions. The hounds used by Panther Trackers are the product of selective breeding from proven stock, tested repeatedly in the field over decades by experienced houndsmen in Africa, Europe, and North America. This is not accidental lineage. It is functional selection. French hound influence contributes nose, endurance, and voice. American coonhound lines contribute drive, track persistence, and independence on cold spoor. Locally adapted African stock contributes heat tolerance, foot durability, and resilience under pressure. Over time, these elements have been combined, tested, culled, and refined to produce a hound capable of operating effectively on solitary big cats in demanding environments. Only consistent performance under real conditions determines breeding value. The conditions these hounds must operate in vary widely and impose constant constraint. Climate ranges from cool highlands to extreme lowland heat. Terrain includes broken escarpment, dense riverine thicket, open woodland, sandveld, floodplain, and rocky substrate. Temperature, wind, and humidity influence scent behaviour directly. Substrate may preserve spoor clearly or erase it within hours. Success depends on whether the hound can work accurately despite these variables, not whether conditions are ideal. The method begins before first light. Roads, dry riverlines, and established game trails are checked well before dawn to intersect fresh leopard movement. This timing aligns with leopard activity patterns and maximises the likelihood that spoor represents recent use rather than historical passage. Track interpretation at this stage is critical. Not all leopard tracks are equal, and not all are worth pursuing. Experience allows distinction between a large territorial male and an undesirable animal based on track size, stride length, depth of impression, toe spread, gait, and confidence of movement. Age and dominance leave consistent signatures on the ground. Selecting the wrong track wastes time, stresses hounds unnecessarily, and degrades the hunting area. The hunt, therefore, is not the hunt for a cat. It is the hunt for a good track.

Big-cat hunting with hounds is conducted within fixed boundaries that exist independently of preparation, experience, or intent. These boundaries are imposed by regulation, by risk, and by operational constraint. They are not flexible, and they do not respond to effort. Regulation defines what is permissible before a hunt ever begins. Species eligibility, quota, age and sex requirements, permitted methods, seasonal windows, area boundaries, firearm and ammunition rules, and trophy movement under national law and CITES are all regulatory constraints. They do not change in response to conditions in the field. A hunt conducted competently that breaches regulation is still a failure, regardless of outcome. Regulatory compliance is therefore not an administrative detail but a structural limiter on decision-making. When conditions force a choice between opportunity and compliance, compliance prevails without debate. Risk exists even when regulation is followed and operations are sound. Big-cat environments expose participants to dangerous game, injured animals, hound loss or injury, medical emergencies, mechanical failure, environmental hazard, and isolation from immediate support. These risks are inherent to operating in remote wild systems and cannot be eliminated. Experience does not remove risk; it only improves judgment when risk materialises. Decisions made in the field are therefore shaped not by the absence of danger, but by the constant presence of it. Constraint is where regulation and risk intersect with reality. Heat, distance, terrain, limited daylight, weather, substrate, hound endurance, human fatigue, and legally imposed time windows all constrain what can be done on any given day. These constraints explain why pursuits are abandoned, why animals are passed, why some runs end early, and why some hunts conclude without resolution. Constraint is not inefficiency or hesitation. It is the operating environment asserting limits that cannot be negotiated. Field authority exists within these boundaries. The professional hunter and land manager are responsible for enforcing regulation, managing risk, and responding to constraint as conditions evolve. Decisions made in the field may override personal preference, expectation, or investment. This authority is functional, not hierarchical, and exists to prevent irreversible error rather than to optimise outcome.