Canned Hunting VS Hunting Of Wild Lions
 

I hate to bring this up again, but I thought "canned hunting" of lions had been banned in South Africa. Therefore, I couldn't understand why the breeding of lions continued on the lion farms and why people continue to support these farms by going there to pet the cubs.

Here's an article published on Dec. 21, 2009 on Plan Your Safari's blog.

http://planyoursafari.com/blog/canne...-of-wild-lions

YES - it's disgusting and as long as the minister for tourism and environment is a hunter himself there won't be any change - I fear.

There are too many tourists who LOVE to cuddle a lion cub which becoms soon the cannon fodder for the canned hunting industry.

Sadly - too few tourists think BEFORE they decide on activities.

Here again it comes down to education!

Also tour operators and travel agents don't ask the right questions - mostly!

I request from any camp or TA a confirmation that the venue I decide on is in no way involved in trophy hunting.

Asking uncomfortable questions makes a difference. At least it makes these folks aware that people are watching the industry.

SV ((@))

Forgot something:

I don't think you cannot bring that up too often!

As stated above: A TO/TA who sells/markets/promotes a destination as nature experience as e.g. safaris should know what's going on in these countries.
At least I consider it essential that mine does.

SV ((@))

You shouldn't "hate" to bring it up again, especially not in World Cup year.

"There are too many tourists who LOVE to cuddle a lion cub which becoms soon the cannon fodder for the canned hunting industry."

That's the connection that is too often missed by those who would never support canned hunts.

So, SV does this mean that you only visit Kenya? There's hunting in Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Uganda; not sure about Rwanda. What other safari destinations are hunting free? Please list the places that are hunting free that you would visit?

Wouldn't it be ideal if the photographic safaris brought in more revenue than the hunters? Then there would be a level playing field to start the discussions from. Then there would be bargaining power to stop the hunters. Then the animals would have a chance.

This is my New Years Dream and Wish for all of Africa!!

safarimama
No, I don't only go to Kenya.
But I make sure I don't stay in en environment where hunting is conducted as a kind of "parallel safari universe".

For example: I would NEVER EVER stay at Serian camp as Alex Walker is an active professional hunter taking "his" hunting clients to TAZ etc.
I keep out of Cottar's as I am not sure whether Calvin C. is still leading hunter safaris outside Kenya.

I would NEVER stay at any of the KWANDO camps in Botswana as their concession is also hunting concession but the hunting is executed by "sub-contractor".

I would NEVER again visit Namibia because of the country wide cheetah hunting. Furthermore Namibia (despite I would love to go back for the awesome landscape) has too many "guest farms" where hunting is conducted. My TO could never make certain which one if and which one isn't.

For example: ONGUMA. A wonderful camp. But also hunting. Only "insiders" know about it. Therefore the whole lot of Namibia is "out of area" for us.

It's hard to stick with the ethics. And it's an endless fight. But it grants a much better feeling and experience. I rather sacrifice an experience than my morals.

AND - wouldn't it be hilarious to support more than a dozen animal welfare foundations and on the other hand feed the greed of hunting concession holders?

And I am glad my TO shares our views.

AND - it's a blatant lie told by hunters and their supporters that hunting creates more revenue than photographic safaris! And it doesn't become more plausible/true the more if gets repeated.

You missed my point.

I state that too few TA/TO really care which venues they market(sell/promote. Only money counts. No ethics on that side as well! I expect my TO to know what's going on in concessions. It's part of his education to not send me to hunting venues.

Merry Christmas!

SV ((@))

If I didn't live here, I wouldn't visit the US because they are exterminating the Northern Rockies wolves again and allowing the die-off of polar bears. I won't go anywhere in Europe because they are exterminating the lynx again. Won't go to Iceland because they just shot and killed two polar bears that made it to their shores. Can't go to Japan because of the whale hunting and porpoise slaughter. China for shark fins and tiger hunting. Unfortunately there will always be those who value hunting and consider it part of preservation and those who don't care about the future of this planet. We can b***h about it until we are blue in the face but not much can be done without human population control and that's highly unlikely and probably not a great solution. When some wealthy person who works on Wall St or in Hong Kong has $10,000 - $100,000 to shoot a (fill in the blank), it will always happen. And don't single out Africa - it is a planet wide problem.

You guys are talking about a subject very close to my heart. And I don't think it can be brought up enough on travel forums. I could share my anger and frustration about this issue for hours.

But one thing I cannot understand. How any "real man" could shoot a (tamed/habituated) lion from a couple of paces, have it stuffed and mounted and hold pride of place in his "den" at home, and then brag to his friends and acquaintenances about his bravery, skill and perseverance.

Such self-delusion absolutely flabbergasts me, as does the adulations and respect of his "friends".

What a coward the guy must be!

You stated it perfectly Bushkid0. The sense of shame tht should be felt from participating in a canned hunt anywhere in the world should be overwhelming.

christabir
You are right. But you also didn't get the point!

It's not about singling out countries (except as I did with Namibia and I won't visit China for their cruelty against animals in general - but that's another topic) it's about avoiding those who are involved in that industry. Avoiding that holiday dollars go into such operations!

If every safari enthusiast would make sure he/she does not support these guys that alone would make a big difference.

But that requests research and sacrifice maybe one or the other venue.

Educated travellers won't visit such venues. That's all I am.
I am not allowing myself getting into a kind of phlegm just because I refuse to get information which is widely available.

Nothing more but nothing less.

bushkid0
I couldn't agree more!

Have a look at the poor figures which are holding a rifle with glance on their face sitting behind a buffalo or lion or stretching a leopard (with the help of the outfitter) from head to tail in order to show "how huge" that killed cat was and how togh the guy was killing it from a distance out of a hide or even from a car!

Just make sure you confront those guys when checking in their rifles............It's not without reason those camps hide their real purpose.

Ah by the way: In 2009 there were more than a thousand lions killed by trophy hunters in canned hunting camps. More than ever before!



Merry Christmas!

SV ((@))

SV, I understand what you are saying about the ethics involved in checking out individual camps, lodges etc. within the countries that you choose to visit, but I cannot understand boycotting the country itself (as in your example of Namibia). That would literally mean any country in the world, I am sure, if the research was done. Even the two countries where you & I live - I in Canada (seal hunt in the Arctic and everyday hunters up in Northern BC) and you in Germany (everyday hunters in Bavaria, very common).

Ethics is admiral, yes, I understand that, but please don't punish an entire country - or an entire world - as there is just too much great stuff to see in this world!

Safarimama, getting back to your post - how will I, as just an average ordinary traveller, know which organizations of the 'petting' kind are for hunting or other purposes? You know me well, I do love to hug those animals & I WILL stay away from those that support canned hunting, but how will I know which is which? For example, I know KWS does NOT support hunting so my cheetah hug in Nairobi is OK, and I know Spiers in South Africa is done for money to raise for cheetah research, preservation & awareness so that's OK - but how will I know about the others that I may come across some day, but haven't as of yet?

I do get your point. But it is done all over the world and I cannot fault another country when my own country is doing things that make me sick. It's called hypocrisy.

I'm astonished that you guys don't understand the mentality of the canned hunter. Of course it's disgusting to those of us with a heart, but it's the same group that "bent" the rules to destroy the banking industry (and the worldwide economy). No morals is no morals be it for humans or animals. There is no such thing as shame in their book.

There will be more and more of thses canned hunts and hunting safaris as more and more of the emerging market countries develop middle and upper classes. It's just the reality of humankind.

There is a fine line between a cheetah sanctuary - who we should support - and a cheetah farm - who we should be trying to put out of business. Not every tourist or TA can or will make that distinction (including me the first time I went). Also there is a group out there (not me) that thinks that if you raise it to kill for sport, then what's the problem?

Sorry to be a downer, but it's the reality of the mindset of so many in the world. Those of us who honestly care are in the minority. And living in a country that uses 25% of the resources in the world for 10% of the population, I can't really say much.

Where can one get the real facts here? We can't ask the right questions if we have no idea what to ask, and of whom? I'm sure most photo safari bookers in the U.S. have no idea about hunting, and which camsp/areas are connected with it.

Over the last couple of years I have been stunned to read (moostly on this forum) how much alleged hunting there still is, where it's done, by whom, and what the economic ramifications are.

And, really, Spiers raises money for cheetah "research, etc."? I would love to see that documented. It sounds like it's strictly a tourist trap to me.

Whilst a number of people may find it abhorrent, there needs to be a degree of balance in this debate.

Canned hunting of lions relieves the pressure on the remaining wild populations. Powerful hunting lobbies are kept happy whilst hunting bans can be imposed in and around national parks.

The operators from canned hunting are also the people who have successfully rebred a number of endangered and rare species. A number of these animals are sold at auction each year, which are available for photographic industry to purchase.

It is also important to remember that most of the animlas on private farms are fenced in and have been purchased. Therefore, the land has a limited carrying capacity. Would you take a loss on something you own when you have become overstocked? The revenues from which could then be invested into further development of your farm (expansion etc) How many people on here would want to stay at a small game farm in SA? Well, by hunting, these small farms create an industry that employs and supports a large number of people across communities.

Very little of the money that is spent to go to our eco-camps is spent directly increasing wildlife populations. Instead of paying 30% commissions to agents, perhaps we should all go on self drives and give the remainder of the money to organisations like Sanparks who have an excellent conservation record.

There is far too much talk of 'Greedy hunters' etc. I would like some of you to go on safari to these areas. Would you really pay $1000 a night to walk and be driven around Mopane woodland? I don't think so.

Yet these areas are important wet season dispersal zones, when hunting does not occur (Southern Africa). They need to produce some economic value in order for them to be preserved. Esle they should be given over to farmland for the benefit of the local populace.

The problem with the anti-hunting lobby is that it fails to ever offer a viable alternative (in non-prime safari areas), instead, it launches emotional attacks against individuals in the industry. There is a false dichotomy regarding the future of hunting from a number of posters.

Africa has a right to develop its own economy, and canned hunting is actually a sustainable industry. The only operations I oppose are those mis-selling conservation.

I would ask people in this thread what they would suggest as an alternative?

1) Build luxury lodges in the middle of the Mopane
2) Have zones of land in countries of no economic value in developing countries just to appease those in West who do not like hunting
3) Keep the status quo, which has kept helped protect and keep many wildlife areas balanced.
4) Again, go on mobile safari and give the rest of the money to the countries Gov/local communities in order to keep these dispersal zones preserved?

(I would add, that I am opposed to the hunting of soical predators like Lions based on its impacts on the dynamics in a particular area)

Well said, Christabir!

Hello guys,

Unfortunately I deleted a lot of my previous post before submitting it last night. I happen to be on safari at the mo, and couldn't finish my train of thought before having to attend to guests (an eco-safari, btw, where we shoot with cameras).

This thread has, once again, brought up some very interesting and controversial ideas. I must admit, lbj2, that I've heard the same justifications from "hunters" all my life, and find many of them less than watertight.

Lets look at some examples:

A university professor in Wildlife Management at a prominent institution in SA was once comparing (in an academic paper) the respective revenue from photographic safaris vs. hunting safaris. The figure he used to reflect the total eco-safari revenue in South Africa was minimal in comparison to the "hunting" revenue. It was also the equivalent to the annual turnover of the nearest "5-star Big-5" private game reserve in vicinity of his university (and not even a particulaly large one). The fact that he deliberately falsified the figures to suit his agendas was considered acceptable to the university. He earns more from "culling" excess animals on nearby reserves, than his university salary.

Another prominent SA academic and a world-acclaimed "expert" in Wildlife Management, actively campaigns worldwide in support of culling "excess elephants" in Kruger National Park. He has very strong links to the "elephant meat canning factory" located in Kruger Park. His financial benefits from elephant culling far exceeds his university salary. Elephant culling has been re-introduced in Kruger, thanks largely to this man's successful international campaigns.

I remember working on a game reserve located near Port Elizabeth, owned by a American businessman. One of this man's claims to fame was that he had shot one of almost single species of endangered animal on Earth. He was immensely proud that his "hunting fees" had contributed to the re-breeding and survival of each species! Like say WHAT!

On the same reserve, I remember a hunter lying in bed one morning while the "trackers" went out with hunting dogs to catch a caracal (African lynx). When the cat was succesfully treed, the hunter received a phone call, got out of bed, showered and breakfasted, before going to shoot the animal from a distance of 12 feet. The trophy was then stuffed and mounted, and holds pride of place, amongst many hundreds of other animals, as evidence of his hunting skill. 56 lynx's were shot on the 10,000ha reserve that year.

Another hunter on the same reserve, shot a giraffe from the back of pick-up. His fear was that it would fall on the vehicle as it collapsed.

Fortunately I left the reserve soon after (but not before they had stolen all my eco-safari itineraries and put them on their website without my knowledge).

Many "real men" teach their sons that they can't be "REAL men" until they are "blooded".

I have to ask, ljb2, if this is the type of mentality and lobbyists we are trying to appease. If so, I don't think they are worthy.

Canned lions do NOT relieve the pressure on the wild lions. They simply increase the numbers of canned lions available to these stupid, pathetic, cowardly b*****'s who continue to delude themselves with their bravery and deceive their friends. Maybe the world would be a better place if they were "culled" as the "weakest link".

Very few of the "hunting operations" have contributed significantly to "conserving" - instead they are primarily interested in their own self-enrichment, and hide behind the "rebreeding" concept in order to generate income.

Try the "Lion Park" in Johannesburg (to mention only one example) - apparently they have almost a million visitors a year. And 100+ aggressive, frustrated, caged, psychotic, doomed lions. Yet visitors still flock to this shameful and disgraceful place, dutifully paying their fees to hug a cub.

By the way, the cubs are deliberately orphaned at birth so that their mother comes back into season immediately, turning her into a cub-manufacturing machine to produce the next generation of "huggable cubs". I wonder what people would think if we orphaned children for financial gain (or alternatively started killing our older folk because they were not economically viable). A bit of an outcry, I would imagine.

Not all the opposition to canned hunting (or hunting in general) comes in the form of emotional attacks against individuals. There are some very well-advised, balanced and environmentally aware folk who are opposed to it. A lot of opposition also comes from people who take seriously the ethics of living in harmony with our environment.

Yes, as a member of the safari industry, I've heard all the justifications from hunters. And I still fail to understand the mentality of those who spout this rubbish (and then consider themselves enlightened).

I've done some research for LyndaS and came across this article on the subject by Gareth Patterson from June 17, 2009. He lives in Knysna and knows the area well.

This last week we heard of the South African High Court ruling that in the medium to long term could result at last in the end of canned lion trophy hunting in South Africa. (Over 1,000 lions were hunted/shot in South Africa last year alone by trophy hunters, according to one report). ... read more by clicking on this link:

http://garethpattersonafrica.blogspo...1_archive.html

Discussion about African conservation: www.garethpatterson.com

Well known for his work on the African lion, Gareth Patterson is an environmentalist, independent wildlife researcher and author who has worked tirelessly for more than twenty-five years for the greater protection of African wildlife. Patterson’s love for the wild has spurred various projects surrounding animal rights. He is the author of:

Cry for the Lions (1989)
Where the Lion Walked (1991)
The Lions’ Legacy (1991)
Last of the Free (1994)
With My Soul Amongst Lions (1995)
Dying to be Free (1998)
Making a Killing (2000)
To Walk with Lions (2001)

LyndaS,
I would say that anytime you pay money to pet a lion cub, to walk with lions etc., you are contributing to the canned lion hunting industry. That in my opinion is the sad truth. Any animal that's been petted by man, cannot live free and be safe.

At the Africat Foundation, they release 90% of the captured cheetahs back into the wild, but you will not see those cheetahs when you visit there. You will only see the 10% that cannot go back into the wild again. Those stay at Africat and to my knowledge do not go to any canned hunting farms.

Bushkid,

I am well aware of some the practices that a number of these organisations carry out, especially those that bred lions in regards to the manner in which cubs are treated.

From a personal perspective, from someone who has also worked in the industry, I am anti-hunting, though I have come to accept it is a neccessary evil in the current conservation model and in the development of South Africa in particular.

It is a massive revenue generator for the RSA, which was my point about finding a viable alternative so that it does not destroy a large chunk of a nations rural economy.

There is a natural reaction to jump in and list examples of hunters misbehaving, scientists misrepresenting facts etc etc. Both sides can present the same arguments. I could easily list a number of instances where tourists have contributed towards the death of a wild animal, like;

- When too many boats surrounded an Elephant crossong of the Chobe, a youngster panicked and drowned.

Or highlight research that is highly questionable.

I must admit that historically and even now, many hunters just want to destroy. Though private farm owners etc know, they need a hunt a sustainable amount if they want to have clients the following year.

Even if they buy their trophies in, it will encourage someone else to bred them.

You seem to have glossed over many of the subtle points that I have made in my post before jumping into your rather aggressive response.

If you read through carefully, my point about dispersal ranges refers to non-prime areas, we are talking about countries like Botswana/Zambia/Zimbabwe where game management areas are larger in size than most of the national parks(no fences, wildlife migrate). They are areas that often are only productive during rainy season and/or have human habitation in them at the fringes of a wildlife zone.

You can't sell high end safaris, only for clients to spend 4 days driving through a Mopane woodland or take them to areas with skittish aniamls due to human prenence.

I completely agree that 5* lodge in a prime area will completely outstrip hunting revenues. Though how many of these resorts can the market sustain? Judging by the current occupancies following the recession, I think a credit binge had a lot to do with the popularity of expensive safaris.

I am not doubting that Wildlife numbers have diminished in Southern Africa, human pressure is evident, though recent trends compared to Kenya (full hunting ban) have remained quite positive.

http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news...ife009.html#cr

To quote:

The study provides the most detailed evidence to date on declines in the ungulate populations in the Mara and how this phenomenon is linked to the rapid expansion of human populations near the boundaries of the reserve. For example, an analysis of the monthly sample counts indicates that the losses were as high as 95 percent for giraffes, 80 percent for warthogs, 76 percent for hartebeest, and 67 percent for impala. Researchers say the declines they documented are supported by previous studies that have found dramatic drops in the reserve of once abundant wildebeest, gazelles and zebras.

"The situation we documented paints a bleak picture and requires urgent and decisive action if we want to save this treasure from disaster," said Joseph Ogutu, the lead author of the study and a statistical ecologist at ILRI. "Our study offers the best evidence to date that wildlife losses in the reserve are widespread and substantial, and that these trends are likely linked to the steady increase in human settlements on lands adjacent to the reserve."

Yet the declines have not been as great in areas that have hunting in the human wildife buffer zones and give animals an economic value.

I am not here to defend that all hunters are ethical, abide by the rules and believe in conserving nature. Though I am equally disgusted by the behaviour of many tourists that get animals killed needlsy each year.

It is not the open-shut case you try to make it. I would ask you again to propose an alternative to the status quo.

This unfortunately goes beyond the moral aspect of the debate. Stopping hunting is the easy part, finding other industries to replace the lost revenues is third countries is tough.

It is great to be passionate about conservation and wildlife, though we also need to be objective and look at the larger picture.

You bring up question of culling, it is not the problem, just one of the solutions. Yet so much time is spent saying no to culling, rather than working on more sustainable alternatives for the environment.

I am completely against lion hugging etc, particularly the Lion walking, though canned hunting is a slightly different industry. Though I understand that many females have to end up somewhere.

I would finally question on what grounds you claim that canned hunts do not relieve the pressure on wild lions?

For example, Canned hunts have given an outlet to a number of hunters wanting to bag the big trophy to brag to their friends about. These are the people with money to spare and no real care for nature. In the the same period that this industry has really grown, there have been hunting moratoriums in Botswana and also parts of Zimbabwe, hence, not so much pressure on wild lions. Hunters who repect nature, who I have met, appreciate the need to conserve.

The pressure on Wild Lions has been reduced as PH's can mix their cleints hunts and include a certain lion. In some cases, clients are not even informed they have shot a canned lion.

lbj2
Make a long story short:
You are repeating the same lame arguments which that sick industry endlessly repeats over and over again in its own defense for ages.

Commenting: waste of time and energy.

SV ((@))

"Yet the declines have not been as great in areas that have hunting in the human wildife buffer zones and give animals an economic value."

That the most hilarious argument which comes up always in order to support the hunting industry.

Whether this studies are done by "reputable" figures which belong to a government body or not - it's simply untrue and the conclusions is wrong.

One - only one! - example for the contradiction:

Botswana has always supported trophy hunting on lions until 2007. Then the government realised that the number of lions is dramatically decreasing due to the "harvesting" of the cats. So Botswana stopped issuing licenses.

So please stop bringing up the same ols arguments over and over again. They don't become true just by repeating.

The whole arguments which come from hunting related bodies, individuals or self-declared "conservationists by killing" are sickeing.

SV ((@))

All of those who are opposed to trophy hunting and canned hunting should join the following page - there will be more to come:

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/p...9363818?ref=mf

It's high time to spread the word and get people aware particularly prior to the FIFA Worldcup.

People MUST know what's going on in Africa and SA in particular in order to be able to make a decent choice.

SV ((@))

Hold on one second!!!

I'm only about a third of the way down the thread, but please, can we distinguish between canned hunting (which is disgusting) and real hunters that does not hunt just for the trophy?? Their's a big difference and I hate it when I,as a hunter, gets brushed over the same comb as a canned lion killer. If it can't fit in my fridge, then there is no use harvesting the animal. That is my philosophy. We spend many many hours in the wilderness (without trucks and four wheelers and no, I refuse to sit in an animal hide luring in unsuspecting bambi) and it is not a simple task. Please don't assume all hunters approve of canned hunting!!

lbj2, I have to agree with you. Many people on this forum forget that the animals they are seeing were bought and transported to the reserve which is fenced in. I have family in the business and a lot of culling goes on behind the scenes.

A game reserve is not a natural setting, it's heavily managed. There is no more untamed wilderness in South Africa.

http://www.cannedlion.org/
Watch the video.
http://www.cannedlion.org/content/ju...h-2009-not-end

Canned animal hunting is appalling.Bow hunters need to feel themselves, the slow agonising death they cause.This is canned hunting at it's worst.And a side to the industry that is hardly publicised.

However, we should not lump all hunters together.Canned, where an animal is prevented by enclosures from escaping a hunter, is quite different from free or wild hunting.Although there's a lot of 'hunters' given the opportunity will indulge in either.
Free hunting or wild hunting has far more to justify it, than canned ever could have.Even in my country, free hunting of imported game, has a measured conservation effect.As thar,deer, wild pig, opossums, etc, all introduced, have no natural predators and strip our environment bare.Hunting is a neccessary control.
But canned, where lions are bred for death by a 'hunter's' gun, long or crossbow is totally unjustifiable.
As for the revenue it creates,can we really use that argument?Many criminal activities could also be justified , if it all boiled down to "the revenue it creates".
Camera hunting could replace that revenue.
In Namibia,reserve, or enclosed lions cannot be bred.The males at the wildlife sanctuary we spent time at, were castrated.But those 5 lions will live out their lives in huge enclosures.Orphans at birth,now human habituated, the sanctuary shows true concern for that wildlife by taking on the task, at heavy cost, providing them a place to roam and live out their lives in dignity.

"Free hunting or wild hunting has far more to justify it, than canned ever could have.Even in my country, free hunting of imported game, has a measured conservation effect.As thar,deer, wild pig, opossums, etc, all introduced, have no natural predators and strip our environment bare.Hunting is a neccessary control"

****

You are stating that these animals are broad in by humans. HUMAN INTERFERENCES with nature causing the problem.

Now you bring the same argument to interfere again?

You cannot be serious!

Your argument following means in the end - going to India and kill the surplus of people?

We ase all ANIMALS! The simple reason we walk on foot gives us the right to decide who/which is SURPLUS!?

Stop it! NOW and forever!

It's SICK!

SV ((@))

PS

One exception: The San people or other native trivbes used to hunt for thousands of years without disturbing nature. These peoplöe MUST have the right to live their klives as their forefathers did. NO ONE ELSE has got the right to judge who/which is SURPLUS!

Anybody else is a KILLER and destroys our all heritage!

UNDERSTAND - NOW! STOP IT!

SV ((@))

Lynnak-

Unfortunately I can't justify any hunting and I do lump them all together. We created the problems of overpopulations of elk and deer here in the US and when we reintroduced the wolves to the northern rockies and improve the environment for all of us the hunters again exterminate them. I know too many hunters who don't chase to the ends of the earth an animal that they injure. It's sick. That's why your argument of "responsible hunting" will always fall on deaf ears where I am concerned. Hate to harp on the wolves, but they are the equivalent of Africa's lions (our top predator, except for us).

Hunters also kill the biggest and most beautiful specimens. This has watered down the gene pool and the offspring from the lesser specimens are weaker and not as fit to survive. We have done too much damage to evolution through hunting for sport. Please see this: http://www.newsweek.com/id/177709

lbj2-

You said - "There is far too much talk of 'Greedy hunters' etc. I would like some of you to go on safari to these areas. Would you really pay $1000 a night to walk and be driven around Mopane woodland? I don't think so."

I have and will again. I think there are a lot of us.


Everyone-

Everyone is making great points here. Imagine being the politicians who have to make the rules. I don't know the answers - the canned industry as I stated earlier will only grow. It is just human nature to want to destroy everything in any way they can (not all of us - you know the point I am trying to make). I invest a lot of money every year donating to groups that hire rangers to protect wildlife all over the planet, and trying to educate the local populations. There have been some positive results, and some that don't work out so well. My point being that we must educate and give financial reasons to the local populations in order to stop the abhorrent behavior of foreigners who create the problem. The locals are just "giving the public what they want" and making a better living (or making a fortune) off the misery of wildlife that we hold dear. To them, the animals become a commodity and not something to cherish. Unfortunately it's all about the money.

christa
I FULLY agree!

And it's the locals who have to explain to their children and grandchilren why they did allow foreigners to destroy their heritage.

But it's ours as well!

Therefore we have to fight as long as these awesome creatures exist!

Join us!

SV ((@))

Christabir,

Perhaps I should have made myself slightly more clear.

We are not talking of the Mopane Woodlands that guests track through trying to follow dogs or some lions, close to the Savuti channel or not far off the main game paths.

I am referring to that massive belt of mopane, you see between the okavango and Linyanti, for example. Where water is so sparse you would be lucky to find a pan with water in it.

When the hunting season starts, most the wildlife in Botswana has migrated back to the permanent water sources, away from these hunting areas.

Not wanting to belittle you, having read your trip reports etc, have not really experienced a true mopane experience. The are no afternoon drives to floodplains, lagoons or watching wild life from camp. Seeing an impala an antelope of any description is quite a rarity, let alone a predator.

Spasvogel you're getting ridiculous.
Quote-Now you bring the same argument to interfere again?
What?First time we've spoken mate.!
There are legitimate justifications for hunting, depending on the circumstances, or the country, or the particular animal that is breeding, without it's natural predator controls.Whether humans have introduced them or not, is no longer of importance.But controlling them now, to save our environment from further damage is.And free hunting is one valuable management tool.Like it or not.
If you're going to have a debate on canned lion hunting, stick to the pointCanned hunting is quite different from wild hunting.Canned hunting has no justification apart from dipstiks putting on their cam gear, and paying plenty to kill a lion that can't get away from you.And if you miss, you have backup.
But to start going on about hunting as a whole, without differentiating, then you may as well argue we should all be vegetarians.And that's not going to happen.
So get back to canned lion hunting.
Meantime, this Christmas we'll be out in our boat, hunting fish.Same isn't it?
Have a great Christmas, and gee that farmed ham is yummy!

SV, or should I say Imra.

If you actually read through what I am saying, I think you find I fall in the middle of you and the hunting lobby. I support its use on the periphery and adjacent communal lands, though not in prime photographic areas.

I see you have an issue with being presented with evidence that you do not agree with. I was completely anti-hunting at one point, though having worked on a fenced reserve and near Game Management Areas, I understand its need.

Clive Walker mentioned back in 2003, that it costs more to capture and transport an Elephant, than you could sell it for at auction.

As for hunting on the periphery, to quote you on giving animals living near communities an economic value;

"That the most hilarious argument which comes up always in order to support the hunting industry."

Perhaps you would diagree with this report created written about the Campfire Project in Zimbabwe, which does exactly that for wildlife,

Just to avoid any confusion, this was written for Department for International Development (DFID) who are a department of the UK government.

http://www.globaleye.org.uk/archive/.../mars_pt1.html

I would also suggests that you get your own statements correct before criticising anyones research papers. You would find that Botswana has not hunted Lions for 7 out of the last 9 hunting seasons. As there was also a moratorium in place between 2001-2005.

I am more than happy to be persuaded by alternatives. Though short of delivering one, you would like to see the destruction of rural economies in Africa just to appease you dislike of hunting?

So rather than just attack, provide informations and convince, your belligerent stance with solutions does the anti-hunting lobby little favours.

What would your solution be to the massive declines in the Massai Mara? (Or are the WWF figures incorrect?)

How would you replace the revenues in areas that cannont generate similar sums through photographic safaris?

I do not like the idea of of animals being killed and could not do it myself, though we all manipulate the commodities around us, whether tangible or not to make a comfortable living for ourselves.

The irony is not lost on me on how we have destroyed a lot of the developed world's remote environment, in persuit of wealth, which we use to visit unspoiled areas in developing countries,flash our money and electronics about. Then tell them they can't put their cattle on the most fertile grounds to develop the type of economy we have.

So they turn to a mixture of photographic and hunting safaris to maximize their incomes, protecting these wild areas and they get criticized, again.

Hey guys,

Nice lively debate! (And Tactile, I suggest we meet under an Indaba tree again ...)

lbj2 - I did not attempt to "gloss over" the finer points of your posting. However, we can debate the finer points for ever and a day. The discussion has little to do with the marginal environments in Botswana.

I, too, have accepted that hunting, regrettably, forms part of our environmental model. However, I do not believe that we need to prostitute our wildlife heritage to meet the demands of the canned hunter (I consider it a better option to cull the canner).

I too have watched the boats drive the elephants into a frenzy on the Chobe. This is NOT the fault of the tourist. This is the direct responsibility of the boat operator, and I believe that Botswana National Parks should apply a no-go zone around ellies crossing (but it means too much in "revenue" - and tips for the boat pilot).

The problem lies in the fact that visitors are educated that it's OK to intrude, to pet a cub, to drive over 500 trees in the pursuit of the illusive leopard. It's OK to feed the leopards of Sabi Sands, so that you can have "leopard on a platter". It's OK to shoot wildlife if it's been bred for the shooting. And I agree with tactile that we would have a considerable problem if activities are justified simply on the grounds of "economically justifiable".

I'm concerned about the comment that "sometimes the client is not even informed that it's a canned lion". So the ignorance, delusions and deceit proliferates. Should we be crediting such a PH with the word "professional"? Should we classify the hunter as an honourable ethical hunter simply because he knows no better?

You may notice that I made some references to the so-called academic leaders of our Wildlife Management programmes (who do the research and educate our young folk) deliberately manipulating and/or falsifying data to achieve their own financial agendas. That is largely where the evil lies. These are folk we trust to maintain the integrity of our society. This also applies to those that have deliberately falsified the revenue statistics for hunting safaris as opposed to photographics, to support their own agendas.

A further issue is that the hunting safari industry, and the canned industry in particular, does not, in my opinion and experience, enrich the local communities. It enriches the privileged few who conduct such operations. It would be interesting to see what the locals get paid in comparison to the cost of the trophy. I suspect there would be quite a large discrepancy.

I made mention of some of my personal experiences with hunters. I didn't mention the idiot who placed 7 bullets in a rhino over an 8-hour period, and then eventually called out the game farm owner to finish the "hunt" because he wanted to take a nap. Or the guys, who use dogs to flush "blue duiker" one of our smallest and rarest antelope. Sadly, very few of the hunters I've met, have exhibited any sense of integrity and true "ethic". I'm sure there are such; I find them few and far between.

I stand at the Johannesburg airport watching these pathetic creatures arriving in their camo, with their rifle cases, and their children dressed in camo, and wonder what planet these aliens come from. Fortunately, there are few in comparison to eco-tourists. The actual ratio would be interesting to determine.

I cannot speak as a professional, an expert or as an academic. I am none of the above. I can only speak of my observations, limited though they are.

But I cannot justify or condone the behaviour that I witness.

qUOTE-"I stand at the Johannesburg airport watching these pathetic creatures arriving in their camo, with their rifle cases, and their children dressed in camo, and wonder what planet these aliens come from"

Yeeah, saw those guys to.
Man did they feel so good about themselves.Didn't have the heart to tell them, their camo gear was so out of place.Wrong colour for SA.
And their fanny bags marked them as a '-come get me.I've got all my valuabes here>"
Somehow I had them marked as more of the influx of 'canned hunting' enthusiasts!

And Bushkid0, there better not be a bull ellie under any indaba tre.
Just been ewatching that video!

qUOTE-I, too, have accepted that hunting, regrettably, forms part of our environmental model. However, I do not believe that we need to prostitute our wildlife heritage to meet the demands of the canned hunter (I consider it a better option to cull the canner).

Totally agree.

LOL, tactile!

I'm just so glad that we had three pairs of eyes looking that day. If it was only mine, we would never have found that bull. Talk about "plastic game viewing" ... (I'm sure somebody planted him after we drove past!). That was "canned elephant" for sure ('cept I'm not sure our can would've survived if he'd stepped on it). Good thing I was wearing "camo gear" (afterwards anyway ... LOL!)

Sorry, everybody, just a little personal indaba here. Nothing like airing our dirty washing ...

ROFL!

BushKid,

I am pretty sure that if we sat down, with a couple hours around the bush TV, we would agree on many things.

One of the main problems are the different hunting models different countries, even within the same country, so to write generally here without submitting a 200 pages essay is a difficult thing to do.

Enjoy your Christmas.

Russel
I had a look at your FB page and now I understand where you are coming from

No more wondering on my side.

SV ((@))

Congratulations.....

You found my facebook page. Shame that it is closed to non-friends, so I would be interested to see what you saw. Or can you tell a lot from a diving photo?

Rather than trying to start some grey areas around me because you choose cannot repute evidence or produce a reasoned arguemts like others can in their opposition.

Yes I run the Kwando group, though if you want to accuse me of working them, be careful. Someone has already been forced to send a written apology (A US based Botswana Travel Agent) for making the same claim.

Perhaps you would like to join this group that I am help run

http://www.facebook.com/search/?flt=...9228609&ref=ts

ALBERT - Against Lion Breeding and Ecological Reintroduction Tourism

(THis targets lion walking mainly done in Vic Falls etc)

No viable alternatives offered, no intelligent counter argument and an attempt at character defamation.

Whatever next?

PS The American agent posts on this forums.