Approach Ron Thompson and ask either for him to write something or for permission to quote from his articles. Those who can, read his articles in African Outfitter. He puts it across well. magron@ripplesoft.co.za

Yes, Thompson's articles and research reports are excellent.

quote:

Jeff,

This is a difficult one. Speaking from Zambia we do not have a wildlife census as such so there are no accurate figures. What we do know is that the elephant numbers are on an increase and that they impact on rural communities and their agrarian activities, so much so that we are now hunting elephant again after a twenty year ban. There is an increase in PAC and I forsee the hunting of non trophy or rather non export jumbo to combat the numbers.

This in itself is a fact.

That is very interesting. So nobody really knows the population facts, but the anti hunters claim to and thus go uncontested, claim legitimate numbers, etc. and win favor with the media types.

Conversely I think it might also be a case of an unpopular concept to the hunting community to really know the numbers of game animals as then there might be justification to shut down a particular species based on census numbers. I personally would like the African game departments to adopt the US model for species harvesting - it's pretty simple: When the populations of a given species drop below a certain level - no hunting. When they go above - hunting allowed. This has worked greatly in our favor here in the US. Wolves for example are now being allowed to be hunted after years of being closed. Same metric for Elk, whitetails, Mule Deer, and many more that have ebbed and flowed over the years. It vworks and dispells any myths about the populations / sustainability of a given or group of species.

Right now from what I can gather, Africa seems to use a non-scientific method for determining quotas and that alone leaves the door open for the anti-hunters to state what they please and provide shoddy science to justify their claims.

Hard scientific numbers would allow for true sustainability and would make any dishonest parties from either side fall back in line with the mainstream. Both sides would have to give, but the result again would be sustainable hunting / conservation.

Africa's human population is set to almost double in the next 100 years - now's the time to get the sustainable mindset going - it will take years to accomplish what has happened here in the US, but it can be done - any effort in that direction is a win for the Hunter-conservationisis, therefore all, especially the species in question.

JW

My thoughts,

I support Sir David's hunting exploits along with the other posters and he has some damn fine trophies but I have to say that my first impression of the trophy photo of the lion was not showing the greatest respect for such trophy. It certainly could have been cleaned up and posed in a way that was more dignified and "proper" for such a grand animal. I realize that there may have been other circumstances, for example it looks like a night shot, and I'm not offering a holier than thou attitude, but I cringe when I see bad trophy photos. It does not do the trophy justice, the hunter has a bad photo to live with and every so often the anti-hunting wackos use it to their advantage....just my opinion.

Paul

quote:

Originally posted by Jeff Wemmer:

quote:

Jeff,

This is a difficult one. Speaking from Zambia we do not have a wildlife census as such so there are no accurate figures. What we do know is that the elephant numbers are on an increase and that they impact on rural communities and their agrarian activities, so much so that we are now hunting elephant again after a twenty year ban. There is an increase in PAC and I forsee the hunting of non trophy or rather non export jumbo to combat the numbers.

This in itself is a fact.

That is very interesting. So nobody really knows the population facts, but the anti hunters claim to and thus go uncontested, claim legitimate numbers, etc. and win favor with the media types.

Conversely I think it might also be a case of an unpopular concept to the hunting community to really know the numbers of game animals as then there might be justification to shut down a particular species based on census numbers. I personally would like the African game departments to adopt the US model for species harvesting - it's pretty simple: When the populations of a given species drop below a certain level - no hunting. When they go above - hunting allowed. This has worked greatly in our favor here in the US. Wolves for example are now being allowed to be hunted after years of being closed. Same metric for Elk, whitetails, Mule Deer, and many more that have ebbed and flowed over the years. It vworks and dispells any myths about the populations / sustainability of a given or group of species.

Right now from what I can gather, Africa seems to use a non-scientific method for determining quotas and that alone leaves the door open for the anti-hunters to state what they please and provide shoddy science to justify their claims.

Hard scientific numbers would allow for true sustainability and would make any dishonest parties from either side fall back in line with the mainstream. Both sides would have to give, but the result again would be sustainable hunting / conservation.

Africa's human population is set to almost double in the next 100 years - now's the time to get the sustainable mindset going - it will take years to accomplish what has happened here in the US, but it can be done - any effort in that direction is a win for the Hunter-conservationisis, therefore all, especially the species in question.

JW

That all makes a great deal of sense. We should challenge the numbers the antis put out there, we should get info from guys like Ron Thompson and use it, glean info from scientists in field...Okay, so in many areas it will be difficult to get figures, especially up to date figures, but there are some that do regular counts, like the Save Conservancy for example. Getting together facts from just a few areas would be a start...I bet there are scientists out there who have good ideas of game populations in certain areas.

And yes, if Africa based their conservation efforts on proven US policy, things would become A okay. But, speaking for Zim, before that can happen many issues need to be addressed, beginning with corruption in all areas and rampant poaching in many. These issues can and will be addressed in this lifetime, make no mistake, but slowly, slowly wins this race.

Strategy and determination is needed, we have an incredibly powerful team, we need to consolidate and win this match, stop turning on each other as these liars want us to, focus on what is important....

They have been a threat to our way of life long enough, let us become a threat to theirs and expose the claptrap for what it truly is.

I really like what I've heard from the Australians, rather than cower we should shove back hard.

Dave

Read Ron Thomson's article in the October edition of the African Outfitter on Alf [Animal Liberation Front] and ELF [Earth Liberation Front]

quote:

Originally posted by David Hulme:

quote:

Originally posted by Tembo:
Don't even waste your time responding to these anti hunting fools. You are not going to change anyone's mind. Ignore them.

I just don't like the idea of lying there and taking the kicking, I'd rather stand up and land one of my own...

We could be doing more, changing the way neutrals perceive hunting, they are not going to come here, we have to go to them.

Candidly, why don't WE go on the Hunt for PETA's?

No, I'm serious. I'm sick of the apologetics of hunting.

I say we HUNT THEM and talk about the massive DISSERVICE they are doing to the animals by restricting hunting. Kenya, anyone?

I, as others have stated, do not sit still well.

I think it's great that Sir David is 76. Looks like I've got another decade or so.

If you want to beat the antis at their game you have to do it one person at a time.

If you have friends or know of a youngster who doesn't shoot, take them to the range for a day and let them try it out. Arrange to take a non-hunter on a hunt. Be a mentor to someone who is looking to get into the shooting sports.

The simple fact is, it's a numbers game. The more shooters we have, the more political clout we have and with the politicians on our side, the antis can go to hell.

If the politicians are antis, get them unelected.

Yes, it takes work and organization. But for most, it's easier to sit at the key board and bitch.

Kind regards,

Carpediem

Some us are not bitching at the keyboard but trying to be constructive.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/...ne-Walk/245494924431

Scroll down the page. Over the last 48 hours, with the help of a guy named Jimmy, I managed to attract between 40 and 50 new friends to my Borderline walk page, probably all of them non hunters and even a few hardcore antis, trying to bridge the gap. I think the really hardcore antis jumped ship when they came across my '4 generations of hunting Hulmes' photo folder on my personal page, but I have certainly given some of them food for thought and my efforts are not directed at the extremists anyway. Most of those 40/50 (from an anti rhino poaching group, because of the Jimmy story) don't like hunting, but they are willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, once we prove its worth. No big deal, but for me it's definitely a start.

quote:

And yes, if Africa based their conservation efforts on proven US policy, things would become A okay.

What!!!
David get off the giggle twig and stop masturbating as much, its making your brain go soft.
In which universe has US policy ever held true in foreign countries or brought long term prosperity to foreign nationals where their thinking is not westernized to start with.

God knows, I love american hero,s and the sacrifices they have made in the name of peace and liberty, but very seldom has the government directing those hero's brought about long term sustainable change much less their policies.
Before you blast me, we will one day meet and share a beer face to face, but you really need to lay off the KY.

Ah, blah, blah, I no longer blast, I have had a few days intensive training in the art of restraint on a South African anti rhino poaching group page, where the vast majority of the members are non hunting women...Think about that old chap, before you start chucking your harmless little pebbles...Isn't that where you should have been, by the way, trying to educate South Africans about hunting?

Re US conservation policy - show me something better. South African maybe? I heard Dawie Groenewald is out and about wheeling and dealing again....

Maybe more should consider taking a puff of whacky weed every now and then, if it merely gets them trying to think positively it would be worth it...

Are you looking for an example of a better conservation program than the US, or having a tug?

But you are right in a way, I must remember to exchange the word 'policy' for 'principles'...

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:

quote:

Originally posted by Tembo:
Don't even waste your time responding to these anti hunting fools. You are not going to change anyone's mind. Ignore them.

Actually the opposite. Us hunters and shooters need to be vocal with positive polite comments of an educational nature. Not for the anti idiots, but instead for all the others readers whom are unaware, or simply don't care. When they read rational responses, such as the hunting safari industry SUPPORTING wildlife initiatives, some are swayed to our point of view.

John,

Well said! . . and it needs to be said again and again. We DO need to 'counter' the efforts of PETA and their ilk. Not so much to change their minds . . pretty much IMPOSSIBLE! . . But to educate those that don't lean either way to understand the whole picture. I've lived in Kenya and Ethiopia for many years and many people are either neutral or negative regarding hunting, and commonly very ill-informed, but when presenting them with the facts in a sane and reasonable fashion, they warm up to the idea! I always look to bring non-hunters in to the conversation, and the majority of the time they walk away with a whole new perspective . . . .

quote:

Are you looking for an example of a better conservation program than the US, or having a tug?

Most certainly having a tug, but I still dont think much of US policy makers.

quote:

Originally posted by African Hunters Quest:

quote:

Are you looking for an example of a better conservation program than the US, or having a tug?

Most certainly having a tug, but I still dont think much of US policy makers.

That is what makes the world interesting, difference of opinion. And anyway, I just see it from a Zim angle and think to myself which policy makers I'd rather have in place of the ones we have here. Policy in general that is. Neither China, Russia, North Korea, SA, UK, rest of Europe, etc appeals as much as USA.

quote:

In which universe has US policy ever held true in foreign countries or brought long term prosperity to foreign nationals where their thinking is not westernized to start with.

Japan, S. Korea, just those insignificant little economies...and you are from where??? LOL!

Fact is, the US "CONSERVATION" policies have proven to be the best model yet on a large scale anywhere.

Hell-no we are not perfect, but given that we turned the Whitetail deer, Wild Turkey, Grey Wolf, Grizzly, Elk, Waterfowl, numerous fisheries, etc around through good science and sound law enforcement practices is statement enough to demonstrate that this type of system can work

IDIOT ALERT: Don't confuse the above with overall US foreign policy / US current state of DC gridlock - different deal.

JW

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:

quote:

Originally posted by Tembo:
Don't even waste your time responding to these anti hunting fools. You are not going to change anyone's mind. Ignore them.

Actually the opposite. Us hunters and shooters need to be vocal with positive polite comments of an educational nature. Not for the anti idiots, but instead for all the others readers whom are unaware, or simply don't care. When they read rational responses, such as the hunting safari industry SUPPORTING wildlife initiatives, some are swayed to our point of view.

Seems to me that pointing a big-bore double at the camera (i.e.: viewer) while espousing "positive polite comments" and "rational responses" is a bit absurd (to say the least).

It’s exactly the wrong image of the hunter ... and belies your message.

They're already terrified of us.

For what it's worth.

Dragging my Dead Horse issue to thios thread to see if it dies also.

Stole this from one of NitroX responses:

1. There are dedicated hunters and shooters whom are active in lobbying for their sports;
2. There are a lot of hunters and shooters, whom do nothing;
3. There are non-hunters and shooters whom are ignorant of the sports, or don't really care;
4. There are people with some negative feelings to hunting and shooting but not actively;
5. There are anti's whom fight actively against us.

From what I am seeing there are a bunch of folks on AR that fit into category No.2, in fact it appears thatv the majority of folks on here fall into that category.

The fight is not about what is or is not hunting or how much or how little money a hunter has. The fight is about convincing the folks in the middle of the road, that don't hunt, but don't really have anything against hunters that the stuff they are hearing from the anti hunters is not the truth.

I am really beginning to believe that most folks really do not care whether hunting survives or not. As a group too many of us are too concerned about trying to "Change The Minds" of the anti's and win them over to our way of thinking. That Is Not Going To Happen!!!!!!

If they win, ALL hunting is going to cease. No one is going to be able to go out and hunt under the noble method they believe as being the only proper way to hunt, no one is going to be able to go out and "hunt" by a method that others find deplorable, it will all be over with.

This is the fourth discussion in the past couple of weeks on AR concerning the efforts of anti hunters and how it will effect hunters. A few people make a post or two and then disappear.

Our fight has nothing whatsoever to do with Fair chase or personal ethics, be damned with those concepts. Our fight has to do with keeping legally sanctioned, authorized hunting frombeing stpooed in totality.

Hunter as a group need to seriously ask themselves which is more important, trying to come to terms with the anti's and keep certain "accepted' forms of hunting alive, or joining together and working to keep all/any legal forms of hunting alive?

One of the posts below that article that annoyed me was the person suggesting that he send 25,000 to help the starving in Africa.

Why is my question. Actually for the same reason I don't send money to feed the starving in Africa - firstly, because it lines the pocket of some corrupt black official.

However, secondly and more importantly. Because the money would be better spent on contraception and steralisation of the population. What do any of those people actually contribute to the country or the world. Nothing is of course the answer.

It does not matter whether those folks contribute anything or not, that is not what is important. Trying to keep the anti hunting segment of society, World Wide, from getting hunting stopped is what is important, unless you really do not care.

I wasn't trying to piss anyone off on the board with my post. I get really annoyed with adverts asking for people to give money to help the starving in Africa, because their own governments are too lazy to do anything constructive, and just rely on other countrys to continually help out.

Back to the topic on this board. Hunting is still a legitimate sport and it pisses me off that this guy has been targeted by a bunch of ignorant fuckwits. Hunting is still in humans blood, it is in my blood and I will continue to be a hunter till the day die. It is a primevil instinct. What these ignorant pricks fail to realse is that hunting in Africa contributes to successful game management and pouring money into the economy. Sending 25,000 to help the starving in Africa is a total waste of money, but then only an ignorant person wouldn't realise that

You did not piss me off, and yes asking for aid for those folks is annoying. However, the point remains, folks want to bitch about the anti's giviong legal hunters a hard time, yet no one seems willing to join together to fight the anti's.