Thought you would be intrested in this. This guy seems to not enjoy hunting.

http://www.animalrightsafrica.org/Hunting.php

if you read the bullshit thisn guy writes you would feel sick. he sais hunting a full maned lion costs 2000$. I want to know who his outfitter is

He has all the information to justify hunting but he just can't let go of his silly emotional arguments.

It's like saying I know the sky is blue but I want it to be green, so let's all just say it is green.

Pass the coolaid Mr.Jones.

A Lion has the right to kill and eat this man; with our without Chutney. Why? Because it is a wild animal, and animals have rights...ya know.
LDK

"Hunters are notoriously intolerant of anyone who questions their so-called “ethics” or who dares to criticise their violent pastime. "

Here is a sampling of what "anti-hunters" have sent me recently...

Roy Fallon
July 10 at 1:57am
What goes around comes around scumbag..and its coming around forfor you sooner than you think!!!!!!!!! All hunters must die!!!!!!!!

Carolyn Bailey
July 10 at 3:37am
New Research Finds Long-Suspected Link Between Hunting and Small Penis Size ..... there's a surprise !!!!

Mademoizelle Arsenik
July 10 at 6:39pm
FUCK YOU AND DIE MOTHER FUCKER
You are shit

Trish Jordan
July 10 at 10:25am
do us all a favour get lost you blood lusting disgusting specuim of a human
you blood lusting animal torturer, so you think your are big with a gun in your hand your are nothing but a ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I like the following from that page "the most basic right of any living creature – the right to life."

And to think I thought only humans had rights.

Guess I was wrong

So I suppose hunting is not for everyone but I would pay good money to see them protesting against you shooting if a Lion charges them or an Elephant start playing football with their buddy's.

The PETA folks are out in numbers criticizing hunting sites, hunting videos on you tube, writing to any city council in towns that depend on hunting. I think it i kind of sad.

The part that gets me the most is that Kenya, who outlawed hunting in 1977, is experience the worst wildlife crisis of any African nation, ever. Its this same numbnut that insists we should all go Vegan because it is more humane. I guess he doesn't realize that Kenyan farming and ranching is the leading killer of Kenyan wildlife, even above poaching.

Yes, very Jonestown-like to me. I am going to kill myself, you should all join me. We are going into the bush to have a group lion hug. Which leads me to my new motto, save a lion, feed them an eco nut. Maybe they will accustom to vegan flesh.

John

How does the peta folks reconcile their killing of kittens and puppies and then dumping them into trash bins? At least I or someone eats what I kill.

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

Oh I forgot the self appointed keepers of animals have decided that it is better for cats and dogs to be dead than "slaves" of people.

Sounds to me like a lot of "HOPE and CHANGE" This could be written by brother Barack and his inner city buddies that have never been in nature much less seen it.

One must keep in mind the fact that ignorance can usually be corrected, but stupidity is a permanent condition.

Do what you can with the former, but just ignore the latter.

Some of their information seems quite dated.

I think Kenya offers a perfect opportunity to see if the animals "win" when hunting is not allowed. I'm as curious as anybody else. Indications so far are that the animals lose. Are they willing to admit that if true. I doubt it.

In their discussion of various countries they focus on the plight of the animals in all the countries except Kenya. Their focus is only on job creation and training, no mention of the animal populations. I guess their story wasn't worth telling. I wonder why?

My gut tells me that all animals lose if they have no economic value. No one is interested in just letting them be. I find that sad to some extent. Everyone wants to use them for their own interest.

I have no problem with photographic trips (not safaris, I don't accept that term.) both taking place; certainly not at the same time on the same concession.

In general, I think the average person with a camera doens't care a bit about whether animals, birds, fish cease to exist in the wild, because they don't care whether the "wild" ceases to exist. They seem to care about convenience, and ease of getting their photos. They would be perfectly happy driving through a high-fenced area in a truck painted like a zebra. Connection to nature or the wild? Don't make me laugh.

I don't believe people on photo trips think too much about preservation of habitat, etc. Left to the shutter-bugs, I suspect they will one day wake-up and say, "where are all the animals?", because they did nothing to ensure their health and well being. Most hunters in my experience are concerned about those issues.

I doubt that the average man or woman with a Canon around their neck on a photo excursion dedicate much thought to what amounts to their lack of caring. They take photos of animals in the morning, then off they go to shop and shoot photos of bridges, buildings, trees, sunsets, etc. That's fine if photography is your hobby, but you've done no more to protect the animals you took photos of than you did to protect the bridge or tree you also took photos of.

I think the hunting community has a higher goal.

I find it odd how the photo folks deplore guns and hunting, until a critter gets too close to the truck, then their true feeling show. I have yet to hear one yell, don't shoot him, he deserves a meal just like everyone else.

John

Kensco

I think they all know where the animals went. They went to the zoo so they don't have any freedom and the greens can see them wearing thier sandals and shorts.