GUYS - THE INFO BELOW IS LONG, BUT PLEASE READ IT, AND GIVE ME YOUR COMMENTS/OPINIONS.

Lions!!!
Only we can save them

To me, the lion is simply the world's most incredible creature! Powerful, cunning, magnificent and beautiful, are just a few of the words that come to mind whenever I cast thought upon the “king”. To know I love to hunt him, might seem to some as a complete contradiction? But the truth is, my desire to hunt the lion is shadowed only, by my desire to see the lion prosper for many years to come! Like many of you, I am firmly convinced, no in fact I'm positive, the only way that happens is if lion hunting remains, period. Thus, it has become our responsibility, our duty, to inform ourselves and then in turn, inform the public. Without information, without knowledge, without facts, our hopes are lost. But instead, let us be the leaders in lion conservation, rather than always the back-seat drivers. Hunters, now is our time to stand for what's right, and what we believe in. The lion needs us more than ever, will you be there in this time of need?


Facts vs Fiction: Surprisingly enough, I am often intrigued by how little knowledge our very own fraternity has as it pertains to lions, lion conservation, and lion hunting. So, how can we possibly expect the general public to be properly informed/educated on the subject, if we ourselves are not? Unfortunately the anti-hunting community, especially those who voice against lion hunting. Often have a huge soap-box in which to spread their false info/propoganda ( i.e. - Derek Joubert & National Geographic). Secondly, I am even more surprised at how often our own community takes the word of many of these so-called “experts”, as gospel. Doing so, without any knowledge of whether the information being provided by the “experts” is remotely factual, or is at all, backed up by any evidence/proof/experience, or scientific data. Frankly, the amount of information provided by said “experts”, which is actually false or based purely upon speculation/guess, is staggering. Below, I plan to outline some examples, along with providing some factual info to the contrary. In some cases I will simply ask you to consider the source, and call upon them to provide evidence/facts to back-up their claim. Please note, I don't profess to be, or think I am, the “end all expert” on lions & lion hunting. But, I do hope to shed some light on the subject, and hope to in turn, get additional info/facts from many of you as well. Only together, united as one, can we spread the TRUTH. Not only amongst ourselves, but the un-informed public as well.


“Are we seeing the Last Lions” a recent article/video by Derek Joubert, in conjunction with National Geographic. Here's a link, if you wish to have a look. http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINIO...s/index.html?hpt=C2#
For those of you that do not know, Derek & Beverly Joubert are firm anti-hunters. Mr. Joubert is NOT a scientist, with any Phd. credentials that I am aware of.


Please note - Derek Joubert claims “that just 50 years ago Africa held 450,000 lions and today there's possibly as few as 20,000.” Well, show me the facts?? Today, numerous “expert” scientists can't agree on the estimated number of lions living in 21st century Africa, much less 50 years ago. I've seen range estimates from as low as 20,000 to as high as 50,000 today. One thing's for sure however, an actual/accurate count of lions throughout Africa is nearly impossible, and certainly was 50 years ago, even 10 years ago. So, to make such a claim without any scientific data, is simply irresponsible, and should not be taken seriously, BY ANYONE!!!

Secondly, “As Beverly Joubert points out in the TED talk, the death of one male lion can have drastic effects on the whole pride. A new male comes into the area and takes over the pride, killing all the cubs and possibly some of the females defending their cubs. So we've estimated that from 20-30 lions are killed when one lion is hanging on a wall somewhere in a far-off place”


Wow!! Now one can see the full effects on false propaganda, and how lack of concern for the facts can be mis-interpreted by the general public. So, let's use some rational thought, and a little bit of experience, to challenge Beverly's claim.
First, let's start with the obvious. Certainly NOT every male lion shot, is at the time, the holder of a pride!!

1. If he's not a pride male, whether because he's too old and has been kicked out by another male/males, or has yet to acquire his own pride, then certainly his death, is not also the result of 20-30 other lions dying. In fact, likely not even one other lion!!!

2. Although I would like to discourage the practice of shooting pride males, it can be acceptable, if the pride is not currently holding dependent young (i.e. - lions under 3 yrs old). If a new male moves in to take over a pride, and the young lions are 3+ years old, likely they are likely gonna be kicked out, not killed.

3. Yes, in fact its true that dependent lion cubs could/would be killed by a new male/males moving into the pride, thus we as hunters must stand firm, and condemn those who are not following good conservation practices.

4. To simply claim that for “every” lion killed by a hunter, another 20-30 lions are killed as a result. Is once again, false propaganda, and very irresponsible journalism, aimed at playing on the emotions of the un-informed public. In hopes of garnering support, and more importantly, FUNDING!!

5. Lastly, we as the hunting community need to challenge such claims to the very end. If the Jobert's, or anyone else, wants to make such claims, then certainly they can provide the facts/data, based on personal experience. If not, then it must be squashed.

My opinion - Joubert's claims are nothing more than PROPOGANDA, aimed at creating a reaction by the easily mis-guided public, for personal benefit. This is simply his set-up for trying to up-list lions at the next CITES convention in 2013, nothing more. He's an anti-hunter, always has been, always will be, period!


FALSE CLAIMS BY ACTUAL SCIENTISTS: This, perhaps more than anything rubs me wrong, and should you too. Its not a stretch to expect folks like the Joubert's to spread anything but false claims. However, I would like to think the actual scientific community would be above this, but sadly not. Case in point, the newly formed "KAFUE LION PROJECT" This example more than anything, stresses the necessity for all of us to be informed. Simply having a scientific degree, does not qualify one as an expert, or insinuate one is providing truthful/varifiable facts. See the examples below, which illustrates my point.

Kafue Lion Project - Summary
Project Notes
The overall aim of the project is to establish a strategic management plan for lions in the greater Kafue National Park (KNP) system, including the surrounding Game Management Areas (GMAs), which would contribute towards a better understanding and the sustainable management of the lion populations of KNP and Zambia as a whole. Researcher: Mr Neil Midlane

Background
National parks in Zambia are state-run, fully protected, and under the mandate of Zambia Wildlife Department (ZAWA). Most national parks are surrounded by GMAs where some consumptive utilisation of wildlife is permitted. Although GMAs fall under the jurisdiction of local chiefs and Community Resource Boards, ZAWA retains ownership of all wildlife, and generates significant revenue from hunting concessions (lease fees) and quotas (license fees).

Zambia currently has the fourth largest lion hunting industry in Africa. Long-term harvest data (1977-2008) show that the number of lion hunted nationally decreased markedly after 1992, then remained stable (with the exception of 2001-2002 when hunting was temporarily banned) at approximately 50 trophies per year, until 2008 when it dropped to its lowest level ever with just 10 trophies taken. Lion quotas remained relatively constant throughout this period, suggesting that the decrease in offtake was reflective of an overall population decline. Despite this, and a lack of population data for GMAs and national parks in general, quotas continue to be negotiated for and allocated annually. There is also evidence of underage (<3 years) male and female lion being shot, and of hunts occurring inside national parks.

The legal destruction of lion from hunting (and, to a lesser extent, problem animal control due to conflict with livestock owners) is compounded by illegal poaching. It is difficult to accurately assess the impact of snaring on lion populations, but it appears widespread in all of Zambia's national parks, and even more so in GMAs.


Above is a COPY of the "Project Summary" set forth by Mr. Neil Midlane, an under-graduate researcher who started the Kafue Lion Project, in conjunction with PANTHERA. He and I, along with the Vice-President of Panthera had lengthy email comms about 6 months ago, regarding his "study". This is a PRIME example of a researcher and his co-working foundation printing FALSE info in hopes of gaining support from the non-hunting and anti-hunting communities, mainly for financial gain (funding), IMO.

1. Take the 2nd paragraph for example, stating that in 2008 the off-take of trophy hunted lion dropped to an all-time low of 10 in 2008. Dr. Paula White (Zambian Lion Project) has 43 separate tissue/DNA samples, from 43 spearate lions shot in 2008 as sport hunted trophies, period!!! Did Mr. Midlane or Panthera, ever bother to consult with Dr. White, who has been operating the Zambian Lion Project since 2004?? Nope, not once!! Why, because facts like this do not play into their agenda!!

2. Same paragraph - "suggesting that the decrease in offtake was reflective of an overall population decline". Are you kidding me?? A decrease in off-take, if it were "TRUE", could indicate many different variables, such as poor hunting conditions, etc, etc, etc. To make such a claim without ANY viable scientific facts/data to support it, is BUNK science at best, and stupidity at worst!

3. Same Paragraph - "There is also evidence of underage (<3 years) males and female lion being shot, and of hunts occurring inside national parks." I asked Mr. Midlane for proof to support any of said claims, of course he could produce NONE! Not a single one. He says there's evidence to support his claim, but could produce NOTHING when asked to do so??

4. Paragraph 4 - "The legal destruction of lion from hunting (and, to a lesser extent, problem animal control due to conflict with livestock owners) is compounded by illegal poaching. It is difficult to accurately assess the impact of snaring on lion populations, but it appears widespread in all of Zambia's national parks, and even more so in GMAs." IT APPEARS EVEN MORE SO IN GMA'S (GAME MANAGEMENT AREAS - HUNTING BLOCKS) I again asked for proof to his claim (data), but of course, none was presented!!

MIND YOU ALL, HE, ALONG WITH THE VP OF PANTHERA WHO MADE ALL OF THESE CLAIMS, DID SO PRIOR TO SPENDING 1 SINGLE DAY IN ZAMBIA, 1 SINGLE DAY STUDYING THE KAFUE LIONS, OR 1 SINGLE DAY SPENT WITH ANY ZAMBIAN OPERATOR!! HORRIBLE PRACTICES, PUT IN PLACE BY "SCIENTISTS".

I then followed up with lengthy emails to both Mr. Midlane & Panthera. The VP of Panthera can be quoted in a major publication stating he is NOT opposed to hunting lion, but has rarely seen an operator who does it "RIGHT". So of course, I asked him to please tell me what country/countries he has spent time in, with what hunting operator or operators, in what concessions, etc, to make said claim? His answer, SILENCE!!

My point is simple, need I actually explain more?


MIS-LEADING INFORMATION - IN MY OPINION: We're all aware of the Lion Aging Guide by Craig Packer. Actually, sounds like a great idea, and likely would be, if hunting was allowed within the Serengeti Eco-System. The Lion Aging Guide was created to help identify lions of a particular age, and be used as a reference guide to accurately age male lions on the "paw". However great this reference guide might be within and around the Serengeti, it falls short of being a guide to follow, outside the afore-metioned study area. To think or claim, that a reference such as this, which was created almost exclusively from one eco-system, is/would be valid throughout the remainder of Africa, is simply not accurate. Certainly I think it has been one factor that has helped create awareness throughout the hunting community, as to the importance of hunting older age class lions. But to refer to, or use this guide as a reference when hunting other parts of Tanzania, Zambia, Mozambique, ZImbabwe etc, as a guideline to aging a lion, is just not correct. I appreciate its use-fullness, but in my opinion, operators need to work together, in each specific eco-system to create a guide of their own. (i.e. The Selous - Tanzania, Zambezi Valley - Zimbabwe))

Recent Information has been circulated which claims that roughly 70% of trophy lions shot each year are 4 yrs old, or younger! Of course, I've not seen any factual data/info which correlates with said claim, but it sounds good for the anti-hunting movement, and those that need FUNDING from the general public. Frankly, More surprisingly, I have heard some in our own fraternity supporting or agreeing with the same claim! I totally dis-agree, and base my opinion on experience each year with multiple hunting operators throughout Africa, and Dr. White's work on the Zambian Lion Project. As well as recent info I received directly from Dr. Colleen Begg, who operates the NIASSA CARNIVORE PROJECT, in northern Mozambique.

However, let me enlighten you with some facts. Facts given and shown to me, as scientific data (proof), complete with photos and tooth x-rays, by Dr. Paula White. In May 2010 Dr. White showed some of her preliminary work, produced in a PRIVATE booklet entitled, "A Regional Guide to Aging Lions in Zambia." In this guide, Dr. White separates the lion pictures/DNA/tooth samples, into two catagories. First catagory is hunted lions from the Luangwa Valley, and the second catagory is hunted lions from the Kafue eco-system. The guide illustrates two things, one is a visual look at each lion, and of course an estimated age, based on tooth sample/x-ray (Science). According to her guide, here's the results to date.

LUANGWA VALLEY: 25 separate lion samples, 23 of the 25 lions were estimated at 5 yrs old, or older.

KAFUE REGION: 22 separate lion samples, 17 of the 22 lions were estimated at 5 yrs old, or older.

The above info indicates from 47 lion samples, that roughly 85% of the Zambian lions harvested during this data collection period, were 5 yrs of age, or older. A far cry from the claim that 70% of the lions shot today are under 5 yrs of age!!! Granted, this is only one country, but if that's the argument against it, show me the data/facts that supports the opposite claim??

The guide also illustrates another very important and interesting observation. Its very easy to see the differences in the lions, especially in their mane development from the Luangwa Valley vs. the Kafue Region. Without question, the Kafue lions are developing better (fuller) manes than that of the Luangwa lions, and are doing so at a younger age too!! A most interesting fact, that goes to my point regarding the "Lion Aging Guide". Its only a helpful tool, not one that should be used as anything else, when not within the specific eco-system in which the guide was produced!!!

Adding to Dr. White's data, Dr. Begg providing me the following info over the past few days. She indicates clearly that her samples are much smaller than that of Dr. White's, but here's her data/quote. "Our samples are much smaller, but in 2004 when we started monitoring lion age 75% were under 6 years, in 2010 only 25% were. We have developed visual aging cues specific to Niassa lions."

So, she states clearly that 75% of the lions shot in the Niassa in 2010 were 6+ years of age! I think this shows a clear indication that not only have PH's worked to progress towards better conservation of lions, but in fact, the vast majority of hunted lions are NOT 4 yrs old, and younger. Again, I grant you this is NOT a fair assessment of all lion hunting throughout Africa, but in the two places that are being monitored heavily, it bares facts that support PH's are doing a much better job of harvesting older age class lions, than what most believe.


ADDITIONAL INFO - MISLEADING??? I THINK SO IN SOME CASES!

Impacts of trophy hunting, habitat loss and retaliatory killings on lion populations in Tanzania
Draft research submitted to Proceedings of the Royal Society B
C. Packer1, H. Brink2, B.M. Kissui3, H. Maliti4, D. Ikanda4,5, H. Kushnir1, T. Caro6
1 Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA,
2 Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, Kent University, Canterbury, Kent CT2 7NR, UK,
3 African Wildlife Foundation, Arusha, Tanzania,
4 Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha, Tanzania,
5 Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science & Technology, Trondheim, Norway,
6 Department of Wildlife, Fish & Conservation Biology, University of California, Davis CA 95616, USA


A QUOTE FROM THE ABOVE INFO:
"We recommend that lion hunting not exceed 0.5-1.0 lions per 1000 km2 per year and that a strict age-minimum for trophy lions be rigorously enforced."

I disagree with his assessment of 1 lion per 1,000km2. It should first be based on each specific area's localized population, and a more realistic number would be 1 lion per 500km2, in areas of good lion populations (example the Luangwa Valley, western Tanzania, etc). Regardless, to put a number on ALL areas throughout Africa, without specific population data, is just guessing!!!

However, when I asked Dr. Begg the same question in Niassa, here was her answer. "The 1 lion per 1000 km2 works in Niassa as we have a low density of lions (2-3 lions / 100 km2). It matches the offtake operators are getting since we introduced age minimum."

So, perhaps in an area of low lion densities this is an accurate guideline, but I do not think it should be universal. However, I would agree strongly with erroring on the side of caution.

EXAMPLE OF CONSERVATION ALREADY IN PLACE - Our 5 blocks in western Tanzania incorporate 8 million acres in one big block, they all adjoin eachother. If using his number of 1 lion per 1000km2, that's 20.1 lions per year. Currently we get 19 lion on quota, only sell about 12 lion hunts per year, and lion hunting success will run 75-90% per year, just depending on hunting conditions, the hunter, etc, etc. I think we are operating well within his criteria, even though I DO NOT agree with his assessment. Based on their recommendation, and our current lion hunting practices, does there seem to be a need for CHANGE??

AGING LIONS: Oh my, this is a big one! The argument Mr. Packer makes, along with his collegues, and many of those in the hunting community, is that only lions of 6 yrs of age or older, should be harvested. And this age limit should be strictly enforced!!!
Ok great!! Please, someone show me a practical lion aging guide, valid for all the distinctive eco-systems throughout eastern & southern Africa? Not that I do not agree with the harvesting of ONLY old/mature lions, I certainly do. However, I have a HUGE problem with a "strictly enforced" age restriction, when science itself, is only accurate to within 10-12 months (1 year) of actual age. As a very experienced lion hunter, and now licensed professional hunter. I believe strongly that any professional should easily be able to identify male lions that are 4 yrs of age and younger (obviously immature), but anything past that is an educated guess. Thus, I would have major problems with a harshly enforced law, that could in fact be enforced by un-reliable data. I personally am more in favor of a strict quotaI in accordance with a 1 lion per 500km2 - 1000km2, based on localized population estimates.

Again, a quote from Dr. Begg as it pertains to lion aging. "Whatever age minimum you put in place you are going to have a problem with aging lions within 1 year of this, hence our support for the intermediate category. No I don't support a change in the minimum age to 5+ . I think this is an arbitrary distinction and given that ecological studies from other places have suggested that 6 is too young and it is more likely to be 7-8 we should be encouraging the PHS to shoot old lions not younger."

I wanted to add the following pictures to illustrate the difficulty in aging lions on the paw! All 4 of these lions come from the Kafue eco-system in Zambia, and all from the same concession. These lions were aged by Dr. White, with tooth x-rays, etc. I will give the exact same info, she gave to me.

This lion shot in 2010 was aged at approximately 4 yrs old.


This lion shot in 2010 was aged at approximately 5 yrs old.


This lion shot in 2009 was aged at approximately 6 yrs old.


This lion shot in 2010 was aged at 6 plus yrs old.


BELOW IS A QUICK OUTLINE ON HOW THE NIASSA LION QUOTA SYSTEM WORKS:
The categories are lions younger than 4, 4-6 and over 6. We work closely with PHs and hunting operators and the Management authority of Niassa. In agreement with Niassa operators ( 9 operators) at a meeting in 2006, lion regulations were put in place. According to these regulations PHs provide full information on all lions hunts (successful and unsuccessful) including number of baits, GPS positions, measurements, photos of noses, manes, general body condition, number of days effort etc In addition we visit all concessions at the end of each hunting season to measure, photograph and age the lions from tooth wear (we also x-ray the pulp cavity). Lions are placed into the three age categories . The data we have show that it is possible to place lions in these categories based on visual aging characteristics. A points system is used to determine the quotas for each concession for the next year. Basically operators receive a decrease in quota of one lion if the lion is under the age 4 (all operators can identify lions that are this young), if all the lions on their quota are over the age of 6, they receive an increase in quota of one lion for the next year. There is no penalty for not shooting all your lions on quota and only lions that are hunted are paid for. The 4-6 year age category is there because we appreciate that it is often difficult to tell the age of lions in this category as there is a lot of variation. If operators shoot one lion in this age category in a year they do not receive any penalty, but they receive a decrease in quota on one lion if all the lions on quota for that year are in that age category

I PERSONALLY WOULD BE HUGELY IN FAVOR OF A STANDARDIZED SYSTEM LIKE THIS, ALL ACROSS AFRICA, BUT SPECIFICALLY TAILORED TO EACH ECO-SYSTEM. This seems fair, accurate, and workable for all involved.

Below is another quote from Dr. Begg - Niassa Carnivore Project
"The most serious threat to lions across their range is not sport hunting it is snaring, poisoning and retaliatory killing and we should not lose sight of what we are trying to do i.e. conserve lions. Sometimes we can spend so much time arguing about sport hunting that has such extremes in opinion that we take away from time and effort that can actually be spent on conserving lions.. We need to keep sport hunting in perspective. That said, I believe that unsustainable sport hunting is one of the threats to lions but, unlike other threats, we can resolve this relatively easily. The only reason it is no longer a threat in Niassa is because we have instituted a system that works for everyone, it is monitored and enforced and based on sound data. We can now switch our efforts to mitigating other threats that are having a long term effect and are much harder to solve. As the Niassa Carnivore Project our vision is to secure lions in Niassa, finding solutions to unsustainable sport hunting is only one of a suite of threats we needed to deal with."

Having spent time with, and spoken to Dr. Paula White many times about the subject of lions/lion hunting, she too feels much the same way as Dr. Begg. The biggest threat to lions is not sport hunting, but the many other factors lions are dealing with across Africa. What I find most interesting of all is two-fold. One, kind of an ironic point. The only two "scientists" that are actually par-taking in, helping, and studying lions and lions hunters, in actual hunting concessions are women!! Secondly, after 7 plus years of experience within the hunting community, and working amongst hunters to help shape the ground rules, both of these scientists DO NOT FEEL AS THOUGH SPORT HUNTING IS A DETRIMENT TO THE LION!! Perhaps, if the general hunting community, the general public, and the rest of the SCIENTIFIC community was as experienced as these two, maybe they too would realize where the real problem lies. Lion hunting is not the threat to the lion. Uneducated opinions, scientific inadequacy, and general lack of knowledge, is the problem. First we must inform ourselves, and then work tirelessly to inform the public. We must put pressure on our own fraternity to hold themselves accountable, and to a higher standard of ethics. And lastly, we must work with the factual and real-life scientific data to squash those who make false claims, in the name of "SCIENCE."

Please consider making contributions to CONSERVATION FORCE - JOHN JACKSON III. www.conservationforce.org

GOod stuff Aaron. Now where you gonna publish this so that even more people can see it?

quote:

The most serious threat to lions across their range is not sport hunting it is snaring, poisoning and retaliatory killing

Aaron,

Great post. Agree with 95+% of all you say.

The above quote is spot on...esp...poisoning. I know personally of one entire pride getting wiped out with poison form retalitory cattle farmers.

Like you say...Hunters MUST lead the way and when lion hunting goes away...so goes the lion.

I have been preaching this from my soapbox since 2006 though...and...found out it is a tough sell!!! And it takes $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to make these projects work. Even you used to be sketical of scientists my friend (sorry I had to say it )

The reason many scientists play to the left is that is where they get easy money...and...THEY ARE NOT REALLY IN IT FOR THE LION...JUST THEIR CAREERS...WHICH THEY MUST FUND OR THEY ARE DONE.

If the lion is going to win...WE (hunters) must be in it FOR THE LION.

Now THAT was a well thought out, and even better written piece of information. Well done Aaron. This lion hunting situation is indeed one that will, and needs to be addressed quickly. Aaron points out the pitfalls of non science based wildlife management that is currently getting the "lion's share" of public face time via TV and press." Experts" that have no practical training, much less on the ground bush time, are the bane of this emotional issue and need our combined capitol and attention to counter their thinly veiled anti hunting platform.
Aaron is one of the most, if not the most, experienced lion hunter on AR from both the client, Professional Hunter ( licensed in Tanzania), and safari operator points of view. His experience was gained in the recognized lion hunting destinations throughout Africa and I bow to his input line by line. Bye the way,it follows my own thinking from my considerable time hunting and filming lion throughout Africa.
Much like a President who has never run a business or had to make a payroll, yet is plotting to manage our entire financial system, taking the word of these armchair experts is running the future into the ground where recovery will be difficult if not impossible.
Thank you for leading the charge Aaron, and I agree that John Jackson and Conservation Force are our best friend..hope...and voice in our attempt to bring sanity into this discussion.
Well done Bwana !!

Gotta put my 2 cents in: that, as passionate and detailed as your request is, unless you auction off a rifle or a hunt to raise funds, CF can expect about 2 cents in contributions from this site.

Hurrahs and back-slapping will avail you nothing.



:: :: ::

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Gotta put my 2 cents in: that, as passionate and detailed as your request is, unless you auction off a rifle or a hunt to raise funds, CF can expect about 2 cents in contributions from this site.

Hurrahs and back-slapping will avail you nothing.



:: :: ::

SteveGI,

I don't speak for Aaron only for myself...but...like my Granny used to tell me right before she knocked the hell out of me...If you don't have anything good to contribute just shut-the-f***-up!!!

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Gotta put my 2 cents in: that, as passionate and detailed as your request is, unless you auction off a rifle or a hunt to raise funds, CF can expect about 2 cents in contributions from this site.

Hurrahs and back-slapping will avail you nothing.



:: :: ::

SteveGI - Point well taken. My intention here is not necessarily to expect the AR crowd to finance the "Fight for the Lion", but to help inform our own, and also get some helpful input. However, I sincerely hope folks will contribute to Conservation Force.

We are currently working on putting together a group (think tank), made up of scientists, industry experts, organization leaders, etc. To help provide factual data/knowledge/experience which can be brought to bare, against those who spread false propoganda. To accomplish some of this, I believe we must first start with informing our own, and then we can work to inform the rest.

I'm not looking for back-slapping, I'm looking for imput that is valuable to the plight of the lion.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Gotta put my 2 cents in: that, as passionate and detailed as your request is, unless you auction off a rifle or a hunt to raise funds, CF can expect about 2 cents in contributions from this site.

Hurrahs and back-slapping will avail you nothing.



:: :: ::

SteveGI - Point well taken. My intention here is not necessarily to expect the AR crowd to finance the "Fight for the Lion", but to help inform our own, and also get some helpful input. However, I sincerely hope folks will contribute to Conservation Force.

We are currently working on putting together a group (think tank), made up of scientists, industry experts, organization leaders, etc. To help provide factual data/knowledge/experience which can be brought to bare, against those who spread false propoganda. To accomplish some of this, I believe we must first start with informing our own, and then we can work to inform the rest.

I'm not looking for back-slapping, I'm looking for imput that is valuable to the plight of the lion.

Aaron, I appreciate your reasoned reply - and my comment was not aimed at any of the previous posters.

I actually support your efforts and just wanted to point out that, aside from the data, your remarks ended with a suggestion that members make a contribution to CF. I remember when John Jackson got totally wiped out by Katrina. I mean he lost everything! Someone posted a request for contributions to CF then - and, unless I missed something - nobody paid much attention to it. It was sad.

Anyway, there was a suggestion embedded in my comments.

I hope your efforts are successful.

Steve

:: :: ::

Sport hunting of mature males is the ONLY thing that can keep the African Lion from extinction.
That much is fact...

Rich

Aaron,

I've read what you wrote, and Lane and I have been working for 3 yrs, to try and inform the hunters of the world that the only chance to defend sport hunting will be through respectable scientific research.

Case and point, at SCI Reno, I gave part of a seminar "Empowering Professional Hunters in Wildlife Conservation Genetics" and afterwards was fielding questions from the audience.

This question was asked "How can you ensure that information gathered from your research won't be used negatively against the hunting industry?"

My answer, was Hunters/hunting organizations can no longer bury their heads in the sand, saying all scientists are bad anti-hunters! Using this excuse, is no different than saying, "the best defense, is no offense!" I was at a meeting in zim in Nov with many organizations like panthera...and these groups better start scaring people, bc they are dangerous...and they operate in psuedo facts.

If more people don't start supporting solid scientific research, there will be nothing to defend hunting. And as Dr. Easter said, it takes big $$$$$...

Oryxhunter - I do agree, science needs to be at the fore-front of the argument. My biggest problem has always been the same, many of the so-called "expert scientists", have alterior motives, and VERY LITTLE to NO, actual experience/data to back up their claims. Look no further than my example of the "Kafue Lion Project", what a complete joke!

We have a plan, now putting it together is gonna take some time.

the bottom line is - do the africans, and their government, want to save lions? if not, there is virtually nothing we can do from here in the states. it's up to the government to recognize the many benefits of foreign hunters/photo tourists (and the dollars they leave in country), then take steps to preserve lions, and this includes controlling poachers and limiting habitat destruction. the title of this thread should read, "only africans can save them", because that's the reality. nice write-up though.

quote:

Originally posted by LBGuy:
the bottom line is - do the africans, and their government, want to save lions? if not, there is virtually nothing we can do from here in the states. it's up to the government to recognize the many benefits of foreign hunters/photo tourists (and the dollars they leave in country), then take steps to preserve lions, and this includes controlling poachers and limiting habitat destruction. the title of this thread should read, "only africans can save them", because that's the reality. nice write-up though.

LBguy,

If we took that attitude...lions would be gone already! Just like Saeed said there were none in Ambosili NP anymore due to Masai poisoning. The general African public not only doesn't like them...THEY HATE THEM! It IS up to US!!! Hopefully...we will step to the plate.

quote:

Originally posted by LBGuy:
the bottom line is - do the africans, and their government, want to save lions? if not, there is virtually nothing we can do from here in the states. it's up to the government to recognize the many benefits of foreign hunters/photo tourists (and the dollars they leave in country), then take steps to preserve lions, and this includes controlling poachers and limiting habitat destruction. the title of this thread should read, "only africans can save them", because that's the reality. nice write-up though.

LBGuy - Certainly some Africans do have concern for the lion, and even more need help seeing why its important to have concern for the lion! So yes, there's plenty we can do from here in the states. Win or lose, I intend to do everything I can, rather than sit on the fence as claim, "well there's nothing I can do about it".

Ultimately, you might be right when you say that only Africans can save them. But, Africans need a whole lotta help recognizing this fact.

A thought and a question...
Thought:
It is obvious to me from the conflicting (surely biased) information written in Aarons post, then the comments by Aaron, Lane, Steve and Oryxhunter, that there is something fundamentally wrong with "science" today. It would appear that today Science is no longer about the acquisition, organization and presentation of facts, instead it is about the acquisition of funding and everyone knows that is done by giving creedence to or pushing someones political agenda. In essence, you could remove the subject of "lions" or "hunting" from this discussion and replace them with "abortion" or "global warming" or any other hot topic and you would find that consistantly the "science" is determined by the politics that funds it. In essence, this causes the road block we are currently sitting at, people on both sides of the argument want big decisions to be made in their favor that affect the lives of others, and the majority that are sitting on the side who have the numbers to sway the arguement one way or the other are constantly torn because they understand they are getting a biased presentation from both sides. Until "Science" comes up with a way to distribute and acquire funding in a way that doesn't tilt the results, the problems that science is trying to solve will remain. I personally don't see how this is possible, as money corrupts all.

Question:
How "proven" is the science of aging carnivores using tooth x-rays? I know it was pushed in deer for a while, and from my recollection, was proven to be "junk" science.

The biggest thread to all wildlife is the growth of population all over the world. We have to conserve nature in a network to give animals a future in a self-sustaining population.
It's not all about hunting, it's about money, but fortunatly people are willing to pay a lot for a lion.

Aaron,

What has been really scary was that Zambia's Minister of Tourism ordered our wildlife department ZAWA to cease hunting Lion with immediate effect? However after lengthy negotiations we have had 60% of the Lion quota returned. Quotas have been slashed from 65 to 45 for 2011. Prime areas retain 3 each and secondary areas have gone from 4 to 1 each. Unfenced game ranches (private properties) have none to date? Each of us now have to argue our case and justify why we should be awarded a quota. Guilty until proven innocent.

With the exception of Paula there has been no research of Lions in Zambia. But what can the wildlife department do when the powers that be decide to dictate policy?

Why did the Minister decide that morning and before breakfast to abolish Lion hunting in Zambia?

Now hear this.

The Board Chairman of ZAWA has endorsed and approved the import of Lions into Zambia to be hunted under a fenced environment. We know of two game farmers who have already received Lions from south Africa and there is many more to come.

It has also been suggested that the GMA's should be divided up into large fenced concessions and we should import Lions for hunting and that is how we address our so called Lion problem?

Well screw the researches and whoever 'advised' the Minister and it is they and the likes of this slanderous Joubert character who will kill off the last of the free ranging Lion, and ultimately destroy vast pristine and protected habitats.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
Aaron,

What has been really scary was that Zambia's Minister of Tourism ordered our wildlife department ZAWA to cease hunting Lion with immediate effect? However after lengthy negotiations we have had 60% of the Lion quota returned. Quotas have been slashed from 65 to 45 for 2011. Prime areas retain 3 each and secondary areas have gone from 4 to 1 each. Unfenced game ranches (private properties) have none to date? Each of us now have to argue our case and justify why we should be awarded a quota. Guilty until proven innocent.

With the exception of Paula there has been no research of Lions in Zambia. But what can the wildlife department do when the powers that be decide to dictate policy?

Why did the Minister decide that morning and before breakfast to abolish Lion hunting in Zambia?

Now hear this.

The Board Chairman of ZAWA has endorsed and approved the import of Lions into Zambia to be hunted under a fenced environment. We know of two game farmers who have already received Lions from south Africa and there is many more to come.

It has also been suggested that the GMA's should be divided up into large fenced concessions and we should import Lions for hunting and that is how we address our so called Lion problem?

Well screw the researches and whoever 'advised' the Minister and it is they and the likes of this slanderous Joubert character who will kill off the last of the free ranging Lion, and ultimately destroy vast pristine and protected habitats.

Like a bad fucking dream.........

Brett

Econ 101:

$Zambian Lion$ < $Tanzanian Lion$

$Zambian Lion$ > or = $Tanzanian Lion$

Brett

Aaron
Well written and well thought out and most importantly FACTUAL

Perhaps Alan Bunn and Ira Larivers could put this article in their respective magazine. I can certainly ask Ira if he would be prepared to do it. It may be preaching to the converted but getting facts out there is better than sitting quietly

I have one question for the likes of Mr Joubert

Does your research show any factual evidence or even refer to any area where Lions populations have improved with the existence of hunting quotas??

The Save Conservancy in Zimbabwe is a prime example. 505Gibbs is right. Science is not about science, its about funding

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
Aaron,

What has been really scary was that Zambia's Minister of Tourism ordered our wildlife department ZAWA to cease hunting Lion with immediate effect? However after lengthy negotiations we have had 60% of the Lion quota returned. Quotas have been slashed from 65 to 45 for 2011. Prime areas retain 3 each and secondary areas have gone from 4 to 1 each. Unfenced game ranches (private properties) have none to date? Each of us now have to argue our case and justify why we should be awarded a quota. Guilty until proven innocent.

With the exception of Paula there has been no research of Lions in Zambia. But what can the wildlife department do when the powers that be decide to dictate policy?

Why did the Minister decide that morning and before breakfast to abolish Lion hunting in Zambia?

Now hear this.

The Board Chairman of ZAWA has endorsed and approved the import of Lions into Zambia to be hunted under a fenced environment. We know of two game farmers who have already received Lions from south Africa and there is many more to come.

It has also been suggested that the GMA's should be divided up into large fenced concessions and we should import Lions for hunting and that is how we address our so called Lion problem?

Well screw the researches and whoever 'advised' the Minister and it is they and the likes of this slanderous Joubert character who will kill off the last of the free ranging Lion, and ultimately destroy vast pristine and protected habitats.

This does not surprise me, Joubert is friends and business partners with the president of Botswana, Khama who is anti-hunting as well. This contact gives Joubert a short,direct line to other African heads of State, except for Mugabe of course, to preach his anti-hunting gospel. This, coupled with his status as explorer-in-residence for National Geographic along with the propaganda films that he spews out, makes Joubert the single biggest threat to lion hunting and the fate of the lion, far greater than that of poaching or loss of habitat.

ZimFrosty,

There is no point in asking Joubert about his research as he is not a scientist and not qualified to take a scientific position.

My point exactly

quote:

it is they and the likes of this slanderous Joubert character who will kill off the last of the free ranging Lion, and ultimately destroy vast pristine and protected habitats.

now you are getting down to the nut cutting. These peoples agendas are not about lions or hunting or conservation or preservation. It is about CONTROL and the money that comes with it.

505 gibbs,

You are 100% correct.

quote:

Question:
How "proven" is the science of aging carnivores using tooth x-rays? I know it was pushed in deer for a while, and from my recollection, was proven to be "junk" science.

505,

I think tooth x-rays will stand muster as we are looking at the pulp-cavity and NOT wear like guides on WT deer.

Pulp-cavity (tooth's root canal) narrows with age fairly consistently.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 505 gibbs:
A thought and a question...
Thought:
It is obvious to me from the conflicting (surely biased) information written in Aarons post, then the comments by Aaron, Lane, Steve and Oryxhunter, that there is something fundamentally wrong with "science" today. It would appear that today Science is no longer about the acquisition, organization and presentation of facts, instead it is about the acquisition of funding and everyone knows that is done by giving creedence to or pushing someones political agenda. In essence, you could remove the subject of "lions" or "hunting" from this discussion and replace them with "abortion" or "global warming" or any other hot topic and you would find that consistantly the "science" is determined by the politics that funds it. In essence, this causes the road block we are currently sitting at, people on both sides of the argument want big decisions to be made in their favor that affect the lives of others, and the majority that are sitting on the side who have the numbers to sway the arguement one way or the other are constantly torn because they understand they are getting a biased presentation from both sides.

"Science's Job"...if you will...is to present the proven facts and let-the-chips-fall-where-they -may. The problem is that alot of media out there is NOT peer-reviewed so things get in print that are NOT actually proven...ususally someones bias.

Until "Science" comes up with a way to distribute and acquire funding in a way that doesn't tilt the results, the problems that science is trying to solve will remain.

Unfortunately this is true...alwasy has been...see my tag-line..."The Golden-Rule" applies again. Unfortunately...some "scientists" (if we want to call them that...have a RED LIGHT on their office door.

The main problem is that John Q. Public does not know a "peer reviewed scientific study in an un-biased journal" from an add in the TV Guide.

Actually...the add in the TV Guide will produce more dollars...why we are in the shape we are in!

quote:

505,

I think tooth x-rays will stand muster as we are looking at the pulp-cavity and NOT wear like guides on WT deer.

Pulp-cavity (tooth's root canal) narrows with age fairly consistently.

I was actually referring to the use of what I assume is the same science used on deer in years past (not tooth wear), which like I said, was shown to be innaccurate.

Aaron:

How much money does CF need?

I gave once before and am happy to contribute again.

First let me state, that I do work for a University and work in the wildlife conservation field.

I would like to see the "scientific papers" that are produced from Conservation Force...

I will restate what Lane has said above..."scientific papers, are published in scientific journals, and are PEER reviewed!" So you can't just say, "well we sampled 5 lions, and we thought they were less than 4 yrs of age because their manes weren't black! Therefore all lions kill in xyz countries are prolly all less than 4 years of age." Because, other scientists, who are experts in their field, will call BS!!!!

All these, brochures, newsletters...blah blah...are total BS, because they do not follow the scientific method...and carry no weight in the fight against anything.

Most of these "experts", wouldn't know where to start, so unless CF is submitting papers to peer review journals, they are not the asnwer. Sorry...universities are pretty much your only hope. And finding reputable researchers who are leaders in their field is the only hope we have!

Money:

OK...if you guys really want to know what kind of money helps...I'll tell you.

The guys at Texas A&M have a program in the works which could answer questions, validate facts, dispute myths, and find new facts for lions and all other African animals as well.

But they need money...and...they need self-sustaining money which means a Foundation Account.

A Foundation Account is an entity (if you will) in which money is deposited in the Texas A&M Foundation System. This money will draw interest and be looked after by competent money managers.

The only source of this kind of money is donations and grants. With a doantion...one can have input as to what the money is used for...IE: research on lions, ele, etc. etc. The language can be written into the Foundation Consitution.

But...to set up a meaningful self-sustaining foundation...one in which equipment can be bought...staff can be hired...work can be accomplished...you are talking serious money.

Dr. Jim Derr and myself originally estimated ~$1,000,000.00 dollars to get off to a good start and be able to self-sustain. Even this will take the constant aquisition of new grants and trickle in of new out-side dollars.

quote:

Originally posted by Oryxhunter1983:
First let me state, that I do work for a University and work in the wildlife conservation field.

I would like to see the "scientific papers" that are produced from Conservation Force...

I will restate what Lane has said above..."scientific papers, are published in scientific journals, and are PEER reviewed!" So you can't just say, "well we sampled 5 lions, and we thought they were less than 4 yrs of age because their manes weren't black! Therefore all lions kill in xyz countries are prolly all less than 4 years of age." Because, other scientists, who are experts in their field, will call BS!!!!

All these, brochures, newsletters...blah blah...are total BS, because they do not follow the scientific method...and carry no weight in the fight against anything.

Most of these "experts", wouldn't know where to start, so unless CF is submitting papers to peer review journals, they are not the asnwer. Sorry...universities are pretty much your only hope. And finding reputable researchers who are leaders in their field is the only hope we have!

Oryxhunter - I recognize your passion, and I recognize the need for science, but its also obvious you have a whole lot to learn about how the WHOLE process works, and just exactly who John Jackson is, and what he does.

Guys, I'll try to answer some of the other questions a little later.

Lets NOT (in true AR fashion) turn Aaron's from-the-heart-post (if Aaron has one ) into a bitch-fest and stay focussed on the purpose...saving the lion.

Aaron,
I'm not making myself clear...I have nothing against CF or John Jackson, I've read his stuff and met the guy, it's fine.

What I'm trying to say is, the scientific world, where real research is done, operates on published scientific papers. If hunters plan on fighting the media...and other organization who operate without PROVEN facts...they will need Proven/Accepted/endorsed facts from the scientific community.

quote:

If hunters plan on fighting the media...and other organization who operate without PROVEN facts...they will need Proven/Accepted/endorsed facts from the scientific community.

Gentlemen we need solutions. One is to get a hunting body to challenge Joubert and his false accusations.

quote:

Sport hunting of mature males is the ONLY thing that can keep the African Lion from extinction.
That much is fact...

I'm not sure anything is saved from extinction by putting medium caliber holes in it...


By this logic, the greatest threat to the lion is the mature male lion.

quote:

I'm not sure anything is saved from extinction by putting medium caliber holes in it...

you have missed what the safari business has done for the wildlife over almost the entire continent of Africa.