http://www.traveller24.com/Exp...ion-hunting-20180115

Cape Town - The Dallas Safari Club, one of the largest trophy hunting organisations has come out strongly against captive-bred lion hunting, otherwise known as ‘canned’ lion hunting as unethical and not contributing to conservation of wild lions.

Captive-bred lion hunting is legal in South Africa despite reservations from many trophy hunters and conservationists. In November last year the Professional Hunting Association of South Africa (PHASA) controversially reversed its previous policy against hunting of captive bred lion and approved the hunting of captive bred lions as a legitimate form of hunting. The South African Department of Environmental Affairs believes trophy hunting captive-bred lions helps toward the conservation of wild lions by deflecting trophy hunters away from vulnerable wild populations.

MUST-SEE: #ShockWildlifeTruths: PHASA backtracks and approves 'canned' lion hunting

However, in a statement, the Dallas Safari Club (DSC) says that “to date there is no evidence or scientific research to suggest that captive bred lion hunting contributes to the conservation of wild lion,” noting that “they have a responsibility to support and encourage ethical hunting practices, even where ethical practices do not align with what is legally permitted.”
Disregard for fair-chase

The organisation’s biggest concern is that the practice of shooting captive lions completely disregards one of the fundamental concepts of hunting, namely the fair-chase. The DSC statement says that “After a thorough analysis and deliberation, the Board of Dallas Safari Club has concluded that the practice of captive bred lion hunting is not a practice that is in keeping with its values of ethical and fair chase hunting.”

Concluding in the clearest terms that “Therefore, the Dallas Safari Club does not support the practice of captive bred lion hunting.”

ALSO SEE: Canned lion hunting: What difference does a month make?

The Dallas Safari Club are not the only organisation to voice concern over South Africa’s canned hunting practices.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the federal agency responsible for issuing import permits for importation of hunting trophies, does not allow the import of captive-bred lion trophies from South Africa, while the African Professional Hunter’s Association (APHA) in Tanzania and the Operators and Professional Hunting Associations of Africa (OPHAA) were both appalled by PHASA’s decision to support canned hunting. OPHAA have gone so far as to suspend PHASA’s membership.

SEE: #ShockWildlifeTruths: Elephant trophy hunting under spotlight again

It seems then that PHASA are increasingly isolated with their stance.
'Back towards more traditional hunting practices'

Conservationists have welcomed the announcement by the Dallas Safari Club. Kelly Marnewick, Senior Trade Officer of the Wildlife in Trade programme at the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) says that “After PHASA’s change in their constitution to allow canned hunting where they lost a lot of members as well as international credibility, it’s encouraging to see ethical hunting organisations coming out strongly against the practice.”

Marnewick says the DSC statement shows there is a definite trend back towards more traditional hunting practices rather the “quick and easy fix that we’ve seen from some trophy hunters recently.”

Other concerns are the removing of lion cubs from their mothers at just a few weeks for the cub petting industry and the ill management of sub adult lions for walking-with-lion experiences.

SEE: UPDATE: US still issuing permits for elephant trophies from Zim

Another contentious issue is the legal selling of captive-bred lion bones to Asia once a lion has been shot.

“We urge the DEA and the few remaining South African operators that still support captive/canned predator hunting to take note of the statements wording,” says Ian Michler, creator of the film Blood Lions. “We also call on Dallas Safari Club to ensure the enforcement of their stand, and all hunting organisations, including Safari Club International (SCI) to push for an end to captive or canned predator hunting. A significant step in this regard would be to prohibit known captive predator breeders and hunters from exhibiting at hunting conventions around the world.”

(Source: Conservation Action Trust)

These words will come back and bite us all.

How are they going to defend farm bred plains game hunting now?

How about put and take?

The antis are winning, with our help!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
These words will come back and bite us all.

How are they going to defend farm bred plains game hunting now?

How about put and take?

The antis are winning, with our help!

Most true.

Put and take captive reared hunting is what will be the end of hunting.

If all hunting was like that, I would sell my guns and join the anti movement.

We do not need operations like that. We certainly should not want them.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Put and take captive reared hunting is what will be the end of hunting.

If all hunting was like that, I would sell my guns and join the anti movement.

We do not need operations like that. We certainly should not want them.

That is like saying, if the world does not have as many wild places as it did when we were younger, then it is not worth hunting.
I don't see the world returning to the wild place it once was.So, it is best to make the best of what we have.
I am sure those hunting over a hundred years ago would be disgusted with how most hunt today.

quote:

” noting that “they have a responsibility to support and encourage ethical hunting practices, even where ethical practices do not align with what is legally permitted.”

Thanks DSC.

It is not necessarily about wild life places. It is about hunters self regulating to ensure a fair chase environment whether it is a wilderness area, your local WMA or a private ranch in South Africa that is managing for wildlife instead of cattle.

When game becomes stock it is not hunting. When pursuit becomes a certainty that a particular animal will be killed it is not hunting. When an animal is poorly shot and shot only to fill a space on a wall or diamondclub status it is not hunting. When hunters allow these types of activities as part of its fabric we should loose.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
It is not necessarily about wild life places. It is about hunters self regulating to ensure a fair chase environment whether it is a wilderness area, your local WMA or a private ranch in South Africa that is managing for wildlife instead of cattle.

When game becomes stock it is not hunting. When pursuit becomes a certainty that a particular animal will be killed it is not hunting. When an animal is poorly shot and shot only to fill a space on a wall or diamondclub status it is not hunting. When hunters allow these types of activities as part of its fabric we should loose.

We all have opinions to what is ethical or not and we may feel that others should accept our opinion and disregard theirs.It should not be a one way street.Also,it seems that you are not aware of this but the places in which you hunt and believe are wild have been possibly stocked with game.

I am not talking about a one way street the basic principles I expounded are universally accepted ethics norms of hunting that is portrayed by hunting organizations, hunters, and accepted by the non hunting public.

Why do you folks think Boone and Crocket Club of North America does not recognize estate hunting.



You

I agree with what DSC is saying, but I would offer that high fence hunting over bait is a bigger issue in the USA than anywhere else. I would love to see them come out against hunting over bait for enhanced horns in TEXAS>>>>>

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

” noting that “they have a responsibility to support and encourage ethical hunting practices, even where ethical practices do not align with what is legally permitted.”

Thanks DSC.

+1 . . . good to see more and more hunters acknowledging the importance of hunting ethics and the need for hunters collectively to do a better job of getting their own house in order.

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
I agree with what DSC is saying, but I would offer that high fence hunting over bait is a bigger issue in the USA than anywhere else. I would love to see them come out against hunting over bait for enhanced horns in TEXAS>>>>>

I agree and there seems to be a double standard here. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Open a hunting magazine nowadays and there are numerous deer farms offering record class heads for sale across the States.

Years ago I traveled from Midwest farm country to Mississippi on a deer hunt. Trees and cover everywhere and a liberal deer season. I was dismayed to hear most if not all properties were leased. Thinking myself lucky that wasn't the case where I lived...I was smug. Here at home 15 years later with countless fence rows, woods, and brush tore out and bulldozed, a rabbit better pack a lunch to find a place to live. Now I see leasing in a different light. I don't like the idea of a canned hunt. But I hate the idea of developing the land. If you can't make it pay one way you'll find another and the critters be damned.

quote:

These words will come back and bite us all.

How are they going to defend farm bred plains game hunting now?

How about put and take?

The antis are winning, with our help!

Once again Saeed, the concept of "Personal Ethics" of a few will end up hurting many.

People simply refuse to believe that Public opinion concerning the hunting of Lions, Elephants, Leopards, Rhinos and Giraffes has dr6astically changed, and it is NOT just among anti's.

Even hunters are asking WHY hunt species whose numbers are declining.

Part of the problem is folks wanting to say anything behind a fence is canned, it's not.

Was it in the old Pogo comic strip where he said "we have found the enemy and it is us" ?

The Dallas Safari Club did us no favor by going public with the feelings of some of the membership.

That is true, but the bigger part of the problem deals with certain people doing everything possible to FORCE their concept of ethics down everyone else's throat.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

Once again Saeed, the concept of "Personal Ethics" of a few will end up hurting many.

Your obviously lack of insight borders on comical . . . you have incorrectly assessed the issue by 180 degrees. It is the lack of a reasonable set of hunting ethics by a few that will end up hurting the hunting rights of many.

SCI did us no favors and from folks in the room directly contributed to the uplisiting of lion by failing to adopt/endorse the 6 year, prideless lion rule.

quote:

Your obviously lack of insight borders on comical . . . you have incorrectly assessed the issue by 180 degrees. It is the lack of a reasonable set of hunting ethics by a few that will end up hurting the hunting rights of many.

No, I have pretty good insight on the issue.

Hunters are playing right into the hands of those that want to end hunting.

Realistically, when hunters are in the field, who is going to be with them to enforce those ethical standards?

The concept that has to be looked at in the overall scheme of things is Do Hunters Personal Ethics matter to those wanting to end hunting?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

Once again Saeed, the concept of "Personal Ethics" of a few will end up hurting many.

Your obviously lack of insight borders on comical . . . you have incorrectly assessed the issue by 180 degrees. It is the lack of a reasonable set of hunting ethics by a few that will end up hurting the hunting rights of many.

Not really!

What we are doing is pandering tot he antis, nothing else.

This is the hunting version of “me too “!

If these game farms/ranches can't make ends meet that will be the end of them. Picture a sterile farm field, cattle pasture, or worse a mine, shantytown, a faunal desert.

quote:

Realistically, when hunters are in the field, who is going to be with them to enforce those ethical standards?

None other than the hunter - by way of moral values.

I would rather see a cattle farm or wheat fields but obviously the financial returns will never match those gained from Lion breeding - let's also not forget genetic modification, as in "White Lions".

The mine would have already been there if there were minerals to be exploited.

quote:

None other than the hunter - by way of moral values.

But how will the rest of us ACTUALLY know what the hunter did?

Which is more important right now, finding common ground that will unite and attract more hunters or continue creating lines of division among hunters which only helps the anti's?

quote:

Not really!

What we are doing is pandering tot he antis, nothing else.

This is the hunting version of “me too “!

With all due respect Saeed, who is pandering to the antis? Oh, by the way, who owns Emirates Airlines?

***
Khaleej Times Aviation (August 6, 2015)

UAE airlines ahead in hunting trophy ban

Emirates and Etihad were months ahead of their American counterparts in banning the transport of hunting trophies on-board their aircraft.

"As part of our efforts to prevent the illegal trade of hunting trophies of elephant, rhinoceros, lion and tiger, Emirates SkyCargo, has decided that effective May 15, 2015, we will not accept any kind of hunting trophies of these animals for carriage on Emirates services," an Emirates spokesperson said in a statement.

The airline had previously already had in place a ban on products and parts of endangered species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites), which includes hunting trophies. An Etihad spokesperson told Khaleej Times that the airline has a similar policy in place.

"We have a comprehensive policy in place which bans the carriage of hunting trophies using animal products," the spokesperson said.
***

quote:

But how will the rest of us ACTUALLY know what the hunter did?

What the eyes do not see the heart does not grieve.

My friend, if a man has no moral values, what he does with his life is his problem and could eventually lead to his downfall, something along the lines of the fellow who recently got stung over a dodgy Leopard trophy.

We as hunters of good upstanding should police ourselves and abide by the unspoken laws of fair chase ... if we want to call ourselves hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

Once again Saeed, the concept of "Personal Ethics" of a few will end up hurting many.

Your obviously lack of insight borders on comical . . . you have incorrectly assessed the issue by 180 degrees. It is the lack of a reasonable set of hunting ethics by a few that will end up hurting the hunting rights of many.

Not really!

What we are doing is pandering tot he antis, nothing else.

This is the hunting version of “me too “!

Way back when, Donald Ker appealed to the game department of Kenya to ban the use of recorded lions when hunting after they saw the effectiveness of it when trying to film them. I wonder which antis he was pandering to...

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
These words will come back and bite us all.

How are they going to defend farm bred plains game hunting now?

How about put and take?

The antis are winning, with our help!

Very true Saeed...+1

It is, to use one of Saeed's favorite terms , "Mind Boggling" that hunters seem incapable of comprehending that discussions such as this one prove if nothing else that hunters really do not support each other.

I do not know if this site has any way of tracking the number of "Looky-Loos"/ Lurkers that view this site daily, but my guess is there are quite a few and probably a lot of them are not hunters.

Odds are that a lot of those folks are not hunters and are simply lurking, looking for such dividing issues as this discussion is pointing out.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

. . . discussions such as this one prove if nothing else that hunters really do not support each other.

You are absolutely correct. For example, I do not support the "hunter" on the Trophy documentary that was "hunting" a crocodile. If someone calling themselves a "hunter" chooses to engage in reprehensible and irresponsible behavior in the name of hunting, I do not feel compelled to support them just because they label their conduct hunting. You want call the crocodile "hunter" a fellow hunter and defend his conduct, go for it. I prefer to condemn it. Hopefully more folks concerned about the future of the sport will do the same.

Your preaching to the choir on this one and I have not watched the video.

I do not watch the videos where "hunters" are "High Fiving" each other over the deer they shot.

But in this day and time of Instant Gratifacation and "End Zone" celebrations, who is going to try and convince those folks that they are giving hunters in general a bad image?

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

. . . who is going to try and convince those folks that they are giving hunters in general a bad image?

Me . . . and apparently not you.

quote:

and apparently not you.

You are correct. If they are comfortable with what they are doing and if what they are doing is LEGAL, it is none of my business.

Nor is it my business to tell someone that they should not refer to themselves as being hunters, nor should they be hunting because they are not a member of the required level of society nor do they adhere to the "Ethical Standards" of the Hunting Elite.

So yes Jines you are right!

After 50 years of what I foolishly believed as being a hunter, you have proved thast folks like me are not part of the level of society that actualy knows what it is like to be a "Real" hunter!

Guess now I can go ahead and throw away the antlers/skulls/tanned hides/pictures and other mementos IO collected over those 50 years and tear up this years hunting license because I do not meet the requirements some believe a REAL Hunter should have and aspire to.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

. . . discussions such as this one prove if nothing else that hunters really do not support each other.

You are absolutely correct. For example, I do not support the "hunter" on the Trophy documentary that was "hunting" a crocodile. If someone calling themselves a "hunter" chooses to engage in reprehensible and irresponsible behavior in the name of hunting, I do not feel compelled to support them just because they label their conduct hunting. You want call the crocodile "hunter" a fellow hunter and defend his conduct, go for it. I prefer to condemn it. Hopefully more folks concerned about the future of the sport will do the same.

Crazyhorse: Trophy is not a traditional jerk wagon hunting show. It is a documentary that was meant to torpedo hunting industry and international sport hunting. The anti filmmakers had a revelation that international sport hunting is a value to Africa. That said it shows the perversion of hunting with unethical hand reared put and take outfitters and shooters who are taking over the soul of hunting. It is on iTunes for free watch it. You will better informed. I dare you to watch and say we should not challenge to remove the currently legal but unethical practices.

Practices that I know you and Saeed do not support. In fact Saeed has often condemned these practices and SCI for supporting or allowing these practices. Yet, he now feels he needs to defend. I say defend because he is arguing with Mjines and I to allow these practices to continue.

Watch it. I say one last time. If I believed that the majority of hunting was as practiced I would sell my guns and become an anti. But if we do not act to shine a light and eradicate the cockroaches, we deserve to be beaten and banned for allowing such practices to exist in our camp.

quote:

I do not watch the videos where "hunters" are "High Fiving" each other over the deer they shot.

They are there for the rest of the world to see (even if you don't) and if you condone such actions and support their kind, you are one of them.

quote:

if you condone such actions and support their kind,

Ah, but that is where you are assuming something you know nothing about, because I neither condone or support such behavior, hence the reason I have not watched hunting shows since the old American Sportsman TV show aired.

L.Heym, I am not defending SCI, in fact I blame them for a lot of the problem along with Boone & Crockett/Pope and Young, for that matter ANY record keeping organization.

They all share the guilt in moving/changing hunting into a Competitive Sport. Honestly, if anyone can or will how many would be worried about shooting a "Book" animal, if the "Book" only recognised the animals measurements and made NO REFERENCE to the hunter that killed it?

Boone & Crockett talked about it a few years back and it was not received well.

If you do not fight against them you are with them. They wear our brand. We cannot allow that.

There can be no fence setting.

Why do we never hear one word about a how unethical a Bongo hunt in Texas on 200 acres is?
Or a Scimitar Oryx on 500 acres?

But as soon as anyone say FENCED in Africa there is a huge issue.
What is the difference in shooting a White Tail Deer on 200 acres and a Lion on 1500 ha?
Most of you on this forum don't see anything wrong with shooting a deer on 200 acres but once anyone
say anything about Africa there is a problem.

Guys, wake up!!!!!!! It's not the "put and take" or size of the property that is the problem!!!!!
It is the species!!!!

Limpopo: You are right. Both are a perversion.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Limpopo: You are right. Both are a perversion.

Exactly, and why should we have any reservations about simply saying so?