quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I could be wrong but the last elephants taken over 120 lbs were in Ethiopia in the mid 80's.

Goeff Broom took one in Longido, TZ in the 90's over 100 but I don't think it topped 120.

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I could be wrong but the last elephants taken over 120 lbs were in Ethiopia in the mid 80's.

Goeff Broom took one in Longido, TZ in the 90's over 100 but I don't think it topped 120.

Had to drag out my SCI Record Book circa 1990:

3/86 - 145 X 143 - Ethiopia, Akobo Valley
7/86 - 144 x 138 - Ethiopia, Gambella
2/89 - 125 x 133 - Ethiopia, Goderre
5/86 - 123 x 121 - Ethiopia, Ilubabor

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I could be wrong but the last elephants taken over 120 lbs were in Ethiopia in the mid 80's.

Goeff Broom took one in Longido, TZ in the 90's over 100 but I don't think it topped 120.

Had to drag out my SCI Record Book circa 1990:

3/86 - 145 X 143 - Ethiopia, Akobo Valley
7/86 - 144 x 138 - Ethiopia, Gambella
2/89 - 125 x 133 - Ethiopia, Goderre
5/86 - 123 x 121 - Ethiopia, Ilubabor

Are there any similar trophies coming out or remaining in ethopia?

Killing old tuskers is justified at best with either the hunter gets it or the poacher get its. The old beast is dead anyway. But this is not hunting as conservation.

I would like to see other Zim PH some who specialize in hunting elephants to comment. The only thing I heard in conversations was the drought forced the old bull out of national park. Hunting a similar one after a long walk with a double would 99.99999 percent entail joining a poaching party in a national park - there are no animals like this left in any regular huning area.

What I don't get is all the hoopla over cecil and even wild lion aging when end of day a lion is a short life span predator - these elephants - old tuskers - are iconic - they won't be replaced if ever for decades.

At least kruger will save a few.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I could be wrong but the last elephants taken over 120 lbs were in Ethiopia in the mid 80's.

Goeff Broom took one in Longido, TZ in the 90's over 100 but I don't think it topped 120.

Had to drag out my SCI Record Book circa 1990:

3/86 - 145 X 143 - Ethiopia, Akobo Valley
7/86 - 144 x 138 - Ethiopia, Gambella
2/89 - 125 x 133 - Ethiopia, Goderre
5/86 - 123 x 121 - Ethiopia, Ilubabor

Are there any similar trophies coming out or remaining in ethopia?

Killing old tuskers is justified at best with either the hunter gets it or the poacher get its. The old beast is dead anyway. But this is not hunting as conservation.

I would like to see other Zim PH some who specialize in hunting elephants to comment. The only thing I heard in conversations was the drought forced the old bull out of national park. Hunting a similar one after a long walk with a double would 99.99999 percent entail joining a poaching party in a national park - there are no animals like this left in any regular huning area.

What I don't get is all the hoopla over cecil and even wild lion aging when end of day a lion is a short life span predator - these elephants - old tuskers - are iconic - they won't be replaced if ever for decades.

At least kruger will save a few.

Mike

Afraid not Mike it was pretty much over by the early/mid 90's. Rich Elliot, who posts here from time to time was there and saw it. On a post some time ago Rich said "Gambella is a cornfield now". There are still pockets of elephant there but don't expect anything big. It was a nice little run for those that made it there in 86' especially.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I could be wrong but the last elephants taken over 120 lbs were in Ethiopia in the mid 80's.

Goeff Broom took one in Longido, TZ in the 90's over 100 but I don't think it topped 120.

Had to drag out my SCI Record Book circa 1990:

3/86 - 145 X 143 - Ethiopia, Akobo Valley
7/86 - 144 x 138 - Ethiopia, Gambella
2/89 - 125 x 133 - Ethiopia, Goderre
5/86 - 123 x 121 - Ethiopia, Ilubabor

Are there any similar trophies coming out or remaining in ethopia?

Killing old tuskers is justified at best with either the hunter gets it or the poacher get its. The old beast is dead anyway. But this is not hunting as conservation.

I would like to see other Zim PH some who specialize in hunting elephants to comment. The only thing I heard in conversations was the drought forced the old bull out of national park. Hunting a similar one after a long walk with a double would 99.99999 percent entail joining a poaching party in a national park - there are no animals like this left in any regular huning area.

What I don't get is all the hoopla over cecil and even wild lion aging when end of day a lion is a short life span predator - these elephants - old tuskers - are iconic - they won't be replaced if ever for decades.

At least kruger will save a few.

Mike

Afraid not Mike it was pretty much over by the early/mid 90's. Rich Elliot, who posts here from time to time was there and saw it. On a post some time ago Rich said "Gambella is a cornfield now". There are still pockets of elephant there but don't expect anything big. It was a nice little run for those that made it there in 86' especially.

Sad - I hate it when this happens. I know for a fact African wild life can come back fast with care effort and a few good bore wells. But elephants to reach a majestic size will take a human lifetime.

I hate it when the justification is the hunter gets it before the poacher does - that may be reality but it significantly diminishes the whole hunting experience and tradition.

A side story my first hunt in Africa - I was hanging out in the lodge at save safaris in the afternoon looking at baboons as Leon duPlessis took his nap Mike Payne came over I wanted to chat with him and saw there was a coffee table book on Tuskers of Kruger. I flipped thru the book and spoke to Mike Payne. Mike's grandfather, father, him and soon his son will have hunted elephants in zim - it's a family tradition. Surrounded by 2000 elephants in the save - I flipped thru the book and asked when will there be only like these Kruger Tuskers in the save. He said not in our lifetime - I was 39 then and Mike a year or two older.

Once they are gone - they are gone for a long time.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

I am not being anti hunting or anything like that.

The reality is as the when this magnificent old bull crossed the park border if he ran into hunters he would be shot and maybe killed. Nixon ain't going to tell a paying client that elephant is too big old majestic iconic to shoot. Lets hope we run into a smaller one. That is the reality of the hunting business nothing more nothing less - $20k-$50k vacations the client gets respect/service/freedom to do what $20k-$50k buys.

But the argument that if the hunter does not get it the poacher does throws the whole hunting as conservation and hunting as a social good out the window - we are just trying to get the resource in this crazy resource grabbing game. The really sad part is this full grounded in reality and the actual world. This is a limited resources that is up for grabs - better the legal players gets it than the illegal one but the legal players adds very little to the resources (elephant) over time and the poacher nothing at all. We can shrug our shoulders and say this is africa but the reality is stark - old magnificent tuskers are getting killed and will not be there for a long time or maybe never.

We have standards how a resource should be harvested - double rifle, not from the truck, after a proper walk and stalk. But the question to ask is should the resource be harvested and if the only justification is us hunters rather than the poacher it is just sad.

I only have this issues with tuskers cause I don't think we can recreate them in an economic lifetime or a cost benefit framework. If we use present value analysis - tusker elephants fall off the screen. They take just too long to fall into a framework - corporation live and die in 20-40 year cycles.

I cannot propose any firm solutions. The reality might be hunter or poacher. But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

For me - I like elephant tusk i think they make cool trophies. I have zero interest in killing one. So I may just make some fibre glass ones to add to my artificial moose antlers from restoration hardware. I don't expect most AR members and elephant hunters to like my path - they may want trophies but its going to tough getting them into the US.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

I am not being anti hunting or anything like that.

The reality is as the when this magnificent old bull crossed the park border if he ran into hunters he would be shot and maybe killed. Nixon ain't going to tell a paying client that elephant is too big old majestic iconic to shoot. Lets hope we run into a smaller one. That is the reality of the hunting business nothing more nothing less - $20k-$50k vacations the client gets respect/service/freedom to do what $20k-$50k buys.

But the argument that if the hunter does not get it the poacher does throws the whole hunting as conservation and hunting as a social good out the window - we are just trying to get the resource in this crazy resource grabbing game. The really sad part is this full grounded in reality and the actual world. This is a limited resources that is up for grabs - better the legal players gets it than the illegal one but the legal players adds very little to the resources (elephant) over time and the poacher nothing at all. We can shrug our shoulders and say this is africa but the reality is stark - old magnificent tuskers are getting killed and will not be there for a long time or maybe never.

We have standards how a resource should be harvested - double rifle, not from the truck, after a proper walk and stalk. But the question to ask is should the resource be harvested and if the only justification is us hunters rather than the poacher it is just sad.

I only have this issues with tuskers cause I don't think we can recreate them in an economic lifetime or a cost benefit framework. If we use present value analysis - tusker elephants fall off the screen. They take just too long to fall into a framework - corporation live and die in 20-40 year cycles.

I cannot propose any firm solutions. The reality might be hunter or poacher. But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

For me - I like elephant tusk i think they make cool trophies. I have zero interest in killing one. So I may just make some fibre glass ones to add to my artificial moose antlers from restoration hardware. I don't expect most AR members and elephant hunters to like my path - they may want trophies but its going to tough getting them into the US.

Mike

I say that there is one other scenario being completely missed here Mike. That is, the hunter gets him, the poacher gets him, or he dies of natural causes in a very short while . The fact is that taking this old bull IS the very essence of conservation through hunting in that only the oldest is taken. Taken well after his breeding days are over and he is on his way out from natural causes.

Yes, sad that this old boy is now gone, but he was going to be gone shortly anyway by the looks of him. If he dies by natural causes, there are NO FUNDS generated to support the conservation efforts and local communities. In this case, just the opposite occurred. Wishing him a natural death instead of by hunter at the end of his days is the same argument the PETA folks make. Remember the Adax lady on 60 Minutes stating she'd rather them go extinct than have anyone enjoy hunting them?

This old bull's genes have been spread. He was no longer contributing to the gene pool. Who's to say he doesn't have offspring roaming the park that are close to his impressiveness already? I'd surmise that he already has sons in the 30 or 40+ year range, and they probably have sons in the 20+ year range. Hardly a case of not replacing this grand old elephant for another 50 years.

quote:

Originally posted by jeff h:
had the pleasure of hunting with Greg Butler in 12 we had long talks about ele hunting. He had been hunting in Bots for many years at that point and they were talking about closing it. He had kept track of bulls he had taken over the years and to my surprise he told me they were getting bigger and bigger each year. I tried to argue with him but he had the facts, at least for Bots. This ele is a shooter make no bones about it.

I also spoke to a ph that was helping find the poisoned ele in the National Park in Zim. a few years back from a chopper. He told me that he was amazed on how many 80,90 and over he saw from the air alive and walking around.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:

And they [national parks] will continue to provide grand trophies for the lucky hunter.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
The idea of waiting at or hanging around the boundaries of a park for a bull to cross turns me off somewhat.I have not shot an ele and would very much like to do so especially today while I still can but with this type of hunting I am not sure. There is a reason for a park.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
The idea of waiting at or hanging around the boundaries of a park for a bull to cross turns me off somewhat.I have not shot an ele and would very much like to do so especially today while I still can but with this type of hunting I am not sure. There is a reason for a park.

There is also a reason for the Safari Areas (Hunting Zones) surrounding the parks acting as buffer zones between the parks and farmers fields. If we are now going to start calling these buffer zones "unethical" to conduct hunts in, what's the purpose of having them? The park boundary is the park boundary. Off limits. The safari area surrounding the park is fair game IMO.

Jines, taken out of context, tomahawker's comment would be pathetic, but in fact, do the parks not feed the hunting areas surrounding them with excess and therefore huntable animals, providing a buffer zone to the "developed" farmers' fields? Isn't that their purpose? If so, tomahawker's statement is spot on as the occasional spectacular specimen will wander into those areas in search of additional room to roam when the park becomes over inhabited.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
The idea of waiting at or hanging around the boundaries of a park for a bull to cross turns me off somewhat.I have not shot an ele and would very much like to do so especially today while I still can but with this type of hunting I am not sure. There is a reason for a park.

There is also a reason for the Safari Areas (Hunting Zones) surrounding the parks acting as buffer zones between the parks and farmers fields. If we are now going to start calling these buffer zones "unethical" to conduct hunts in, what's the purpose of having them? The park boundary is the park boundary. Off limits. The safari area surrounding the park is fair game IMO.

Jines, taken out of context, tomahawker's comment would be pathetic, but in fact, do the parks not feed the hunting areas surrounding them with excess and therefore huntable animals, providing a buffer zone to the "developed" farmers' fields? Isn't that their purpose? If so, tomahawker's statement is spot on as the occasional spectacular specimen will wander into those areas in search of additional room to roam when the park becomes over inhabited.

Perhaps there could be a zone between hunting areas and parks where there could be no hunting or farming or cutting trees.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
The idea of waiting at or hanging around the boundaries of a park for a bull to cross turns me off somewhat.I have not shot an ele and would very much like to do so especially today while I still can but with this type of hunting I am not sure. There is a reason for a park.

There is also a reason for the Safari Areas (Hunting Zones) surrounding the parks acting as buffer zones between the parks and farmers fields. If we are now going to start calling these buffer zones "unethical" to conduct hunts in, what's the purpose of having them? The park boundary is the park boundary. Off limits. The safari area surrounding the park is fair game IMO.

Jines, taken out of context, tomahawker's comment would be pathetic, but in fact, do the parks not feed the hunting areas surrounding them with excess and therefore huntable animals, providing a buffer zone to the "developed" farmers' fields? Isn't that their purpose? If so, tomahawker's statement is spot on as the occasional spectacular specimen will wander into those areas in search of additional room to roam when the park becomes over inhabited.

Perhaps there could be a zone between hunting areas and parks where there could be no hunting or farming or cutting trees.

You mean like a buffer zone to the buffer zone. Then we'll add a buffer zone to the buffer zone to the buffer zone. And then ...

Where does that logic end?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

Perhaps there could be a zone between hunting areas and parks where there could be no hunting or farming or cutting trees.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

I am not being anti hunting or anything like that.

The reality is as the when this magnificent old bull crossed the park border if he ran into hunters he would be shot and maybe killed. Nixon ain't going to tell a paying client that elephant is too big old majestic iconic to shoot. Lets hope we run into a smaller one. That is the reality of the hunting business nothing more nothing less - $20k-$50k vacations the client gets respect/service/freedom to do what $20k-$50k buys.

But the argument that if the hunter does not get it the poacher does throws the whole hunting as conservation and hunting as a social good out the window - we are just trying to get the resource in this crazy resource grabbing game. The really sad part is this full grounded in reality and the actual world. This is a limited resources that is up for grabs - better the legal players gets it than the illegal one but the legal players adds very little to the resources (elephant) over time and the poacher nothing at all. We can shrug our shoulders and say this is africa but the reality is stark - old magnificent tuskers are getting killed and will not be there for a long time or maybe never.

We have standards how a resource should be harvested - double rifle, not from the truck, after a proper walk and stalk. But the question to ask is should the resource be harvested and if the only justification is us hunters rather than the poacher it is just sad.

I only have this issues with tuskers cause I don't think we can recreate them in an economic lifetime or a cost benefit framework. If we use present value analysis - tusker elephants fall off the screen. They take just too long to fall into a framework - corporation live and die in 20-40 year cycles.

I cannot propose any firm solutions. The reality might be hunter or poacher. But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

For me - I like elephant tusk i think they make cool trophies. I have zero interest in killing one. So I may just make some fibre glass ones to add to my artificial moose antlers from restoration hardware. I don't expect most AR members and elephant hunters to like my path - they may want trophies but its going to tough getting them into the US.

Mike

I say that there is one other scenario being completely missed here Mike. That is, the hunter gets him, the poacher gets him, or he dies of natural causes in a very short while . The fact is that taking this old bull IS the very essence of conservation through hunting in that only the oldest is taken. Taken well after his breeding days are over and he is on his way out from natural causes.

Yes, sad that this old boy is now gone, but he was going to be gone shortly anyway by the looks of him. If he dies by natural causes, there are NO FUNDS generated to support the conservation efforts and local communities. In this case, just the opposite occurred. Wishing him a natural death instead of by hunter at the end of his days is the same argument the PETA folks make. Remember the Adax lady on 60 Minutes stating she'd rather them go extinct than have anyone enjoy hunting them?

This old bull's genes have been spread. He was no longer contributing to the gene pool. Who's to say he doesn't have offspring roaming the park that are close to his impressiveness already? I'd surmise that he already has sons in the 30 or 40+ year range, and they probably have sons in the 20+ year range. Hardly a case of not replacing this grand old elephant for another 50 years.

Good post Todd!

And exactly why I stated if I could export the ivory...I would shoot him...but with the ban in place...would let him walk.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

I am not being anti hunting or anything like that.

The reality is as the when this magnificent old bull crossed the park border if he ran into hunters he would be shot and maybe killed. Nixon ain't going to tell a paying client that elephant is too big old majestic iconic to shoot. Lets hope we run into a smaller one. That is the reality of the hunting business nothing more nothing less - $20k-$50k vacations the client gets respect/service/freedom to do what $20k-$50k buys.

But the argument that if the hunter does not get it the poacher does throws the whole hunting as conservation and hunting as a social good out the window - we are just trying to get the resource in this crazy resource grabbing game. The really sad part is this full grounded in reality and the actual world. This is a limited resources that is up for grabs - better the legal players gets it than the illegal one but the legal players adds very little to the resources (elephant) over time and the poacher nothing at all. We can shrug our shoulders and say this is africa but the reality is stark - old magnificent tuskers are getting killed and will not be there for a long time or maybe never.

We have standards how a resource should be harvested - double rifle, not from the truck, after a proper walk and stalk. But the question to ask is should the resource be harvested and if the only justification is us hunters rather than the poacher it is just sad.

I only have this issues with tuskers cause I don't think we can recreate them in an economic lifetime or a cost benefit framework. If we use present value analysis - tusker elephants fall off the screen. They take just too long to fall into a framework - corporation live and die in 20-40 year cycles.

I cannot propose any firm solutions. The reality might be hunter or poacher. But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

For me - I like elephant tusk i think they make cool trophies. I have zero interest in killing one. So I may just make some fibre glass ones to add to my artificial moose antlers from restoration hardware. I don't expect most AR members and elephant hunters to like my path - they may want trophies but its going to tough getting them into the US.

Mike

I say that there is one other scenario being completely missed here Mike. That is, the hunter gets him, the poacher gets him, or he dies of natural causes in a very short while . The fact is that taking this old bull IS the very essence of conservation through hunting in that only the oldest is taken. Taken well after his breeding days are over and he is on his way out from natural causes.

Yes, sad that this old boy is now gone, but he was going to be gone shortly anyway by the looks of him. If he dies by natural causes, there are NO FUNDS generated to support the conservation efforts and local communities. In this case, just the opposite occurred. Wishing him a natural death instead of by hunter at the end of his days is the same argument the PETA folks make. Remember the Adax lady on 60 Minutes stating she'd rather them go extinct than have anyone enjoy hunting them?

This old bull's genes have been spread. He was no longer contributing to the gene pool. Who's to say he doesn't have offspring roaming the park that are close to his impressiveness already? I'd surmise that he already has sons in the 30 or 40+ year range, and they probably have sons in the 20+ year range. Hardly a case of not replacing this grand old elephant for another 50 years.

Good post Todd!

And exactly why I stated if I could export the ivory...I would shoot him...but with the ban in place...would let him walk.

All these old tuskers of Kruger are most likely recovered after they die of natural causes.

http://www.tuskersofafrica.com/tuskersn/duke.htm

http://sanparks.co.za/parks/kr...ers/magnificent7.php

http://www.360cities.net/image...ica-travel-channel-3

http://www.krugerpark.co.za/im...camp-480_295x200.jpg

There are at best 40-50 animals like this in the world.

If the drought forces more into Zim and they get hunted and killed on the park and national boundary - South Africa will do something. Fence, bore wells, gps collars, death nail to transfrontier park idea - https://www.bing.com/images/se...e8f5d22o0&ajaxhist=0

These are iconic animals that support a much larger tourism business. Krueger and its old tuskers are a real economic and national asset for South Africa.

Let us not kid ourselves about the whole hunting as conservation idea for trophy elephants - 100 pounders only reside in national parks. There is not a single operator with a time horizon or business model long enough to allow trophy elephants to grow to 100 pounds.

Like I said earlier a 50 pounder harvested in the Save after all the operators have done surveys and even done culls (not sold as tuskless or cow hunts) is much easier to justify as hunters than shooting a 100 pounder outside a national park. One is scientifically harvested in a proper game management system - the other is a target of opportunity and best justified as got it before the poacher did.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

I am not being anti hunting or anything like that.

The reality is as the when this magnificent old bull crossed the park border if he ran into hunters he would be shot and maybe killed. Nixon ain't going to tell a paying client that elephant is too big old majestic iconic to shoot. Lets hope we run into a smaller one. That is the reality of the hunting business nothing more nothing less - $20k-$50k vacations the client gets respect/service/freedom to do what $20k-$50k buys.

But the argument that if the hunter does not get it the poacher does throws the whole hunting as conservation and hunting as a social good out the window - we are just trying to get the resource in this crazy resource grabbing game. The really sad part is this full grounded in reality and the actual world. This is a limited resources that is up for grabs - better the legal players gets it than the illegal one but the legal players adds very little to the resources (elephant) over time and the poacher nothing at all. We can shrug our shoulders and say this is africa but the reality is stark - old magnificent tuskers are getting killed and will not be there for a long time or maybe never.

We have standards how a resource should be harvested - double rifle, not from the truck, after a proper walk and stalk. But the question to ask is should the resource be harvested and if the only justification is us hunters rather than the poacher it is just sad.

I only have this issues with tuskers cause I don't think we can recreate them in an economic lifetime or a cost benefit framework. If we use present value analysis - tusker elephants fall off the screen. They take just too long to fall into a framework - corporation live and die in 20-40 year cycles.

I cannot propose any firm solutions. The reality might be hunter or poacher. But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

For me - I like elephant tusk i think they make cool trophies. I have zero interest in killing one. So I may just make some fibre glass ones to add to my artificial moose antlers from restoration hardware. I don't expect most AR members and elephant hunters to like my path - they may want trophies but its going to tough getting them into the US.

Mike

I say that there is one other scenario being completely missed here Mike. That is, the hunter gets him, the poacher gets him, or he dies of natural causes in a very short while . The fact is that taking this old bull IS the very essence of conservation through hunting in that only the oldest is taken. Taken well after his breeding days are over and he is on his way out from natural causes.

Yes, sad that this old boy is now gone, but he was going to be gone shortly anyway by the looks of him. If he dies by natural causes, there are NO FUNDS generated to support the conservation efforts and local communities. In this case, just the opposite occurred. Wishing him a natural death instead of by hunter at the end of his days is the same argument the PETA folks make. Remember the Adax lady on 60 Minutes stating she'd rather them go extinct than have anyone enjoy hunting them?

This old bull's genes have been spread. He was no longer contributing to the gene pool. Who's to say he doesn't have offspring roaming the park that are close to his impressiveness already? I'd surmise that he already has sons in the 30 or 40+ year range, and they probably have sons in the 20+ year range. Hardly a case of not replacing this grand old elephant for another 50 years.

Good post Todd!

And exactly why I stated if I could export the ivory...I would shoot him...but with the ban in place...would let him walk.

All these old tuskers of Kruger are most likely recovered after they die of natural causes.

http://www.tuskersofafrica.com/tuskersn/duke.htm

http://sanparks.co.za/parks/kr...ers/magnificent7.php

http://www.360cities.net/image...ica-travel-channel-3

http://www.krugerpark.co.za/im...camp-480_295x200.jpg

There are at best 40-50 animals like this in the world.

If the drought forces more into Zim and they get hunted and killed on the park and national boundary - South Africa will do something. Fence, bore wells, gps collars, death nail to transfrontier park idea - https://www.bing.com/images/se...e8f5d22o0&ajaxhist=0

These are iconic animals that support a much larger tourism business. Krueger and its old tuskers are a real economic and national asset for South Africa.

Let us not kid ourselves about the whole hunting as conservation idea for trophy elephants - 100 pounders only reside in national parks. There is not a single operator with a time horizon or business model long enough to allow trophy elephants to grow to 100 pounds.

Like I said earlier a 50 pounder harvested in the Save after all the operators have done surveys and even done culls (not sold as tuskless or cow hunts) is much easier to justify as hunters than shooting a 100 pounder outside a national park. One is scientifically harvested in a proper game management system - the other is a target of opportunity and best justified as got it before the poacher did.

Mike

An emotional argument. Still doesn't address the fact that this old bull was very likely at the end of his life cycle anyway, given his appearance of extreme age.

And I addressed the issue of the operator's timelines. This old boy surely has 30 to 40+ year old offspring in the field at this point. And they certainly have 20 to 30 year old offspring at this point. And so on, and so on. It's the life cycle.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Good thoughts Mike.

If I was hunting ele today with the ban...I would hesitate to shoot this bull for sure. With out the ban...I would. I am glad he is going to Germany...his teeth will probably garner respect there among hunters.

I am not being anti hunting or anything like that.

The reality is as the when this magnificent old bull crossed the park border if he ran into hunters he would be shot and maybe killed. Nixon ain't going to tell a paying client that elephant is too big old majestic iconic to shoot. Lets hope we run into a smaller one. That is the reality of the hunting business nothing more nothing less - $20k-$50k vacations the client gets respect/service/freedom to do what $20k-$50k buys.

But the argument that if the hunter does not get it the poacher does throws the whole hunting as conservation and hunting as a social good out the window - we are just trying to get the resource in this crazy resource grabbing game. The really sad part is this full grounded in reality and the actual world. This is a limited resources that is up for grabs - better the legal players gets it than the illegal one but the legal players adds very little to the resources (elephant) over time and the poacher nothing at all. We can shrug our shoulders and say this is africa but the reality is stark - old magnificent tuskers are getting killed and will not be there for a long time or maybe never.

We have standards how a resource should be harvested - double rifle, not from the truck, after a proper walk and stalk. But the question to ask is should the resource be harvested and if the only justification is us hunters rather than the poacher it is just sad.

I only have this issues with tuskers cause I don't think we can recreate them in an economic lifetime or a cost benefit framework. If we use present value analysis - tusker elephants fall off the screen. They take just too long to fall into a framework - corporation live and die in 20-40 year cycles.

I cannot propose any firm solutions. The reality might be hunter or poacher. But the USFW will look at the elephant ban in a data centric framework - if the argument is let us import elephant tusk cause it is us hunters or the poacher we are doomed. The same argument that it is africa let the hunter kill the elephant also will insure that USFW will require an unsurmountable hurdle from african governments and hunting organizations to get the ban lifted.

For me - I like elephant tusk i think they make cool trophies. I have zero interest in killing one. So I may just make some fibre glass ones to add to my artificial moose antlers from restoration hardware. I don't expect most AR members and elephant hunters to like my path - they may want trophies but its going to tough getting them into the US.

Mike

I say that there is one other scenario being completely missed here Mike. That is, the hunter gets him, the poacher gets him, or he dies of natural causes in a very short while . The fact is that taking this old bull IS the very essence of conservation through hunting in that only the oldest is taken. Taken well after his breeding days are over and he is on his way out from natural causes.

Yes, sad that this old boy is now gone, but he was going to be gone shortly anyway by the looks of him. If he dies by natural causes, there are NO FUNDS generated to support the conservation efforts and local communities. In this case, just the opposite occurred. Wishing him a natural death instead of by hunter at the end of his days is the same argument the PETA folks make. Remember the Adax lady on 60 Minutes stating she'd rather them go extinct than have anyone enjoy hunting them?

This old bull's genes have been spread. He was no longer contributing to the gene pool. Who's to say he doesn't have offspring roaming the park that are close to his impressiveness already? I'd surmise that he already has sons in the 30 or 40+ year range, and they probably have sons in the 20+ year range. Hardly a case of not replacing this grand old elephant for another 50 years.

Good post Todd!

And exactly why I stated if I could export the ivory...I would shoot him...but with the ban in place...would let him walk.

All these old tuskers of Kruger are most likely recovered after they die of natural causes.

http://www.tuskersofafrica.com/tuskersn/duke.htm

http://sanparks.co.za/parks/kr...ers/magnificent7.php

http://www.360cities.net/image...ica-travel-channel-3

http://www.krugerpark.co.za/im...camp-480_295x200.jpg

There are at best 40-50 animals like this in the world.

If the drought forces more into Zim and they get hunted and killed on the park and national boundary - South Africa will do something. Fence, bore wells, gps collars, death nail to transfrontier park idea - https://www.bing.com/images/se...e8f5d22o0&ajaxhist=0

These are iconic animals that support a much larger tourism business. Krueger and its old tuskers are a real economic and national asset for South Africa.

Let us not kid ourselves about the whole hunting as conservation idea for trophy elephants - 100 pounders only reside in national parks. There is not a single operator with a time horizon or business model long enough to allow trophy elephants to grow to 100 pounds.

Like I said earlier a 50 pounder harvested in the Save after all the operators have done surveys and even done culls (not sold as tuskless or cow hunts) is much easier to justify as hunters than shooting a 100 pounder outside a national park. One is scientifically harvested in a proper game management system - the other is a target of opportunity and best justified as got it before the poacher did.

Mike

An emotional argument. Still doesn't address the fact that this old bull was very likely at the end of his life cycle anyway, given his appearance of extreme age.

And I addressed the issue of the operator's timelines. This old boy surely has 30 to 40+ year old offspring in the field at this point. And they certainly have 20 to 30 year old offspring at this point. And so on, and so on. It's the life cycle.

Nothing emotional here just presented facts that old kruger bulls tusk and skulls are recovered and preserved in a museum for public viewing, old Krueger bulls are a tourist attraction, they have books and websites built around them most are named. They are more of an economic asset than the trophy fee collected by Nixon - that is reality and facts.

If this bull wandered into timbuvati I bet it would not be shot even if they had a permit.

I have gotten some more emotional pm from a few south african and some Krueger park official thoughts on the elephant.

As to your operator time line - you really think Nixon stays up at night worrying about the genetics of the elephant herd he hunts from. They are located in a national park of a another country !!!

Let's not confuse the business of hunting, the participation in a hunt with some great social conservation goal.

There are no isis funding poachers or some big Chinese ivory poaching ring operating inside krueger as some have implied on this thread.

I would really like to see other Zim PH who specialize in hunting elephants or those who also run tourist photo safari business in national park to comment on this elephant.

Do we at least all agree that elephant of this size and tusk quality can only be hunted when they stray from a national park?

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

What I have a problem with is, and it's not with you personally, but rather the lack of a black and while distinction between how, what, and where hunting can take place absent an individual hunter's emotions labeling something as unethical after the fact when all the rules and regs were complied with 100%. That creates a trap that anyone can fall into at anytime depending on the "moral superiority" of the guy who has made the unethical proclamation.