I offer this without comment, but am curious what pesticide is being used and how big a problem it really is.

quote:

Saving the Last Lions
By Dereck Joubert
Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Just 50 years ago there were close to a half-million lions in Africa -- about 450,000 in all. Today there are between 16,000 and 23,000. And yet, unlike elephants (a far more numerous species), lions have no protection under the international accord governing such matters.

Big cats are in trouble everywhere. The number of tigers has dipped below 3,000. Indeed, as we look at the lion population today, it's the shadow of the tiger's history that scares me most. Tiger bones are used extensively in the East for medicines and mythological (read nonsense) cures for ailments or limp libidos, and the demand is increasing. A growing demand and a disappearing supply is a formula for disaster.

The solution we are seeing play out is a switch from tiger bones to lion bones, which can be easily sold off as tiger bones. It's ironic that the most famous animal in Africa, perhaps in the world, can't even be poached on its own value but only as a "mock tiger."

This week the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) is meeting to decide whether lions, whose numbers have declined by 50 percent in the past 20 years, are worthy of protection under Appendix I to the convention: the listing of the most endangered animals. The problem is that the safari hunting industry and buyers in Asia are opposing it, because such a decree would limit what they can do with the trophies. Fact: Appendix I does not mean you can't shoot a lion -- it means you can't import the skin to hang on the wall. And the answer to the question we are asked a thousand times is: Yes, you can still go to Africa to kill a lion.

CITES needs a country to sponsor the motion for lion protection. We can't, so far, get one to put its hand up first, to take on the issue and save lions. No one will risk offending big safari hunting lobbies. It would seem that many are just not thinking this through. Extinction threatens by the year 2020. Then there will be no lions to hunt, or to protect.


(Meanwhile another ominous development poses a further threat to wildlife. A pesticide is being used by poachers to kill lions and many other animals. Sprinkled on meat, it kills lions, hyenas, vultures and other creatures in minutes).

We don't have much time. The biggest threat isn't hunters, poachers or poison makers -- it is our own complacency, the lazy hope that someone else is taking care of the great beasts of Africa.

Lions and other large predators are disappearing even as we learn more about the collapse of entire ecosystems. The $200 billion a year reaped from ecotourism will be lost, causing suffering among communities all over Africa that rely on this trade.

As explorers in residence at National Geographic, my wife, Beverly, and I are calling on everyone with even a remote interest in big cats, or in Africa, to make sure that these wild systems keep working well. Scientists, conservationists -- everyone -- must come together, work together and support this effort now: the Big Cats Initiative. It's a movement that doesn't want to exclude a single soul or leave out any idea on how to reduce the conflict. We have a short window of time in which we can remedy this. It is closing very rapidly.

Dereck Joubert and his wife, Beverly Joubert, are National Geographic explorers in residence. They have spent years making films and writing about the big cats of Africa. To view some of their photos and films, visit http://www.wildlifeconservationfilms.com.

My PH last month said the poison is a huge problem. 60 minutes did a story on it as well. Part of the problem may be the fact the Masai are not getting their share of money from the hunting industry; for them, lions are a liability, not an asset.

Go to that website and respond via the contact button; here is what I said:

Your story in the Washington Post lacked substance. How many lions are killed each year by sport hunting? What is the natural reproductive rate? Is sport hunting killing more lions than poaching? Your mention of poison is almost laughable. The real problem with lions today is poison. Countries that allow sport hunting have thriving game populations. Kenya, which outlawed hunting back in 1977 (going by memory here) has had a large drop in big game populations. When Tanzania outlawed hunting in 1973, the Selous elephant population was decimated - but today, thanks to sport hunting, elephants are thriving there. Your own country, Botswana, has a healthy population of elephants, thanks to the money brought in by the safari industry.

Certain areas of Africa will never be attractive for photo safaris; those who partake in such trips aren't willing to pay the charter, let alone the money required for a remote camp.

Oh, one other thing. Last month in Tanzania, while hunting in the Selous, we ran into a bunch of poachers. I won't describe in print what we did, but suffice to say if we only had a camera our impact would have been significantly more muted than the one we made.

The most persecuted animals in the world are cows, chickens, and pigs. They are also the most numerous, thanks to the fact that they have great economic value.

I thought CITES was meeting in March to decide the "fate" of the Lion.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
I offer this without comment, but am curious what pesticide is being used and how big a problem it really is.

quote:

Saving the Last Lions
By Dereck Joubert
Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Just 50 years ago there were close to a half-million lions in Africa -- about 450,000 in all. Today there are between 16,000 and 23,000. And yet, unlike elephants (a far more numerous species), lions have no protection under the international accord governing such matters.

Big cats are in trouble everywhere. The number of tigers has dipped below 3,000. Indeed, as we look at the lion population today, it's the shadow of the tiger's history that scares me most. Tiger bones are used extensively in the East for medicines and mythological (read nonsense) cures for ailments or limp libidos, and the demand is increasing. A growing demand and a disappearing supply is a formula for disaster.

The solution we are seeing play out is a switch from tiger bones to lion bones, which can be easily sold off as tiger bones. It's ironic that the most famous animal in Africa, perhaps in the world, can't even be poached on its own value but only as a "mock tiger."

This week the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) is meeting to decide whether lions, whose numbers have declined by 50 percent in the past 20 years, are worthy of protection under Appendix I to the convention: the listing of the most endangered animals. The problem is that the safari hunting industry and buyers in Asia are opposing it, because such a decree would limit what they can do with the trophies. Fact: Appendix I does not mean you can't shoot a lion -- it means you can't import the skin to hang on the wall. And the answer to the question we are asked a thousand times is: Yes, you can still go to Africa to kill a lion.

CITES needs a country to sponsor the motion for lion protection. We can't, so far, get one to put its hand up first, to take on the issue and save lions. No one will risk offending big safari hunting lobbies. It would seem that many are just not thinking this through. Extinction threatens by the year 2020. Then there will be no lions to hunt, or to protect.


(Meanwhile another ominous development poses a further threat to wildlife. A pesticide is being used by poachers to kill lions and many other animals. Sprinkled on meat, it kills lions, hyenas, vultures and other creatures in minutes).

We don't have much time. The biggest threat isn't hunters, poachers or poison makers -- it is our own complacency, the lazy hope that someone else is taking care of the great beasts of Africa.

Lions and other large predators are disappearing even as we learn more about the collapse of entire ecosystems. The $200 billion a year reaped from ecotourism will be lost, causing suffering among communities all over Africa that rely on this trade.

As explorers in residence at National Geographic, my wife, Beverly, and I are calling on everyone with even a remote interest in big cats, or in Africa, to make sure that these wild systems keep working well. Scientists, conservationists -- everyone -- must come together, work together and support this effort now: the Big Cats Initiative. It's a movement that doesn't want to exclude a single soul or leave out any idea on how to reduce the conflict. We have a short window of time in which we can remedy this. It is closing very rapidly.

Dereck Joubert and his wife, Beverly Joubert, are National Geographic explorers in residence. They have spent years making films and writing about the big cats of Africa. To view some of their photos and films, visit http://www.wildlifeconservationfilms.com.

Most probably Bayticol or something similar - not sprinkled, but injected liberally into different parts of the carcass.

Sadly, this malpractice has led to the demise of entire prides of Lion as well as a large number of the scavenging species.
Lions that have survived are now reluctant to feed off a carcass, resorting to a fresh kill instead.

Seems that most people in my part of the world use Temik. I don't know the chemical formula but it's very effective. It also is effective at getting some attention from the Environmental protection agency or the fish and game dept.

Kenya has lost almost all of there lions.

Europeans want meat. Masaii like to ranch, it is a marriage made in heaven. Unless you are a lion.

Europeans eradicate tsetse fly ostensibly to improve the lives of locals. Incidently the tsetse fly kills domestic livestock (not wildlife)so by eradicating it you can expand the cattle ranching significantly.

Masaii oblige and find the lions, that weren't a problem with small indiginious ranching, are now a problem. No guns but lots of cheap poison available. So lions get poisoned.

Net result. Europe gets beef. Masaii make money. Lions die.

Novel way to reverse it... reintroduce the tse tse fly.


This illustrates how hunting is beneficial to wildlife. Bottom line the land is going to be used for something, if a hunting outfitter locks it up then the wildlife gets it, if a rancher locks it up then cows get it. Generally the land makes more money with hunting outfits however if hunting is outlawed the cows win by default.

That sucks. I really liked waving that one in the face of euro-greenies on Facebook that I debate from time to time.

We all know that poaching/poisoning (along with habitat loss) is what is threatening the lion, not sport hunting. Unfortunately, CITES doesn't understand how to effectively separate the two. Simply requiring documentation that an animal was legitimately taken under license should allow the animal's parts to be exported. Go beyond that if you wish and prohibit all exportation of lion bones other than skulls and claws -- sport hunters are only interested in the skulls/hides/claws as trophies, anyway; whereas the illicit market trade is interested in bones or gall bladders or whatever.

It is certainly true that if lions have no value as game, then they are only vermin (or worse) to the indigenous people and will be treated that way.

In the last 12 months, the number of stories I've read about the demise of lions is off the charts. I remember this same cycle of media reporting a decade ago regarding the Black Rhino. First the articles only appeared in international journals and publications, but now here, Derek Joubert (who is a highly respected National Geographic videographer and conservationist), gets an article published in the Washington Post. He's not a staff writer for the Post, just a freelance contributor on occasion. Now that the lion issue has trickled into the mainstream media, I guarantee you it has become a real story.

Because lions are so widespread throughout Africa, it's difficult, almost impossible to get a true assessment on their actual numbers. It's not like counting up let's say polar bears.

But we all know lions aren't doing that well. I read alot of international journals and have yet to see statistics that I can trust. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows?

There's a ton of misinformation being put out by both sides, and as hunters we should demand the truth, take a step back and listen. If it's time to stop hunting them we should accept that as true conservationists and do our part to save the lion.

You stop hunting them the problem gets worse.

You need to figure out how to get the locals to stop poisoning them.

I believe the product is Furadan (SP?). It used to be produced by FMC. I am out of touch with mergers and acquisitions so I don't know the present company that makes it. It was originally designed for use by crop dusters. I saw the filling operation several times and it was treated like it was deadly to the touch.

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
I believe the product is Furadan (SP?). It used to be produced by FMC. I am out of touch with mergers and acquisitions so I don't know the present company that makes it. It was originally designed for use by crop dusters. I saw the filling operation several times and it was treated like it was deadly to the touch.

That is the chemical 60 minutes profiled.

So John, as the locals poison the lions to death, and we hunt them to death, doesn't the problem become doubly worse?

This was why Botwana authorities halted lion hunting a couple years ago, because they felt farmers and others were wiping out the lions that were killing cattle. And in order not to have a more drastic effect on the population, trophy hunting of lions was halted.

I don't know the ultimate answer, but I know one thing. If hunters are forbidden from bringing back their trophies, no one will want to spend the tremendous fees to have a local hanging the hide on their wall, or worse having it put away in a gov. warehouse. How will lion recovery work without that money?

quote:

Originally posted by SableTrail:
So John, as the locals poison the lions to death, and we hunt them to death, doesn't the problem become doubly worse?

This was why Botwana authorities halted lion hunting a couple years ago, because they felt farmers and others were wiping out the lions that were killing cattle. And in order not to have a more drastic effect on the population, trophy hunting of lions was halted.

It isn't that simple. Hunting them creates value. It makes them valuable. If they are valuable then people protect them (like the Masaii protect there cattle). Now if sport hunting meant killing every single lion in a concession then yes, hunting is bad. But it isn't. To harvest good trophies you have to have thriving local populations to grow them.

You have hunting outfits paying for concessions, they take care of those areas and nurture the animals. If they didn't then they would run out of "stock" pretty damn quick. If outfitters aren't paying for concessions those areas go to the next highest paying deal, usually cattle ranching. In a ranching operation the lions are pests.

The big national parks are not by themselves large enough to support the wild lion populations.

If lions go cities 1 they are doomed.

quote:

It isn't that simple. Hunting them creates value. It makes them valuable. If they are valuable then people protect them (like the Masaii protect there cattle).

John: Lions are valuable today! Never before in the history of trophy hunting have safari-goers paid more $$$ to harvest a lion. Yet despite that, never before has there been this much abuse to lions. You mentioned Masai. Huh! They're some of the worst offenders. They kill more lions, than safari hunters do. And the long term effects they cause on breeding stock and pride development, are immeasurable. So how can you make the above statement, "If they are valuable people protect them." Lions will always hold value simply because of the role they play in the circle of life. He's at the top of the food chain, a valuable species in the African ecosystem.

Are you suggesting that just because you can't hunt them, they have no value? That's ridiculous. Yes selective hunting of lions does hold value, but that's not all they're good for.

You mentioned "nurture the animals" in the first line of your second graph. What does that mean? We're talking about wild lions here. In that ecosystem, it's all about survival of the fittest. If you're talking about blesbok on a South African ranch, then maybe nurturing applies, but in most places not. Ranchers take care of their animals yes, but they don't baby them. To nurture them would only guarantee the development of a weaker strain. Trophy hunters don't want to hunt "soft" nurtured animals John.

You also mentioned "big national parks". FYI that's not where all the lions get deposited in Africa. But have you ever seen some of the lions in Kruger or in Kenya?

Better yet, what is your experience hunting lions before we go much further on this discussion? Have you done your big five yet? Please respond.

quote:

Are you suggesting that just because you can't hunt them, they have no value? That's ridiculous. Yes selective hunting of lions does hold value, but that's not all they're good for.

I don't think John or anyone else in their right mind would suggest that. However if you're a poor African trying to make a living off of cattle you may not care much about how wonderful lions are in and of themselves as proofed by your statement about the Masai being the worst offenders. I would venture that John's point is that lions in and of themselves aren't valuable enough to some people to save/not kill. He is stating that safari hunting and photo tourism if done properly (sharing revenue and benefit with local communities) add extra value to lions that may be enough to protect them from pastoralist like the Masai because they realize lions = money. It's unfortunate that everyone can't see lions in and of themselves as worth saving, but that's the reality of the situation.

Brett

quote:

Better yet, what is your experience hunting lions before we go much further on this discussion? Have you done your big five yet? Please respond.

This is irrelevant and quite frankly dismissive and condescending. Would the oppinion of a wildlife biologist who spent decades researching and studying lions be any less relevant because he or she didn't take their big five????? Don't take this as an attack as I'm sure your a good guy. The internet has got the best of me a few times as I'm sure it has you, but come on.

Brett

PS. I will stop by at SCI and say hi. I'd like to meet the "Moja".

quote:

Originally posted by JohnHunt:

It isn't that simple. Hunting them creates value. It makes them valuable. If they are valuable then people protect them (like the Masaii protect there cattle). Now if sport hunting meant killing every single lion in a concession then yes, hunting is bad. But it isn't. To harvest good trophies you have to have thriving local populations to grow them.

You have hunting outfits paying for concessions, they take care of those areas and nurture the animals. If they didn't then they would run out of "stock" pretty damn quick. If outfitters aren't paying for concessions those areas go to the next highest paying deal, usually cattle ranching. In a ranching operation the lions are pests.

The big national parks are not by themselves large enough to support the wild lion populations.

If lions go cities 1 they are doomed.

The above statement contains a lot of "IF" scenarios....... I suspect no more than 10% of the hunting operators in Tz acively do something to protect their blocks and mayvbe less than that take an interest in specifically protecting and monitoring their lion populations through regulated hunting practices.

Hunting lions only helps to conserve them if the "right" lion is hunted. There have been several discussions on the board on this subject initiated by myself and a few others but I cannot help but notice that there is a lot of resistance in learnign about what is the best lion to hunt sustainably. So if you ask me, there is currently more harm being done to hunted lion populations than good simply because clients and their PHs?operators don't give a damn!

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:
So if you ask me, there is currently more harm being done to hunted lion populations than good simply because clients and their PHs?operators don't give a damn!

Unfortunately that's probably the state of affairs, but that doesn't change the fact that it can be done properly if countries will mandate and enforce the 6 year rule and opperators will produce tangible benefits to local communities from safari hunting.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by SableTrail:

quote:

It isn't that simple. Hunting them creates value. It makes them valuable. If they are valuable then people protect them (like the Masaii protect there cattle).

John: Lions are valuable today! Never before in the history of trophy hunting have safari-goers paid more $$$ to harvest a lion. Yet despite that, never before has there been this much abuse to lions. You mentioned Masai. Huh! They're some of the worst offenders. They kill more lions, than safari hunters do. And the long term effects they cause on breeding stock and pride development, are immeasurable. So how can you make the above statement, "If they are valuable people protect them." Lions will always hold value simply because of the role they play in the circle of life. He's at the top of the food chain, a valuable species in the African ecosystem.

Are you suggesting that just because you can't hunt them, they have no value? That's ridiculous. Yes selective hunting of lions does hold value, but that's not all they're good for.

You mentioned "nurture the animals" in the first line of your second graph. What does that mean? We're talking about wild lions here. In that ecosystem, it's all about survival of the fittest. If you're talking about blesbok on a South African ranch, then maybe nurturing applies, but in most places not. Ranchers take care of their animals yes, but they don't baby them. To nurture them would only guarantee the development of a weaker strain. Trophy hunters don't want to hunt "soft" nurtured animals John.

You also mentioned "big national parks". FYI that's not where all the lions get deposited in Africa. But have you ever seen some of the lions in Kruger or in Kenya?

Better yet, what is your experience hunting lions before we go much further on this discussion? Have you done your big five yet? Please respond.

I sense a troll. But in case you are not I will try to explain. Can I assume you know the difference between hunting and killing?

The Masaii are cattle ranchers they are killing the lions as pests, not hunting them as trophies. And there weapon of choice is poison. Why do you think they are doing this?

For that matter what makes a lion valuable to you? Now why would you expect those same values to be held by others? Especially others not quite as high up old Maslow's heirarchy as you are.

If everything you owned was tied up in 50 head of cattle and a local lion pride was eating 1 every couple of days how would you value the lion?

Well one way is to earn money off the lions directly... a good source would be a rich trophy hunter (or photo tourist) visiting from time to time. You might be willing to give up a cow or two if you made money when a trophy hunter came to town.

What lions need is habitat. Bottom line.

It just happens that trophy hunters and lions like the same habitat. So even if you are not hunting lion, you are helping them by preserving habitat every time you hunt. In other words the landowner leases the land to a hunting outfitter instead of a rancher. Good for hunters, good for lions.

Trophy hunters are selective. Not every lion is pursued, in fact the sciense of it suggests either 4 or 6 year olds are the lower limit to ensure on going pride health.

Now why would the Masaii in Kenya give whoop about hunting? It has been outlawed there for 30 years. So by default the land goes to ranching. Those prides are in the worst shape of all the southern african prides. No outfitters to "nurture" them.


In the end this is a complex subject and much research needs to be done to figure out how to save them. Research that is being done to day. If you value lions then why not support Conservation Force (I do) http://www.conservationforce.org/lionconservation.htm
They are doing more then most to figure this out.

Maybe we should breed lions in cages and offer them for hunting or for sale to the far east medicine market.....that should relieve the pressure on the wild lion population Africa, should it not Mr. Joubert?

Sport hunting is far from the African lion's chief nemesis. Poisoning, loss of habitat and unregulated shooting "outside" of sport are the chief problems.

Lions do not make good neighbors, and in Africa, when people and wild animals are in conflict, the animals always lose.

Still, the sport hunting of lions without regard to sound lion conservation is definitely a problem, IMHO. And it has been a problem for as long as the lion has been hunted.

Only in recent years have hunters - and African governments - begun, rather grudgingly it seems to me, to limit the shooting of lions in an intelligent and scientifically sound manner.

Hunting is good conservation for a number of reasons, but only if the hunting is rationally regulated so as to insure the sustainable use of the quarry.

quote:

Can I assume you know the difference between hunting and killing?

Forgive me for asking, but, from the lions perspective, does he not wind up dead in both cases?
This topic comes up pretty regularly and the result is generally the same. The "hunters" say, "Naw, there's no problem, it's all the liberals, greenies, do gooders etc., but just in case, I'm going to kill my lion while the going is still good, and, Oh!, by the way, it's someone else's fault" Then there is the "Yes there is a problem, but it is someone else's fault. If only poaching would stop then I could keep killing (oops sorry, hunting, lions)". Then there is the "Yes there may very well be a problem, let's find out more and see what can be done". Funny thing is I haven't heard that last option mentioned yet. Mrxlema's post comes very close however! And no, I haven't got my Big Five yet!
Peter.

Lions are like any other animal. The folks start screaming about them eating their tomatoes, crashing their cars, blah, blah and down go the animals.

They are trying to ding all these imaginary deer at a local park because there are "just too many," whatever that means. Too much grazing or what?

I suspect that the car insurance companies piss and moan to the Game Dept and down go the deer.

Lions, unless they get large enough unfettered areas, they are toast.

Lions never needed to be studied, collared, drugged, or harassed by do-gooders for a zillion years. Just give them enough real estate and leave them alone

quote:

I sense a troll. But in case you are not I will try to explain. Can I assume you know the difference between hunting and killing?

John: Let's not digress and call each other names. You obviously don't know who I am. My name is Marc Watts. Here is my website. www.sabletrailproductions.com My line is open at 312 226 4047. Thanks for the facts about the Masai. I'm fairly up to speed on their culture. I've eaten with them. Slept with them. Learned Swahili from them and have hunted with two Masai trackers in Tanzania. I also had a Masai who speaks fluent English, drive me on a 17-day journey throughout Africa. So I kinda know what they're all about John.

You never answered my question about your lion hunting experience. I have some which allows me to make the claims I do make, certainly not as much experience as others on this board. My latest lion is only #21 in the record book, and completely tracked John.

Glad to see you support Conservation Force. That organization does good work, as does The Tashinga Initiative, of which I'm a spokesman for.

If you go to my site, you'll see other programs I'm busy with in Africa besides hunting. Let's not be nasty. Debate on this board can be intellectually stimulating. It shouldn't involve name calling.

Brett: Thanks for the compliment. I am a good guy! Thanks man. Booth 1107 in Reno. Come by anytime. Let's go have a coffee. The reason I was asking that to John is because, with knowledge of his hunting experience, perhaps I can figure out the gist of what he says. No, the big five doesn't qualify one as a lion expert, but by hunting dangerous game, one does learn somewhat the role the Lion plays in the African ecosystem. And if you hunt lions you learn even more about their culture. That's what I'm getting at.

Dr. Laurence Frank, one of the world's most noted authorities on lions, has never hunted. Yet he knows hundreds times more than me and all of us. He's talked to me at length to get a better understanding of the role and desires of the trophy hunter.

So no I'm not trying to be condescending to John, but I do believe one's experiences in hunting lions and other dangerous game shapes their values and knowledge of which they speak.

Hey Justin-It's all good. Not trying to say I'm all that. Just wanted to let John know what side I was on, and support my remarks by letting him know who I am. We're both in the same fight together. That's all I'm trying to say.

If we're going to exchange thoughts and ideas on this board, I think it does help to know who the fellow chatters are. That way the remarks are more meaningful.

This is a very interesting and educational topic for me as well...My understanding is being enlightened considerably!!!

Please folks carry-on as I would assume quite a few of us here know nothing about this, especially in terms of the informative discussions by John Hunt and SableTrail...I'd like to thank you two especially its an informative discussion for sure!

Hope others with knowledge will chime in as well...

Thanks again!

All the AR'ers are invited throughout the course of the Reno convention to booth 1107. I'll have free goodies for everybody!

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
Sport hunting is far from the African lion's chief nemesis. Poisoning, loss of habitat and unregulated shooting "outside" of sport are the chief problems.

Lions do not make good neighbors, and in Africa, when people and wild animals are in conflict, the animals always lose.

Still, the sport hunting of lions without regard to sound lion conservation is definitely a problem, IMHO. And it has been a problem for as long as the lion has been hunted.

Only in recent years have hunters - and African governments - begun, rather grudgingly it seems to me, to limit the shooting of lions in an intelligent and scientifically sound manner.

Hunting is good conservation for a number of reasons, but only if the hunting is rationally regulated so as to insure the sustainable use of the quarry.

+1

Marc,

I have spent a couple of hours with a Bushman at a bar and some quality time with a Shona driving around in a truck but regrettably none with a Masaii tribal member.

I didn’t realize it was you when I suggested a troll. Your comments were sounding suspiciously like those I encounter with anti-hunters on other forums. So for that I apologize. We have met by the way. At SCI in Reno, I stopped by and chatted for a bit. And for the record I did see that bird you threw as I walked away without buying a CD (just kidding of course).

Since we are doing introductions I live in the Pacific Northwest (near Seattle). I own a software consulting company; we build custom software on the Microsoft platform. I am not a scientist and haven’t played one either. I am interested in conservation and approach it from a layman’s perspective. I have none of the big 5 but plan on fixing that in Zim next summer.

Now… on to lions.
For being such a visible and emblematic species there is relatively little conservation research on lions. That is changing rapidly as the lion population is plummeting throughout southern Africa. There is no single reason for this drop in population, there is no one bad actor, nor is there a single white knight. My conservation views are firmly in the consumptive utilization camp. The almighty dollar has been and continues to be the single most effective way to influence people’s behavior. I would hate to see lions fall into a “preservation” type survival strategy like tigers or pandas and that is what we (the hunting community) are fighting against right now.

What makes trophy hunting of lions different then other forms of killing lions? After all they still end up dead… right? Well trophy hunting has four primary benefits over other forms killing.
1. Hunting operation benefits local populations (sharing of trophy fees, jobs, etc..) So the locals that live with lions actual benefit from lions making them less likely to poison them like we are seeing in Kenya.
2. Hunting keeps wild land wild. Lions need habitat to thrive. Hunters and lions like the same habitat and can share it. No hunting in Kenya so the wild land is now ranch land, with a corresponding loss of wildlife.
3. Hunting targets the older male lions, allowing younger ones to move into breeding positions. Poaching and poisoning kills all lions indiscriminately.
4. Trophy hunters want large lion populations so they can be selective about the lion they kill (good for the species, bad for the individual big maned old bastard lion). Poachers don’t want any lion populations.

Why is trophy hunting better then photo tourism?
1. You need far fewer lions for photo tourism. One tame pride will pretty much do it. Hunters need many more to be able to sustainably harvest some.
2. It takes many more photo tourists to bring in the same revenue as a single trophy hunter, with a corresponding larger overall impact on the wildlife (more lodges, more trucks, more habituation)
3. The money that comes in from the lions does not flow to the local populations but rather to large businesses that own lodge operations.
4. The national parks can pretty much manage the photo tourism business. Problem is the lion population cannot survive in the parks, they are too small. For wild lions to thrive they need additional wild areas, places photo tourist won’t tread (but hunters do).

Is there a place for photo tourism? Of course there is but it won’t replace hunting rather it should complement it in an overall conservation strategy.

If lions get listed on Cities 1 then USFG may restrict the importation of there hides much like they do with Polar Bears. If that happens then, by default, the lions are on a preservation track. SCI is helping to fund lion studies to prevent this from happening. These studies census the lions and form a basis for defining a long term conservation plan. If they fail then Cities 1 is almost guaranteed.

What does the hunting community need to do? One is to help fund Conservation Force and SCI with these lion studies. They need the funds now, three years from now and it might be too late. Two continue hunting wild lions, keep the money flowing. Three only take old lions; studies are showing that hunting older lions does not impact the overall population whereas taking younger lions does.

More great ways to expand on this subject;
1. Kenya, no hunting since 1977. Where did all the wildlife go? http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.../07/090707201216.htm http://dsc.discovery.com/news/.../kenya-wildlife.html
2. Details on Packer and the Chardonnay studies http://www.conservationforce.o...oftheafricanlion.pdf
3. Aging lions while hunting http://www.safaripress.com/ful...ge.php?productid=742
4. Current lion studies and conservation plans happening right now http://www.conservationforce.o...thafricanlion023.pdf
5. What anti-hunters want the world to believe
6. Conservation vs. Preservation

How is that for a start?

John Hunt

John, thanks you for providing these links...I for sure will start learning the plight of these magnificent beasts and what they're up against and how they impact the people of Africa especially!

Thank you!



I'm also hoping that SableTrail would provide the same...


Very educational for me indeed...

Thanks guys....

Guys, this has been a really interesting discussion. However, it's not really about trophy hunting vs. a complete moratorium on hunting like they have in Kenya. It would be wonderful if it were that simple. It's all about habitat. If you want lions, then you have to have a place where lions can be loins and the exploding population of humans is providing constant encroachment on those places and in truth and fact, humans are breeding every other species into extinction. You want to save the lions, move the Masai to to west Texas and give them some damn cattle. Until you can figure a way to to that, the lions are doomed along with most of the other wild species of Africa. It's just like the great plains here in America where 50 million bison once roamed. My advice, go see it if you can because if it is up to us humans, it will all be gone in your lifetime.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
I believe the product is Furadan (SP?). It used to be produced by FMC. I am out of touch with mergers and acquisitions so I don't know the present company that makes it. It was originally designed for use by crop dusters. I saw the filling operation several times and it was treated like it was deadly to the touch.

That is the chemical 60 minutes profiled.

Kenya moves forward to ban the pesticide Furadan after it is used to kill 76 lions

http://news.mongabay.com/2009/...e_furadan_kenya.html

quote:

Originally posted by SableTrail:


This was why Botwana authorities halted lion hunting a couple years ago, because they felt farmers and others were wiping out the lions that were killing cattle. And in order not to have a more drastic effect on the population, trophy hunting of lions was halted.

An approach that has never proven to yield a substantially beneficial effect on increasing populations.

Many examples with other species in the past, show further degradation of numbers.

___________________________________________
John Stossel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...x5c4&feature=related

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Guys, this has been a really interesting discussion. However, it's not really about trophy hunting vs. a complete moratorium on hunting like they have in Kenya. It would be wonderful if it were that simple. It's all about habitat. If you want lions, then you have to have a place where lions can be loins and the exploding population of humans is providing constant encroachment on those places and in truth and fact, humans are breeding every other species into extinction. You want to save the lions, move the Masai to to west Texas and give them some damn cattle. Until you can figure a way to to that, the lions are doomed along with most of the other wild species of Africa. It's just like the great plains here in America where 50 million bison once roamed. My advice, go see it if you can because if it is up to us humans, it will all be gone in your lifetime.

Kenya is used as an example because if hunting is ended for lions then in 30 years all southern African countries could have the same result.

If land is leased to hunting outfitters it stays wild. The great hunting blocks of east Africa bordered the great reserves and parks and provided a large (very large) boundary between parks and local population growth.

That is all gone now. The population has edged up to the parks and the parks are simply not big enough to provide enough habitat on there own. Net result... no animals.

So yes you are right, it is all about habitat. Where you missed the point is how to best preserve habitat.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnHunt:

So yes you are right, it is all about habitat. Where you missed the point is how to best preserve habitat.

John, where you missed the point it that you can't preserve the habitat unless you can figure a way to stop humans from breeding and I think that is impossible. Your profile doesn't say where you are from but my advice is if you want to see a wild lion, go now because, like the glaciers, in your lifetime they will be gone.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
---unless you can figure a way to stop humans from breeding ---
--- if you want to see a wild lion, go now because, like the glaciers , in your lifetime they will be gone.

Not good evidence of human "breeding" as to the effects on glaciers-

Lions--we're in agreement-- unless we can make the VALUE be UNDERSTOOD they will face the path the Tigers have followed.