Hi Aaron,

I posted this before our discussion about it.

Jo

Jolo

I have never called you names but I have challenged your integrity and character.

Others have called you names because you have been devious, pretending to want to learn but actually already ahving an agenda. Then you spring the cougar photo.

If you want to be accepted and treated with respect you need to be honest & not be devious ort manipulative with hidden agenda.

No I do not expect you go to every anti site and challenge them. Just Lion Aid will do. That is my test of your honesty & integrity!

Why don't you just leave us alone? You will never gain any credibility here on AR.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Nakihunter,

quote:

Go on to any anti-hunting site that you support and you will see many such conclusions. The fact that you do not oppose those sites means that you support their view.

Look at Dr. Kat's site - how many people equate hunters with evil, inhuman, murderers etc.? You say nothing! NOTHING!

Now you try to somehow be credible on AR!

You will NEVER gain any credibility here unless you go out into the wilderness and experience the wilderness and may be even accompany some hunters and just share camp a few days or weeks.

Again this is ludicrous!!

You want me to go on every anti-hunting site and disagree with them? I actually don't read any anti-hunting sites unless a link catches my eye on twitter.

Regarding people calling you evil, inhuman, murderers are you having a laugh? Do you really have such double standards? You think it is perfectly ok for me to be called every name under the sun here and you say nothing and yet you want me to defend you elsewhere?
Priceless!!!!!!!

The names you are called are what peoples opinion of you are and i'm afraid my saying they're not is not going to change that opinion. You do know that sticks and stones may break your bones but names will never actually hurt you dont you?

Why let people calling you names bother you? Is that the most important thing you would like to get across to them? That its not ok to call you names? I think your priorities are wrong somewhere here!

Regarding going and seeing for myself, i agree, i need to and i plan to. I have been discussing it and will be discussing it further with a member here.

quote:

They would be off the land that the hunters wanted but they didn't really give a thought to the land they would move onto and in their own words ruin!

Jolo,
Pls understand, it is NOT the hunters that are moving them off the land but rather the Government has decided to ENFORCE the legal land use for that piece of land which is a Wildlife Protected Area. The fact that Government has further decided (decades ago) that the best USE for the wildlife resources on that portion of land is to be consumptive, is a separate matter all-together and unrelated to the eviction. IOW, it isn't the hunters that are moving these people.

The original Game Controlled Area (GCA) is approx 4000 odd sq km. TZ laws state that NO human habitation or activity is allowed on GCA land. The Maasai have ignored this status for decades. The Gov has decided to only enforce the GCA status and its land use on approx 1500sq km and de-gazette the remaining approx 2500sqkm to allow those Maasai to continue to live there. There is plenty of space in the 2500sqkm - which by the way abuts to other general/village land occupied by the same Maasai several times larger than what we are arguing about - for people. More than they need to live comfortably acctually, if they adopted modern ranching principles and adjusted their herds to the carrying capacity of the land. The life of the Maasai is not going to be negatively impacted by not accessing the 1500 sq km that has been enforced as a GCA.

I don't know how to put it more simply for you

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

They would be off the land that the hunters wanted but they didn't really give a thought to the land they would move onto and in their own words ruin!

Jolo,
Pls understand, it is NOT the hunters that are moving them off the land but rather the Government has decided to ENFORCE the legal land use for that piece of land which is a Wildlife Protected Area. The fact that Government has further decided (decades ago) that the best USE for the wildlife resources on that portion of land is to be consumptive, is a separate matter all-together and unrelated to the eviction. IOW, it isn't the hunters that are moving these people.

The original Game Controlled Area (GCA) is approx 4000 odd sq km. TZ laws state that NO human habitation or activity is allowed on GCA land. The Maasai have ignored this status for decades. The Gov has decided to only enforce the GCA status and its land use on approx 1500sq km and de-gazette the remaining approx 2500sqkm to allow those Maasai to continue to live there. There is plenty of space in the 2500sqkm - which by the way abuts to other general/village land occupied by the same Maasai several times larger than what we are arguing about - for people. More than they need to live comfortably acctually, if they adopted modern ranching principles and adjusted their herds to the carrying capacity of the land. The life of the Maasai is not going to be negatively impacted by not accessing the 1500 sq km that has been enforced as a GCA.

I don't know how to put it more simply for you

Bwanamich,

Do you really expect Jolo and Dr. Kat and the idiots that belong to their organization to understand simple logic?

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

You know the ones. Those who have never been in the wild.
Have never even seen a true wild animal out of the zoo.

They are the same lot who are campaigning for the elimination of wild animals from the circus.

Next it is going to be the closure of all zoos.

Next it is going to be the elimination of all farmed animals.

Human's need brains to work out logic.

Some of those who walk on two legs must have missed the boat the day they were giving out brains.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

They would be off the land that the hunters wanted but they didn't really give a thought to the land they would move onto and in their own words ruin!

Jolo,
Pls understand, it is NOT the hunters that are moving them off the land but rather the Government has decided to ENFORCE the legal land use for that piece of land which is a Wildlife Protected Area. The fact that Government has further decided (decades ago) that the best USE for the wildlife resources on that portion of land is to be consumptive, is a separate matter all-together and unrelated to the eviction. IOW, it isn't the hunters that are moving these people.

The original Game Controlled Area (GCA) is approx 4000 odd sq km. TZ laws state that NO human habitation or activity is allowed on GCA land. The Maasai have ignored this status for decades. The Gov has decided to only enforce the GCA status and its land use on approx 1500sq km and de-gazette the remaining approx 2500sqkm to allow those Maasai to continue to live there. There is plenty of space in the 2500sqkm - which by the way abuts to other general/village land occupied by the same Maasai several times larger than what we are arguing about - for people. More than they need to live comfortably acctually, if they adopted modern ranching principles and adjusted their herds to the carrying capacity of the land. The life of the Maasai is not going to be negatively impacted by not accessing the 1500 sq km that has been enforced as a GCA.

I don't know how to put it more simply for you

Bwanamich,

Do you really expect Jolo and Dr. Kat and the idiots that belong to their organization to understand simple logic?

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

You know the ones. Those who have never been in the wild.
Have never even seen a true wild animal out of the zoo.

They are the same lot who are campaigning for the elimination of wild animals from the circus.

Next it is going to be the closure of all zoos.

Next it is going to be the elimination of all farmed animals.

Human's need brains to work out logic.

Some of those who walk on two legs must have missed the boat the day they were giving out brains.

+1

I love it when a response is so lyrical, I need not even type. Besides I might merely detract from the painfully obvious.

Jeff

quote:

I have never called you names but I have challenged your integrity and character.

Others have called you names because you have been devious, pretending to want to learn but actually already ahving an agenda. Then you spring the cougar photo.

So it is ok for others here to call me names but not ok for people on other sites to generically call hunters names?
No, i'm sorry it does not work like that.

You say others have called me names here because i have been devious and pretended to want to learn when i have an agenda?
Well i would suggest that hunters (generically) are called names for the very same deviousness and agenda you claim about me. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander as they say!

I have never once not claimed to have an agenda. That agenda is protecting wildlife full stop.

quote:

If you want to be accepted and treated with respect you need to be honest & not be devious ort manipulative with hidden agenda.

Whether you (generic) treat me with respect or not is of no consequence to me, i couldn't give a toss.
I am curious though to know where you think it is i have been devious, manipulative or acted with hidden agenda?
And don't come back with more bluff, give me examples, tell me what this hidden agenda i have is.

quote:

No I do not expect you go to every anti site and challenge them. Just Lion Aid will do. That is my test of your honesty & integrity!

You want me to challenge someone on your word of what is right for conservation?
Why do you not make a challenge, and don't tell me Lion Aid have blocked you because that is not the only way you can make a challenge.

quote:

Why don't you just leave us alone? You will never gain any credibility here on AR.

You have a choice here. You can choose to converse with me or not converse with me. You yourself have made the choice to interact, you can reverse that choice quite easily and not bother.
You make it sound like i have burst into AR like some kind of playground bully, its laughable.

Now lets discuss your way to challenge the views of antis, conservation sites like Lion Aid and the good old general public.
I'm going to be quite frank here and i make no apologies for it either.
You (generic) sit here and piss and moan about the bad rap you as hunters get. How people claim you are murderers, inhuman etc etc and yet you just have to look to the information available on hunting to see why that is!
How many conservation charities are out there that are backed by hunters or started by hunters? How hard are you (generic) trying to get your message across that hunting is a conservation tool? None that i have found!
If you want people to see you as the conservationists you are or claim to be then why not do something? Why not start a very public campaign like the antis do and put your arguments across, get it out there!
But no you sit on your asses and complain that your are portrayed badly by the public and anti websites. You are your own worst enemies when it boils down to it, hiding in AR moaning that people dont see you as conservationists. Don't ask me to help you when you can't be bothered helping yourselves!!

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

They would be off the land that the hunters wanted but they didn't really give a thought to the land they would move onto and in their own words ruin!

Jolo,
Pls understand, it is NOT the hunters that are moving them off the land but rather the Government has decided to ENFORCE the legal land use for that piece of land which is a Wildlife Protected Area. The fact that Government has further decided (decades ago) that the best USE for the wildlife resources on that portion of land is to be consumptive, is a separate matter all-together and unrelated to the eviction. IOW, it isn't the hunters that are moving these people.

The original Game Controlled Area (GCA) is approx 4000 odd sq km. TZ laws state that NO human habitation or activity is allowed on GCA land. The Maasai have ignored this status for decades. The Gov has decided to only enforce the GCA status and its land use on approx 1500sq km and de-gazette the remaining approx 2500sqkm to allow those Maasai to continue to live there. There is plenty of space in the 2500sqkm - which by the way abuts to other general/village land occupied by the same Maasai several times larger than what we are arguing about - for people. More than they need to live comfortably acctually, if they adopted modern ranching principles and adjusted their herds to the carrying capacity of the land. The life of the Maasai is not going to be negatively impacted by not accessing the 1500 sq km that has been enforced as a GCA.

I don't know how to put it more simply for you

I don't disagree with anything you have said here but what you have failed to mention is the big fat chunk of money that the government gains from the UAE royal family owned hunting company that wants that land to use for hunting!
Don't forget in Africa as has been said to me so many times 'if it pays it stays' and hunting companies certainly pay!

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
hunting companies [AND HUNTERS] certainly pay!

How many threads and pages did it finally take you to realize that? And with that money comes habitat protection and anti poaching? These too factors increase wildlife populations or in the very least prevent their decline.

Saeed, Saeed, Saeed,

Were you not taught manners in your household?

quote:

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

If that is how you feel, do something! Get off your ass and put the hunters version out there!

quote:

You know the ones. Those who have never been in the wild.
Have never even seen a true wild animal out of the zoo.

I've seen them, not everyone is the same, stop lumping us all together!
Now where have i heard that before??

quote:

They are the same lot who are campaigning for the elimination of wild animals from the circus.

Next it is going to be the closure of all zoos.

Next it is going to be the elimination of all farmed animals.

Shame on you Saeed

Are you telling me you advocate the practices of making wild animals perform in a circus?
Are you telling me that it is perfectly ok for an elephant such as the one used in the film 'water for elephants' to be appallingly tortured all in the name of getting it to perform for human pleasure?

Are you also telling me that you approve of some zoos practices? Keeping animals in enclosures bereft of their needs,that are too small?
Are you telling me there is any need for animals to wander back and forth across their enclosures because they are so unhappy and it is all so unnatural?

Zoos certainly have their place in conservation but many are not fit for the animals they contain.

As for farmed animals, long as they are humanely treated i see no problem. I've visited UK farms and i've also been to a croc farm in SA. I have no problems with them run properly.

Once again Saeed you have shown your mentality for what it is. You don't care about the animals as long as you get to use them for your own personal gain. I say again shame on you.

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
hunting companies certainly pay!

How many threads and pages did it finally take you to realize that? And with that money comes habitat protection and anti poaching? These too factors increase wildlife populations or in the very least prevent their decline.

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

quote:

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

Jolo, to give you an example: I operate a small number of hunting safaris close to a National Park. The Park gets anywhere from 1500 to 3000 visitors in the year. I get 10 to 15 hunters.

These 10 to 15 hunters provide the same amount of revenues to the local communities as the Park does...

The difference is that the tourists do not do anti-poaching, and do absolutely nothing to enhance the animal populations. They do not raise conservation awareness among the local communities. They do not participate in species census. They do not check the conditions of the environment, monitor water points, manage wild fires, do early burns in the bush, check remote areas for supposedly extinct species, interact with the elders to try and return to sustainable local hunting practices.

The tourists just come around, visit the Park from the back of a vehicle, safely on permitted paths, take a few pictures, do a lot of Ohs and Ahs, do absolutely NOTHING towards conservation of animals that most of the time they can barely name if at all, and consider themselves as dyed-in-the-wool true conservationists.

The same bunch looks down on our hunting vehicles with irate condescendence when peradventure we meet them on the trail... Because we represent the evil incarnate, we animal killers.

Pathetic.

Granted, whenever I get the opportunity to talk with any of them in detail, they generally end up revising their outlook on the issue. But there are millions and millions of people like that out there, and there is no way you can educate them - not with the bias driving the media on anything animal related!

I know I have hit a raw nerve!

I had not realized this thread was still going on. I stopped reading it a while ago and can´t be bothered to catch up but I have a question,
I am not an africa hunter and despite some dreaming in the past, nor will I probably ever be. I have an interest in african wildlife and come here for the great amount of real experience and knowledge that is here.

My Q is, is there any other, non hunting, forum where people who love african wildlife, for example birdwatchers, safari tourists, professional guides and scientists spend their time daily sharing stories and knowledge about africa and its wildlife and if not, why so?

Also, I may be wrong but I believe Kruger park was established to save the wildlife, not from hunters per se but from farmers. Farmers tried successfully to eradicate all wild animals because they spread disease to the domestic livestock.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Saeed, Saeed, Saeed,

Were you not taught manners in your household?

quote:

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

If that is how you feel, do something! Get off your ass and put the hunters version out there!

Errr... Hasn´t Saeed started the largest hunting (and conservation) discussion forum on the internet?

quote:

Originally posted by Philip A.:

quote:

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

Jolo, to give you an example: I operate a small number of hunting safaris close to a National Park. The Park gets anywhere from 1500 to 3000 visitors in the year. I get 10 to 15 hunters.

These 10 to 15 hunters provide the same amount of revenues to the local communities as the Park does...

The difference is that the tourists do not do anti-poaching, and do absolutely nothing to enhance the animal populations. They do not raise conservation awareness among the local communities. They do not participate in species census. They do not check the conditions of the environment, monitor water points, manage wild fires, do early burns in the bush, check remote areas for supposedly extinct species, interact with the elders to try and return to sustainable local hunting practices.

The tourists just come around, visit the Park from the back of a vehicle, safely on permitted paths, take a few pictures, do a lot of Ohs and Ahs, do absolutely NOTHING towards conservation of animals that most of the time they can barely name if at all, and consider themselves as dyed-in-the-wool true conservationists.

The same bunch looks down on our hunting vehicles with irate condescendence when peradventure we meet them on the trail... Because we represent the evil incarnate, we animal killers.

Pathetic.

Granted, whenever I get the opportunity to talk with any of them in detail, they generally end up revising their outlook on the issue. But there are millions and millions of people like that out there, and there is no way you can educate them - not with the bias driving the media on anything animal related!

I'm aware of all this which is why i said i did, past tense question but thanks for the reply.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
hunting companies certainly pay!

How many threads and pages did it finally take you to realize that? And with that money comes habitat protection and anti poaching? These too factors increase wildlife populations or in the very least prevent their decline.

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

Great, have both.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I know I have hit a raw nerve!

You did indeed Saeed.
But there again what you fail to realise in your arrogance is that you hit a LOT of nerves here with your couldn't care less about the welfare of animals attitude!

quote:

Originally posted by snowhound:
I had not realized this thread was still going on. I stopped reading it a while ago and can´t be bothered to catch up but I have a question,
I am not an africa hunter and despite some dreaming in the past, nor will I probably ever be. I have an interest in african wildlife and come here for the great amount of real experience and knowledge that is here.

My Q is, is there any other, non hunting, forum where people who love african wildlife, for example birdwatchers, safari tourists, professional guides and scientists spend their time daily sharing stories and knowledge about africa and its wildlife and if not, why so?

Also, I may be wrong but I believe Kruger park was established to save the wildlife, not from hunters per se but from farmers. Farmers tried successfully to eradicate all wild animals because they spread disease to the domestic livestock.

Kruger Park was established to stop the over hunting of the animals. It had nothing to do with farming or disease.

quote:

Originally posted by snowhound:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Saeed, Saeed, Saeed,

Were you not taught manners in your household?

quote:

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

If that is how you feel, do something! Get off your ass and put the hunters version out there!

Errr... Hasn´t Saeed started the largest hunting (and conservation) discussion forum on the internet?

Yes he has created a place designed for hunters, not for all to discuss conservation unless you want to be called names and have your questions go unanswered.

See my earlier post which referred to hunters challenging the anti-hunters and how they could do it.

Lets be honest any anti-hunter coming here would not change their mind about hunters on reading this thread and all the vitriol it contains.

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
hunting companies certainly pay!

How many threads and pages did it finally take you to realize that? And with that money comes habitat protection and anti poaching? These too factors increase wildlife populations or in the very least prevent their decline.

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

Great, have both.

Agreed.

Bt lets make sure that the wildlife is protected and that both kinds of business are run in the right way.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by snowhound:
I had not realized this thread was still going on. I stopped reading it a while ago and can´t be bothered to catch up but I have a question,
I am not an africa hunter and despite some dreaming in the past, nor will I probably ever be. I have an interest in african wildlife and come here for the great amount of real experience and knowledge that is here.

My Q is, is there any other, non hunting, forum where people who love african wildlife, for example birdwatchers, safari tourists, professional guides and scientists spend their time daily sharing stories and knowledge about africa and its wildlife and if not, why so?

Also, I may be wrong but I believe Kruger park was established to save the wildlife, not from hunters per se but from farmers. Farmers tried successfully to eradicate all wild animals because they spread disease to the domestic livestock.

Kruger Park was established to stop the over hunting of the animals. It had nothing to do with farming or disease.

Jolo

You say that your agenda is to conserve wild life and yet you are against hunting!

What eveidenece do you need that hunters contribute more to establishing sanctuaries and national parks? I have already made this point & you have found evidence. How many park rangers are NOT hunters?

How many hunting concession have been improved as wildlife habitat by controlling poaching? Has any non hunting areas have been similarly improveed in the last 30 years? None! Why can you not accept that it is only due to licensed commercial hunting that many parts of Africa have improved in animal habitat? Why can you not agree that Kenya has declined in wild life after banning hunting?

The evidence is every where - hunters are the primary people to establish wild life reserves and parks. Hunters are the most effecctive cause of controlling poaching in areas that are not national parks!

Very simple.

BTW - my areggument is that the bbunny hugging hate sites are full of people with no human compassion. They are extremists - similar to religious fanatics. You aassociatte wiith them! Think about it.

You also missed BIG point - all those sites just ban hunters and delete posts that are supportive hunting. they deelete posts that are full of facts and reason! You approve of that! Think about it.

-*------------------------

jolo said

quote:

How many conservation charities are out there that are backed by hunters or started by hunters? How hard are you (generic) trying to get your message across that hunting is a conservation tool? None that i have found!
If you want people to see you as the conservationists you are or claim to be then why not do something? Why not start a very public campaign like the antis do and put your arguments across, get it out there!

Jolo

The big difference is that you are allowed to freely engage & discuss here - despite your lack of genuine intellectual honesty. You are not banned and your posts are not deleted. you have exactly the same rights as all other members.

But all your anti-hunting friends and sites do not practice the same kind of democratic and civiil debate. They spew hate and just ban us hunters and delete our posts. They are essentially hate sites with no desire to engage in honest and factual debate. As I have said before these antis are all like religioous fanaticss.

Any anti coming here will be ignorant - like you - posting a cougar photo for a lion discussion. They will have no real experience of the wilderness - like yourself! They will be totally prjudiced and have nothing but armchair knowledge of conservation - like you.

Most of them will be dishonest and fail to acknowledge that the hunting community contributes more to wild life conservation than the bunny kissing antis!

----------------------------------
jolo said

quote:

Lets be honest any anti-hunter coming here would not change their mind about hunters on reading this thread and all the vitriol it contains.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
hunting companies certainly pay!

How many threads and pages did it finally take you to realize that? And with that money comes habitat protection and anti poaching? These too factors increase wildlife populations or in the very least prevent their decline.

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

Great, have both.

Agreed.

Bt lets make sure that the wildlife is protected and that both kinds of business are run in the right way.

Broken record.........Groundhog Day........endlessless terminal loop..........stuck in Purgatory........must find door......ignore,ignore,ignore.....

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Saeed, Saeed, Saeed,

Were you not taught manners in your household?

quote:

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

If that is how you feel, do something! Get off your ass and put the hunters version out there!

quote:

You know the ones. Those who have never been in the wild.
Have never even seen a true wild animal out of the zoo.

I've seen them, not everyone is the same, stop lumping us all together!
Now where have i heard that before??

quote:

They are the same lot who are campaigning for the elimination of wild animals from the circus.

Next it is going to be the closure of all zoos.

Next it is going to be the elimination of all farmed animals.

Shame on you Saeed

Are you telling me you advocate the practices of making wild animals perform in a circus?
Are you telling me that it is perfectly ok for an elephant such as the one used in the film 'water for elephants' to be appallingly tortured all in the name of getting it to perform for human pleasure?

Are you also telling me that you approve of some zoos practices? Keeping animals in enclosures bereft of their needs,that are too small?
Are you telling me there is any need for animals to wander back and forth across their enclosures because they are so unhappy and it is all so unnatural?

Zoos certainly have their place in conservation but many are not fit for the animals they contain.

As for farmed animals, long as they are humanely treated i see no problem. I've visited UK farms and i've also been to a croc farm in SA. I have no problems with them run properly.

Once again Saeed you have shown your mentality for what it is. You don't care about the animals as long as you get to use them for your own personal gain. I say again shame on you.

If anyone had ANY doubts about their agenda.

Here it is.

In his/hers/its own words!

This bunch of nitwits are living in cuckoo land.

They are absolutely, positively, no better than PETA and HSUS!

Nutters who have no life!

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by snowhound:
I had not realized this thread was still going on. I stopped reading it a while ago and can´t be bothered to catch up but I have a question,
I am not an africa hunter and despite some dreaming in the past, nor will I probably ever be. I have an interest in african wildlife and come here for the great amount of real experience and knowledge that is here.

My Q is, is there any other, non hunting, forum where people who love african wildlife, for example birdwatchers, safari tourists, professional guides and scientists spend their time daily sharing stories and knowledge about africa and its wildlife and if not, why so?

Also, I may be wrong but I believe Kruger park was established to save the wildlife, not from hunters per se but from farmers. Farmers tried successfully to eradicate all wild animals because they spread disease to the domestic livestock.

Kruger Park was established to stop the over hunting of the animals. It had nothing to do with farming or disease.

unadulterated bullshit. the Boer farmers were determined to exterminate wild life as it used the same available habitat for grazing/browsing as their livestock- not to mention the predators eating said livestock. the "overhunting" was a determined campaign to kill off the competition...

See what I mean?

Just imagine, JellyBrain and his/her/it friends will start a new organization for the protection of tse tse flies.

Imagine again what hunters will have to go through for swatting a tse tse fly!


Hey JellyBrain, you can put me on top of your list of tse tse flies killers. I take bags of rubber bands, which we use to ki8ll as many of those lovely tse tse flies as we can.

In fact, we have contest to see who can kill more than the other.

quote:

I don't disagree with anything you have said here but what you have failed to mention is the big fat chunk of money that the government gains from the UAE royal family owned hunting company that wants that land to use for hunting!

So that is what is really bothering you? The fact that a royal family that are hunters is offering more funds towards conservation activities than what the non hunting photo operators did or can? Why does that bother you?

If instead of consumptive use, the land use was non consumptive, the Gov would move the maasai from there as well.

If you care so much about the welfare of the animals that roam the GCA, you would not want the maasai and their cattle wandering the same land with their livestock, cordoning off the water resources for their herds thereby preventing wildlife access to the same. Not to mention destroying all the predators they come across.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

I don't disagree with anything you have said here but what you have failed to mention is the big fat chunk of money that the government gains from the UAE royal family owned hunting company that wants that land to use for hunting!

So that is what is really bothering you? The fact that a royal family that are hunters is offering more funds towards conservation activities than what the non hunting photo operators did or can? Why does that bother you?

If instead of consumptive use, the land use was non consumptive, the Gov would move the maasai from there as well.

If you care so much about the welfare of the animals that roam the GCA, you would not want the maasai and their cattle wandering the same land with their livestock, cordoning off the water resources for their herds thereby preventing wildlife access to the same. Not to mention destroying all the predators they come across.

I was waiting for this answer.

Common sense and logic.

But don't hold your breath for the fringe idiots to understand this.

In today's paper I see that PETA is trying to stop horse racing!

As Walter likes to say, these idiots have a negative IQ number

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

I don't disagree with anything you have said here but what you have failed to mention is the big fat chunk of money that the government gains from the UAE royal family owned hunting company that wants that land to use for hunting!

So that is what is really bothering you? The fact that a royal family that are hunters is offering more funds towards conservation activities than what the non hunting photo operators did or can? Why does that bother you?

If instead of consumptive use, the land use was non consumptive, the Gov would move the maasai from there as well.

If you care so much about the welfare of the animals that roam the GCA, you would not want the maasai and their cattle wandering the same land with their livestock, cordoning off the water resources for their herds thereby preventing wildlife access to the same. Not to mention destroying all the predators they come across.

WRONG !!!

What bothers me is that noone gives a rats ass about where the Maasai move onto and the wildlife and land they might ruin there!

All they cared about was enabling hunting on the land the Maasai already occupied.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
See what I mean?

Just imagine, JellyBrain and his/her/it friends will start a new organization for the protection of tse tse flies.

Imagine again what hunters will have to go through for swatting a tse tse fly!


Hey JellyBrain, you can put me on top of your list of tse tse flies killers. I take bags of rubber bands, which we use to ki8ll as many of those lovely tse tse flies as we can.

In fact, we have contest to see who can kill more than the other.

Never heard of a tse tse fly, must be a new species.
I have heard of a tsetse fly though and i'd kill those too.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by snowhound:
I had not realized this thread was still going on. I stopped reading it a while ago and can´t be bothered to catch up but I have a question,
I am not an africa hunter and despite some dreaming in the past, nor will I probably ever be. I have an interest in african wildlife and come here for the great amount of real experience and knowledge that is here.

My Q is, is there any other, non hunting, forum where people who love african wildlife, for example birdwatchers, safari tourists, professional guides and scientists spend their time daily sharing stories and knowledge about africa and its wildlife and if not, why so?

Also, I may be wrong but I believe Kruger park was established to save the wildlife, not from hunters per se but from farmers. Farmers tried successfully to eradicate all wild animals because they spread disease to the domestic livestock.

Kruger Park was established to stop the over hunting of the animals. It had nothing to do with farming or disease.

unadulterated bullshit. the Boer farmers were determined to exterminate wild life as it used the same available habitat for grazing/browsing as their livestock- not to mention the predators eating said livestock. the "overhunting" was a determined campaign to kill off the competition...

jdollar,

You have picked a mighty bad subject to challenge me on my friend. I have researched, been to, visited the history library at Skukuza and had articles published on the history of Kruger!
I can assure you that you are the one spouting bullshit but out of the goodness of my heart i'll certainly educate you on it if you wish.
Rewriting history to fit your personal agenda really isn't cricket you know, but nice try.
By the way did you know that one of the rangers brought in to help with the Kruger Park wanted to eradicate all the predators there? Luckily James Stevenson Hamilton wouldn't go for it otherwise that could have ended rather badly now couldnt it? Oh and fyi the ranger was a hunter!!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Saeed, Saeed, Saeed,

Were you not taught manners in your household?

quote:

They have an agenda, to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant Joe Public.

If that is how you feel, do something! Get off your ass and put the hunters version out there!

quote:

You know the ones. Those who have never been in the wild.
Have never even seen a true wild animal out of the zoo.

I've seen them, not everyone is the same, stop lumping us all together!
Now where have i heard that before??

quote:

They are the same lot who are campaigning for the elimination of wild animals from the circus.

Next it is going to be the closure of all zoos.

Next it is going to be the elimination of all farmed animals.

Shame on you Saeed

Are you telling me you advocate the practices of making wild animals perform in a circus?
Are you telling me that it is perfectly ok for an elephant such as the one used in the film 'water for elephants' to be appallingly tortured all in the name of getting it to perform for human pleasure?

Are you also telling me that you approve of some zoos practices? Keeping animals in enclosures bereft of their needs,that are too small?
Are you telling me there is any need for animals to wander back and forth across their enclosures because they are so unhappy and it is all so unnatural?

Zoos certainly have their place in conservation but many are not fit for the animals they contain.

As for farmed animals, long as they are humanely treated i see no problem. I've visited UK farms and i've also been to a croc farm in SA. I have no problems with them run properly.

Once again Saeed you have shown your mentality for what it is. You don't care about the animals as long as you get to use them for your own personal gain. I say again shame on you.

If anyone had ANY doubts about their agenda.

Here it is.

In his/hers/its own words!

This bunch of nitwits are living in cuckoo land.

They are absolutely, positively, no better than PETA and HSUS!

Nutters who have no life!

So people only nutters think cruelty to animals is not acceptable!

Saeed, you are your own worst enemy and fyi the reason people call hunters inhuman and monsters is right here in your words.

You are a bad advertisement for hunting and one of the people who i feel has no place in hunting!

I hope the members of AR take note of this before trying to tell me every hunter is conservation minded and a lover of animals!!

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
hunting companies certainly pay!

How many threads and pages did it finally take you to realize that? And with that money comes habitat protection and anti poaching? These too factors increase wildlife populations or in the very least prevent their decline.

I've never actually disagreed with this concept. I did question whether hunting or photo safari paid more into the economies of African countries.

Great, have both.

Agreed.

Bt lets make sure that the wildlife is protected and that both kinds of business are run in the right way.

Broken record.........Groundhog Day........endlessless terminal loop..........stuck in Purgatory........must find door......ignore,ignore,ignore.....

And unfortunately i will keep saying it until the hunting community decides to man up and accept that their house needs putting in order.

Why your pal Saeed is evidence of this. He feels its ok to torture animals and display them in inappropriate surroundings for human pleasure. After all as he says in his complete arrogance animals were put here for man to use!

You must be so proud that the owner of this site which preaches conservation and welfare of animals is such a good advertisement for the complete opposite!!

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Jolo

The big difference is that you are allowed to freely engage & discuss here - despite your lack of genuine intellectual honesty. You are not banned and your posts are not deleted. you have exactly the same rights as all other members.

But all your anti-hunting friends and sites do not practice the same kind of democratic and civiil debate. They spew hate and just ban us hunters and delete our posts. They are essentially hate sites with no desire to engage in honest and factual debate. As I have said before these antis are all like religioous fanaticss.

Any anti coming here will be ignorant - like you - posting a cougar photo for a lion discussion. They will have no real experience of the wilderness - like yourself! They will be totally prjudiced and have nothing but armchair knowledge of conservation - like you.

Most of them will be dishonest and fail to acknowledge that the hunting community contributes more to wild life conservation than the bunny kissing antis!

----------------------------------
jolo said

quote:

Lets be honest any anti-hunter coming here would not change their mind about hunters on reading this thread and all the vitriol it contains.

Yada yada yada.

We can dance this dance forever if you wish but you are obviously unable to prove the accusations you make of my dishonesty and deviousness blah blah blah.

Double standards do not work for me in any shape or form.

I wont have a go at anyone for not allowing you to post on their site, they have every right not to engage with you, get over it!!

Now when are you going to live up to your own standards and get the people here to stop calling me names?

I know, never !!

Because in your opinion i deserve it. Well guess what in the opinion of those calling hunters names you deserve it.

Ta dah!!

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Jolo

You say that your agenda is to conserve wild life and yet you are against hunting!

What eveidenece do you need that hunters contribute more to establishing sanctuaries and national parks? I have already made this point & you have found evidence. How many park rangers are NOT hunters?

How many hunting concession have been improved as wildlife habitat by controlling poaching? Has any non hunting areas have been similarly improveed in the last 30 years? None! Why can you not accept that it is only due to licensed commercial hunting that many parts of Africa have improved in animal habitat? Why can you not agree that Kenya has declined in wild life after banning hunting?

The evidence is every where - hunters are the primary people to establish wild life reserves and parks. Hunters are the most effecctive cause of controlling poaching in areas that are not national parks!

Very simple.

BTW - my areggument is that the bbunny hugging hate sites are full of people with no human compassion. They are extremists - similar to religious fanatics. You aassociatte wiith them! Think about it.

You also missed BIG point - all those sites just ban hunters and delete posts that are supportive hunting. they deelete posts that are full of facts and reason! You approve of that! Think about it.

-*------------------------

jolo said

quote:

How many conservation charities are out there that are backed by hunters or started by hunters? How hard are you (generic) trying to get your message across that hunting is a conservation tool? None that i have found!
If you want people to see you as the conservationists you are or claim to be then why not do something? Why not start a very public campaign like the antis do and put your arguments across, get it out there!

Firstly before you make the accusation that i am anti-hunting know what you're talking about. Have a look at the posts in this thread, you know the one you're participating in and see what i say about hunting!!

The rest i'm not sure what you're rambling on about. I wasn't aware i had disagreed about who established many national parks!! I wasn't aware i had said that park rangers weren't hunters! Im not aware that i had disagreed that wildlife in kenya had dropped since the banning of hunting! I wasn't aware id said i wanted a ban on all hunting! I wasn't aware i associated with bunny hugging hate sites!

And as for the BIG point well surely all the more reason you should start your own website / campaign and get your point out there. Create your own platform for your own beliefs. There are free website sites or you can get one from about £9.99 a month. Surely worth spending if you are so keen to be able to get your message out there.

Nakihunter + Jolouburn = worthy adversaries.

Hello AR members.

Please stop calling jolo names. She is "one of us".

She agrees that hunting is good for conservation.

She agrees that Kenyan conservation is worse off by stopping hunting.

She agrees that hunters have contributed more to starting national parks and reserves than bunny huggers.

She is not against banning ALL hunting. Just lions for now. She is still making up her list for the future.

She does not associate with Bunny hugging hate sites! Just Lion aid - so lion hugging hate site is ok!

Hey guys - we have converted her! She is now one of us! WE DID IT!


NOW - Who is going to take her on her first hunt?

How about a nice mountain lion hunt in British Columbia - without a collar of course!

I offer to take her into some real wilderness in India - no hunting. But lots of true wilderness experience - walking for days, sleeping under the stars, in village sheep pens, drinking stream water. Lots of thorns, mosquitos, nettle, corns and blisters. Oh and very hot weather too with very high humidity.

quote:

Firstly before you make the accusation that I am anti-hunting know what you're talking about. Have a look at the posts in this thread, you know the one you're participating in and see what i say about hunting!!

The rest i'm not sure what you're rambling on about. I wasn't aware i had disagreed about who established many national parks!! I wasn't aware i had said that park rangers weren't hunters! Im not aware that i had disagreed that wildlife in kenya had dropped since the banning of hunting! I wasn't aware id said i wanted a ban on all hunting! I wasn't aware i associated with bunny hugging hate sites!

And as for the BIG point well surely all the more reason you should start your own website / campaign and get your point out there. Create your own platform for your own beliefs. There are free website sites or you can get one from about £9.99 a month. Surely worth spending if you are so keen to be able to get your message out there.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Hello AR members.

Please stop calling jolo names. She is "one of us".

She agrees that hunting is good for conservation.

She agrees that Kenyan conservation is worse off by stopping hunting.

She agrees that hunters have contributed more to starting national parks and reserves than bunny huggers.

She is not against banning ALL hunting. Just lions for now. She is still making up her list for the future.

She does not associate with Bunny hugging hate sites! Just Lion aid - so lion hugging hate site is ok!

Hey guys - we have converted her! She is now one of us! WE DID IT!


NOW - Who is going to take her on her first hunt?

How about a nice mountain lion hunt in British Columbia - without a collar of course!

I offer to take her into some real wilderness in India - no hunting. But lots of true wilderness experience - walking for days, sleeping under the stars, in village sheep pens, drinking stream water. Lots of thorns, mosquitos, nettle, corns and blisters. Oh and very hot weather too with very high humidity.

quote:

Firstly before you make the accusation that I am anti-hunting know what you're talking about. Have a look at the posts in this thread, you know the one you're participating in and see what i say about hunting!!

The rest i'm not sure what you're rambling on about. I wasn't aware i had disagreed about who established many national parks!! I wasn't aware i had said that park rangers weren't hunters! Im not aware that i had disagreed that wildlife in kenya had dropped since the banning of hunting! I wasn't aware id said i wanted a ban on all hunting! I wasn't aware i associated with bunny hugging hate sites!

And as for the BIG point well surely all the more reason you should start your own website / campaign and get your point out there. Create your own platform for your own beliefs. There are free website sites or you can get one from about £9.99 a month. Surely worth spending if you are so keen to be able to get your message out there.

I'll throw in a float trip during the Salmon run to observe (and not kill) those lovable furry Brown Bears. I really will have no idea how the bacon fat ended up on her tent.

quote:

You are a bad advertisement for hunting and one of the people who i feel has no place in hunting!

Oh boy!

You really ARE so obsessed with your own self importance!

Who cares what you feel?