http://safaritalk.net/index.php?showtopic=7291

'The same goes for hunting. It's a sport, for recreation, for fun. It is not conservation. You don’t go out and shoot a lion because you are a good conservationist. Hunting happens because you are selfish and want to kill something for yourself. We have to stop kidding ourselves that hunters do it for conservation. Conservation is the justification for what is basically a selfish act, and even then once you pick at it you realize that hunting is not conservation at all. If it was, once hunters knew that lions were in danger of extinction then of course they would stop.'

We have problems. This guy is a seriously blinkered fanatic. How can he have worked with wildlife for so long and be so clueless? The end of African hunting will spell the end of African wildlife, that is a given. Has Joubert got any comment on North American hunting and its impact on wildlife populations, I wonder? Any idea of the effect hunting has when it is done properly? People are swallowing all this hook, line and sinker, because this whackhead has made a few dumbo and lion king movies. Something has to be done, but I am not clued up enough and nor do I have enough clout. Aaron Nielson, ledvm, Shakari etc, what can we do now to counteract this? We can't muzzle him for sure (much as I'd like to physically do that), but can't we dig up some gen which is able to discredit his rantings? Facts and figures for lion areas/countries? I mean, I know the lions are not doing well everywhere and of course there are problems, but to claim that African lions are in danger of extinction and lay the blame squarely on hunting is irresponsible. I have just been browsing the internet and what I see is are huge discrepancies in the numbers of lions various greenie groups assume are out there - some say there are 40000 in the wild, some say 20000 and it is obvious that none of them have any idea. Does anyone who is not driven by emotion have an idea? Even for one country? What is the truth behind why the wild lion population has declined in recent times? It would be good if we could start a Facebook page trashing some of Joubert's spouting with hard fact. Post some facts about populations in various areas maybe, some info on how much loot lion hunting pours into the coffers of conservation....I believe this man is a real danger to hunting and should be in our crosshairs. Please help.

When they did the "Eternal Enemies" video were they not accused of placing those lion cubs in with the cobra so they could get better footage? That is what I heard from outfitters in Botswana. All three of those lion cubs ended up being killed by the Cobra along with their mother being bitten.

Unfortunately, a lot of hunters fit Joubert's analysis ... guys who are experts in ballistics and shot placement but are otherwise idiots and jackasses.

There is so much more to a safari than the kill; so many interesting things happening in the bush: the sights, sounds, even smells; so much to see and learn.

Contrary to what the Joubert's say, hunting is conservation, not only of wildlife; but of habitat, of ecosystems and ecosystem services, of tradition, of indigenous culture and knowledge, of the millions of species of flora and fauna preserved along with the wildlife.

Personally, I think that over-emphasis on the "trophy" is one of the worst aspects of trophy hunting. I rarely show a trophy photo of myself ... unless there is some other aspect to it besides the trophy, like the people who will benefit or with whom I hunted.

What trophy hunting needs is a new breed of hunters: less concerned with shooting the biggest and baddest trophies; more interested in the peoples of Africa, more interested in the overall experience of the hunt, and more interested in hunting as conservation.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Unfortunately, a lot of hunters fit Joubert's analysis ... guys who are experts in ballistics and shot placement but are otherwise idiots and jackasses.

There is so much more to a safari than the kill; so many interesting things happening in the bush: the sights, sounds, even smells; so much to see and learn.

Contrary to what the Joubert's say, hunting is conservation, not only of wildlife; but of habitat, of ecosystems and ecosystem services, of tradition, of indigenous culture and knowledge, of the millions of species of flora and fauna preserved along with the wildlife.

Personally, I think that over-emphasis on the "trophy" is one of the worst aspects of trophy hunting. I rarely show a trophy photo of myself ... unless there is some other aspect to it besides the trophy, like the people who will benefit or with whom I hunted.

What trophy hunting needs is a new breed of hunters: less concerned with shooting the biggest and baddest trophies; more interested in the peoples of Africa, more interested in the overall experience of the hunt, and more interested in hunting as conservation.

Very well put Steve, I like your attitude.

I am in, and the likes of Joubert will destroy old Africa as we know it.

A 'about hunting website is a great idea'.

Andrew

My analysis:

Human population is increasing. Historically not even war and disease have stopped the climbing numbers.
The earth is not getting much bigger by all accounts. Wildlife still needs the same amount of habitat to thrive. Humans have the ability to live on smaller areas of land. So how do we eventually not push them right off the board?
Against that we have a couple of weapons to buy time in the almost lost hope that we will change. We have tourism and hunting, both give value to wild places so people will leave them alone in order to get money.
The motives of tourists or hunters are irrelevant. They are tools to buy time and that is all.
Anything we can do to get people to bribe the tide of humanity to leave the wild places alone, we should do. It's the only hope we have. I don't care why they do it.

Received some Interesting and thought provoking comment in a PM a moment ago, have posted it below. I think most of us will agree that our biggest problem is we are so divided. Many hunters have the same kind of attitude commercial farmers and the industries that supported them had here in Zim, when all our troubles began in 2000. They were too concerned with their own individual agendas to make a united stand and see where it got them. If all the farmers and businesses that were funded by those farmers had heeded certain calls in 2000 and downed tools to a man when the first farms were invaded, the house would have come crashing down in a matter of weeks. Instead it has turned into a decade long debacle with the end not in sight yet. I believe we need to become far more proactive and vocal, start really getting the message out there, broadcast the positives of hunting, stand together for a change.....

fairgame - so now there are two of us! So long as we don't become divided, things can only get better! Now we need more guys, commitment to support such a website, guys who know what they are talking about to administer it, someone to set it up...Not just about lions, about hunting in general.. Promoting ethical, sustainable, progressive hunting practices...


David,
Thanks for posting that, interesting read.

Problem is, I see him as partially right in many ways. I agree to an EXTENT that hunting is in fact largely a selfish act and that we as a community use conservation as justification.

It's just sad that two groups with the same goal have polar methods to reach said goal.

The 556 lions he thinks he can save by stopping sport hunting is the "low hanging fruit" we as hunters are an easy target, we are largely disorganized. We by definition need high income professions to engage in this sport, so we hunt and we work in our given professions with precious little time to give to anything else.

These non producing environmental filmmakers need a boogie man to survive, we are their boogie man. Every liberal cause needs that boogie man, look at Obama, he has made business men like me the enemy with his constant drone of "millionaires and billionaires". Al Gore needed a boogie man to become the first "carbon billionaire" his boogie man is Carbon and industries that produce carbon.

The way I see it is this; I have been to Africa and spent enough time there (36) safaris in most sub-saharan countries that it always has been and alway will be about money. We as a community or in your case an industry need to be worth more to them than the other side.

If poisoning and man predator conflict is the largest culprit in decline why would they not tackle that first? no boogie man there. the indigenous people are to spread out, to remote and frankly don't care about the laws, they care about their families, their cattle and fuck everything else.

There are (by Craig Boddintons numbers) roughly 10,000 international sport hunters that go to Africa every year. You do the math, We (International Sport Hunters) are THE endangered species here, not the lion.

Just my thoughts here on Sunday morning

Of course hunting is a selfish act. That doesn't make it non-beneficial. I go to work and take care of my patients every day. Fundamentally that's selfish, too. I need to make money to live, and with luck, keep going hunting in Africa. Be that as it may, my patient population still benefits from my selfish act.
Hunting promotes conservation because as hunters, our self interest is in concert with the interests of the game. It's a natural fit. We aren't exterminators.
I think it was Ayn Rand who coined the term "enlightened self interest."

quote:

Originally posted by SG Olds:

The motives of tourists or hunters are irrelevant. They are tools to buy time and that is all.
Anything we can do to get people to bribe the tide of humanity to leave the wild places alone, we should do. It's the only hope we have. I don't care why they do it.

Yes, of course hunting is a selfish act. And Joubert also got it right when he said it was fun! But he got it very wrong when he said it's not conservation. SG Olds puts it well, as does Marty. Who cares what a hunter's reason for hunting is - why he does it, what he gets from the experience, whether it's a selfish act or whatever... The only important thing as far as wildlife is concerned is that he carries on hunting and carries on propping the wild areas up with his money.

David-

The answer to your question is that we need to fight fire with fire.

The battle to save hunting is not going to be fought in the court room or through legislative action. While those are important, they're essentially a defensive, delaying actions.

For us to preserve the right to hunt, we need to win the hearts and minds of the average, non-hunting person. Not the anti-hunters, whose numbers are probably equal to our own, but the majority of the population, who are for the most part indifferent.

Public opinion is very easily swayed, at least in the US. All it takes is someone like Oprah to say something is good or bad and the majority of our population will take it as the truth. The Jouberts, with their endorsement by National Geographic, are going to be viewed by most as being honest, ethical people who are telling the truth. If they weren't, why would a respected publication like National Geographic endorse them? That's what the average person thinks.

If we really want to win the hearts and minds of the non-hunter, we need to market to them through mass media. I'm not talking about traditional hunting videos or tv shows, which honestly have no appeal to non-hunters. Like it or not, the vast majority of people do not want to visibly see animals killed. As hunters, we tend to take a very arrogant and dismissive attitude towards this group of people. "Don't they know where their food comes from? Don't they wear leather? Can't they see how hypocritical that is?" are things that I hear hunters say over and over. I've said myself many times.

To get to the point, these documentaries are killing us in the hearts and minds battle because we don't have any of our own. People love these things because it provides them with entertainment, and a simple, easy to understand message - these beautiful animals are threatened with extinction, and the killing of them needs to be stopped. And we're the easiest target.

To actually influence them, we need to create our own documentaries. And they shouldn't show sport hunters killing animals. Instead, it needs to focus on the plight of the local people, and show how these animals can be a serious detriment to their lives and livelihoods. Think about how people would feel about elephant hunting if you showed a native village whose entire crop had just been destroyed by elephants...people crying and lamenting the fact that they're going to starve. Show the remains of a herdsman killed by lions protecting his flocks. Show the children. We need to show the world that these animals aren't the anthropomorphic, gentle creatures Walt Disney has painted them out to be. And then from there, you talk about the role of sport hunting in controlling populations of animals. You show people getting meat and celebrating. You interview the game scouts who talk about the great jobs they have as a result of the hunting industry. And you make it really entertaining, so that it will capture the imagination of the general public.

Doing this would cost millions, not just to produce, but to get it actually aired on national television. It's what the anti's have been doing for years. They're better funded and much better marketing people than we are. If we truly want to beat them, we need to learn to play their game. And we need to change our message, and who we're marketing it to.

There's a show on the Travel Channel called "The Wild Within." I would guess that one show has done more to influence he public in favor of hunting in the last year than all of the hunting organizations combined. We need more of this if we want to keep hunting.

Sorry for the rant. But I see hunters donate a lot of money to various organizations to protect and promote hunting, but I don't see most of it being used in a way that does any good whatsoever.

Pete

quote:

The problem, as I see it, are those, who for some reason, feel they must justify hunting as a conservation tool rather than the pursuit of an enjoyable experience. That claim is a "straw man" that can easily be knocked down.

I'll bite, thirdbite. Go ahead. Knock it down.

A show of hands from all hunters who would like to carry on hunting? Who would like their children to carry on the tradition? Right, all of you with your hands raised are in it to conserve, as well as for whatever other reasons you may have.

Pete - that is not a rant, that is all informative and constructive gen. I hear what you say and agree, but where to start...The most I can do is write stories and I am ashamed to admit that I have not yet done that...I mean, I've had a few dozen hunting stories published, but that is all they are - hunting stories, not the positives associated with hunting, besides the adrenaline rush that is! I will rectify that. I think implementing fairgame's website idea would be a great start.

Dave

I truly feel we are the last generation of hunters "as we know hunting today".

We MUST DO what we can to make a difference but its only a matter of time before it all ends, of that I am convinced. I am a 3rd generation hunter and talk from a fairly global perspective having experienced the issues first hand in India, parts of Africa, North America, South America and Europe.

A hunting website isn’t nearly enough … nor is a documentary or a TV show. What is needed (and I hate hearing myself say this) is an NGO along the lines of the WWF and Nature Conservancy.

The premise would be preservation and restoration of ecosystems via sustainable-use – a philosophy that is in diametric opposition to the WWF & TNC.

The foundation (initially) could be laid on some basic facts:

1) That hunting concessions protect more land in southern Africa than all of the national parks there combined.

2) That game-ranchers in South Africa protect as much land as the entire national parks system of the United States and more than 5 times as much as SANParks.

3) That CBNRM programs represent the best approach toward natural-resource-management in rural Africa … and the only significant source of income in many conservancies is trophy hunting.

The premise would be based upon the sustainable-use of natural resources as being the best model and the only rational approach to preserving, protecting and restoring the world's ecosystems.

People's changing attitudes toward wildlife is the result of our moving from an agrarian culture to a metropolitan culture. Over the last 3 generations, more and more people have moved off the farms and ranches and into the cities where the jobs are. Once they are away from nature, they tend to forget the way it used to be. They no longer look at a deer or antelope or even a cow as a meal, but as a cute, furry creature. One hundred years ago there were darned few, if any, vegitarians, and darn few, if any, anti-hunters. But now that we live in a "modern" society, most people are no longer connected to the land and its bounty. So many people now view hunting as barbaric and unneccesary. I find it strange that man survived thousands of years living off the land, and now, all of a sudden, what man has always done (hunted) is now considered wrong, unnecessary, or even barbaric.

You can say that hunting is a selfish act, and for some people maybe it is. But there are an awful lot of people who still want to be connected to the land, to nature, to wild things. A guy who lives in Montana who goes and shoots a spike elk to feed his family could hardly be called selfish. If that same guy finds a huge 6-point instead, and shoots it to feed his family, then he gets both the meat and the trophy horns. Is he now being selfish? No. If conservation is a byproduct of hunting, and it is hunter's dollars that are keeping places wild and game populations up, then hunting should be supported by the public. This holds true whether we're talking about elk in the Rockies, or lions in Africa.

You nailed it Molepolole. The urban imbecile is not only hunting's greatest enemy, but is the biggest threat to the future of life on earth.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
A hunting website isn’t nearly enough … nor is a documentary or a TV show. What is needed (and I hate hearing myself say this) is an NGO along the lines of the WWF and Nature Conservancy.

The premise would be preservation and restoration of ecosystems via sustainable-use – a philosophy that is in diametric opposition to the WWF & TNC.

The foundation (initially) could be laid on some basic facts:

1) That hunting concessions protect more land in southern Africa than all of the national parks there combined.

2) That game-ranchers in South Africa protect as much land as the entire national parks system of the United States and more than 5 times as much as SANParks.

3) That CBNRM programs represent the best approach toward natural-resource-management in rural Africa … and the only significant source of income in many conservancies is trophy hunting.

The premise would be based upon the sustainable-use of natural resources as being the best model and the only rational approach to preserving, protecting and restoring the world's ecosystems.

Agreed and good post. But a website would work as so would awareness on internet giants such as Facebook, Twitter etc.

It is all about media awareness and we should be in the position to challenge and debate the likes of Joubert in public forum.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
A hunting website isn’t nearly enough … nor is a documentary or a TV show. What is needed (and I hate hearing myself say this) is an NGO along the lines of the WWF and Nature Conservancy.

The premise would be preservation and restoration of ecosystems via sustainable-use – a philosophy that is in diametric opposition to the WWF & TNC.

The foundation (initially) could be laid on some basic facts:

1) That hunting concessions protect more land in southern Africa than all of the national parks there combined.

2) That game-ranchers in South Africa protect as much land as the entire national parks system of the United States and more than 5 times as much as SANParks.

3) That CBNRM programs represent the best approach toward natural-resource-management in rural Africa … and the only significant source of income in many conservancies is trophy hunting.

The premise would be based upon the sustainable-use of natural resources as being the best model and the only rational approach to preserving, protecting and restoring the world's ecosystems.

Agreed and good post. But a website would work as so would awareness on internet giants such as Facebook, Twitter etc.

It is all about media awareness and we should be in the position to challenge and debate the likes of Joubert in public forum.

I believe we should put ourselves in that position ASAP, with qualified, experienced, on the ground guys forming our team. We need representatives from each country, people who know what they are talking about. I could approach hunter and safari operator Mr Clive Stockil to speak for Zim. He was recently awarded the French National Order of Merit for his work in conservation and community upliftment. No shortage of guys who I could ask to help - Dr Alistair Pole, Dusty Joubert (Joubert vs Joubert would be entertaining!),Martin Pieters of ZPHGA.... In a public debate, I am certain that either Stockil, Pole or Joubert would effectively trash whatever argument D Joubert brought to the table.

I spoke to a website designer chap tonight, he is willing to help set up a site. But we need material - scientific fact, gen from hunters on the ground, from the community leaders....Photos, data, stories - anything and everything to do with the positive aspects of hunting. And we need guys with clout at the helm. This would need to be a team effort, bringing together as many countries and hunters as possible...

I think it's a fantastic idea.

quote:

the indigenous people are to spread out, to remote and frankly don't care about the laws, they care about their families, their cattle and fuck everything else.

And the problem is.....?
Anyone notice the thread right below this one: "Shooting lions from Trucks"?
Peter

Yes, Facebook, Twitter, anything and everything that will help to further our cause. This Borderline walk I've been doing is supposed to be all about hunters/communities/conservation, but I just haven't managed to broadcast it enough. My plan was to get really vocal when I finished and that's still the plan, but it's taking me a bit longer to finish than I expected! The goalposts have changed slightly (put it down to education en route) but the principles remain the same. I am due to post an AR Borderline report any day now and will fill you all in. I have so many stories I could contribute to a real pro hunting site, about life in Zim, how so many people depend on hunting for a living, and indeed survival etc etc. I know there are many of you out there who could do the same. I could rope in a cameraman friend and we could film some not so amateur documentaries (I have the impact stories in mind), and send them off to a TV network. If we roped in our film producing friends here on AR we could submit a couple of really professional productions...

Friends, the possibilities are endless, we need a gameplan and a strong team. As Pete said, fight fire with fire. We could and should be doing more.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

the indigenous people are to spread out, to remote and frankly don't care about the laws, they care about their families, their cattle and fuck everything else.

And the problem is.....?
Anyone notice the thread right below this one: "Shooting lions from Trucks"?
Peter

Ja, we noticed it, well I did at least. We won't invite these guys to join our team. We won't promote diesel stalking, we will gun those guys too. We will have a code of ethics. Although I know I have spouted off some about how divided we are, I'm willing to bet that a large number of our community (either AR or hunting in general) would agree to be party to a simple code which just upheld the fundamental principles of fair chase and sustainable utilization, and which promoted our cause and the lives of those who live in and around our hunting areas. None of us really want to shoot a lion from the back of a truck, even if there was no choice. And if you are reading this and you do want to shoot your lion from the back of a truck, you are in the wrong place because you are not a hunter.

quote:

a simple code which just upheld the fundamental principles of fair chase and sustainable utilization, and which promoted our cause and the lives of those who live in and around our hunting areas.

And there you have it!! Who can argue with what you just said?
Peter.

I am clearly in support of both fair-chase and sustainable-use; but .. the fact is ... they are completely different concepts which have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with one another.

The waters often get muddied when personal ethics or tradition get mixed up with policy or science.

quote:

Originally posted by David Hulme:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
A hunting website isn’t nearly enough … nor is a documentary or a TV show. What is needed (and I hate hearing myself say this) is an NGO along the lines of the WWF and Nature Conservancy.

The premise would be preservation and restoration of ecosystems via sustainable-use – a philosophy that is in diametric opposition to the WWF & TNC.

The foundation (initially) could be laid on some basic facts:

1) That hunting concessions protect more land in southern Africa than all of the national parks there combined.

2) That game-ranchers in South Africa protect as much land as the entire national parks system of the United States and more than 5 times as much as SANParks.

3) That CBNRM programs represent the best approach toward natural-resource-management in rural Africa … and the only significant source of income in many conservancies is trophy hunting.

The premise would be based upon the sustainable-use of natural resources as being the best model and the only rational approach to preserving, protecting and restoring the world's ecosystems.

Agreed and good post. But a website would work as so would awareness on internet giants such as Facebook, Twitter etc.

It is all about media awareness and we should be in the position to challenge and debate the likes of Joubert in public forum.

I believe we should put ourselves in that position ASAP, with qualified, experienced, on the ground guys forming our team. We need representatives from each country, people who know what they are talking about. I could approach hunter and safari operator Mr Clive Stockil to speak for Zim. He was recently awarded the French National Order of Merit for his work in conservation and community upliftment. No shortage of guys who I could ask to help - Dr Alistair Pole, Dusty Joubert (Joubert vs Joubert would be entertaining!),Martin Pieters of ZPHGA.... In a public debate, I am certain that either Stockil, Pole or Joubert would effectively trash whatever argument D Joubert brought to the table.

I spoke to a website designer chap tonight, he is willing to help set up a site. But we need material - scientific fact, gen from hunters on the ground, from the community leaders....Photos, data, stories - anything and everything to do with the positive aspects of hunting. And we need guys with clout at the helm. This would need to be a team effort, bringing together as many countries and hunters as possible...

I think it's a fantastic idea.

The REAL LIFE, HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL MODEL FOR THE ABOVE CONCEPTS EXISTS IN THE FORM OF DUCKS UNLIMITED.

Take a look at the Ducks Unlimited internet site; read their MISSION.

If they were contacted I'm sure that organization would lend a helping hand in the establishment of LIONS UNLIMITED.

Of course Joubert doesn't want the average non hunter to know the truth. That hunting is just one of many management tools for conservation, If he really cares about all the animals so much wht doesn't he show culling? I'll tellyou why. Because that is how he gets all the money to make those films, by donations from well meaning uninformed people. All of these animal rights groups are just huge confidence schemes. I'll bet most people would be amased at how much the heads of PETA,Or SEARA CLUB make. Not to mention Joubert.

quote:

Originally posted by boltshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by David Hulme:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
A hunting website isn’t nearly enough … nor is a documentary or a TV show. What is needed (and I hate hearing myself say this) is an NGO along the lines of the WWF and Nature Conservancy.

The premise would be preservation and restoration of ecosystems via sustainable-use – a philosophy that is in diametric opposition to the WWF & TNC.

The foundation (initially) could be laid on some basic facts:

1) That hunting concessions protect more land in southern Africa than all of the national parks there combined.

2) That game-ranchers in South Africa protect as much land as the entire national parks system of the United States and more than 5 times as much as SANParks.

3) That CBNRM programs represent the best approach toward natural-resource-management in rural Africa … and the only significant source of income in many conservancies is trophy hunting.

The premise would be based upon the sustainable-use of natural resources as being the best model and the only rational approach to preserving, protecting and restoring the world's ecosystems.

Agreed and good post. But a website would work as so would awareness on internet giants such as Facebook, Twitter etc.

It is all about media awareness and we should be in the position to challenge and debate the likes of Joubert in public forum.

I believe we should put ourselves in that position ASAP, with qualified, experienced, on the ground guys forming our team. We need representatives from each country, people who know what they are talking about. I could approach hunter and safari operator Mr Clive Stockil to speak for Zim. He was recently awarded the French National Order of Merit for his work in conservation and community upliftment. No shortage of guys who I could ask to help - Dr Alistair Pole, Dusty Joubert (Joubert vs Joubert would be entertaining!),Martin Pieters of ZPHGA.... In a public debate, I am certain that either Stockil, Pole or Joubert would effectively trash whatever argument D Joubert brought to the table.

I spoke to a website designer chap tonight, he is willing to help set up a site. But we need material - scientific fact, gen from hunters on the ground, from the community leaders....Photos, data, stories - anything and everything to do with the positive aspects of hunting. And we need guys with clout at the helm. This would need to be a team effort, bringing together as many countries and hunters as possible...

I think it's a fantastic idea.

The REAL LIFE, HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL MODEL FOR THE ABOVE CONCEPTS EXISTS IN THE FORM OF DUCKS UNLIMITED.

Take a look at the Ducks Unlimited internet site; read their MISSION.

If they were contacted I'm sure that organization would lend a helping hand in the establishment of LIONS UNLIMITED.

I thought about listing DU as item 4 but decided not to because I didn't have the facts about how much land they protect at my finger tips and because I wanted to stick to Africa. They do follow the SU model and protect a lot of land, but they're not the sort of global NGO that would be needed. Plus they're mostly just about wetland protection.

Nor do I think we limit the site to Africa and this is a global issue and should incorperate the USA, Europe, Russia etc where hunting is a way of life and always has been. Hunting and conservation in the States is a huge success story and much information is readily available here. Of course include the likes of DU but as more as a good example of conservation.

For Africa I think the likes of Boddington and Flack could contribute considering the wealth of country information they have collated for African Hunter 2 and the Safari Guide?

For example Aaron Neilson and the LCTF could handle Lion issues with a refrence to their site but this is not about Lion it is about hunting and the sustainability of the world's natural resources.

Maybe wise to keep away from ethics and what we consider what is right or wrong. Each country has it's own code of conduct, each continent embraces varying rules and regulations. The site should be factual, general and informative. Not too cluttered.

I would also keep away from the standard advertisement of guns, ammunitions, safari companies and their wares. Maybe the sponsors should be corperate?

The site should have enough clout to force other sites such as You Tube to rid their sites of what we consider offensive hunting material or at the very least raise a public objection.

But who will make these decisions? Who will dictate what is right and what is wrong? Will it go to a public vote or is it confined by membership?

Good idea buts needs quite a bit of thought.

Ja, it has been churning around in my little brain all night...

I hear you all, sound advice and opinion. The ethics/code issue is something which requires serious thought. I agree with you fairgame, that shouldn't be what the site is about, but where does one draw the line? I mean, we don't want Dawie Groenewald all over our site, do we? I reckon you involve guys like Boddington, Flack, Stockil and the code is already in place....I also agree that it shouldn't be only about Africa, it is a global issue.

So many times on AR the debate about what is right and wrong comes up. I can only believe that the vast majority of the time these debates - or in many instances full on slanging matches - are brought about by shit stirrers. Why? Because most of us outdoorsmen/hunters know what is right and wrong 'out there', we were born knowing it. I am certain that if we were sitting down at a table, if we able to look each other in the eye, most of us would agree on basic hunting principles. Example - culling impala at night from a vehicle is okay, because it is not hunting but rather a management strategy. Shooting lionesses from a truck(yes, unwounded!) is not okay. Sure we will disagree on certain issues - leopards with hounds comes to mind - but we must stop letting minor difference of opinion tear us apart. We are not schoolboys, let's stick together, present a united front. As hunters we have been kicked around for too long. It is time we got to our feet, consolidated and struck back. Not wild uncoordinated swinging, a couple of short, sharp well-aimed jabs right on the collective hooters of the antis is what is required.

Above all, I think it's important that the site presents a united front, that any contentious issues which need to be hammered out are done so before going online.

I agree with fairgame - not too cluttered, tackle some of those ridiculous youtube videos etc...All good. And yes, it does need quite a bit of thought - who will dictate what is right and wrong - but there are enough guys out there who care enough about the future of hunting to make it work. If we get guys like Boddington, Flack, Stockil and Pole involved, we make a good start. Guys that don't have any agenda other than to promote ethical/sustainable hunting.

This will not be as difficult/complex as some may think, with the right guys on the team. The members from each country should select their one representative, and those reps will make up the 'board'. I for one would have no issue with any of the chaps I've mentioned representing Zim hunting. I have no doubt that the majority of Zim hunters would concur.


What do you all reckon about getting a rough draft plan for the site together and sending it around for opinion/getting guys to commit, sign up and help?

I truly hope this pans out, but whether it does or not, I have my own personal plan. I am going to do something similar, on my own website (being setup now). I am including a section on hunting positively and I am going to ask Stockil, Boddington et al to contribute. I will let you all know when it's up and running. And yes, I am going to gun those pathetic 'from the truck' lion shoots on youtube, with all my might, on my website, on Facebook, wherever I can....



Dave

Dave,

Always remember the 10% rule: No matter the group, 10% of it is the riff-raff that threatens the well being of the other 90%.

Also, somebody needs to convey this message clearly and frequently:

POACHERS ARE NOT HUNTERS!!!

10% Rule?

Man you must be kidding or you are using a really good group of people if you only find 10% are riff-raff.

My experience is closer to 40%.

Unfortunately, educating the non-hunting public by countering the anti's (media groups, peta, ushs, and the simply stupid)must be a continual process. As long as the anti's are out there we must respond with well reasoned, factual responses. Presenting a dignified appearance and responses at government agency "public input" meetings, etc., on wildlife management plans goes a long ways to fostering a positive image.
I hate having to waste the time and money on countering the anti's but the alternative (loosing our hunting and fishing traditions and corresponding loss of wildlife)is not acceptable.

When game encounters the needs of an increasing human population, it is the game that generally loses. The abundance of the "old days" that seemed like it would never run out starts to disappear. Particularaly when that game threatens people's wealth, livelihod and food.

Africa Population

1900-100mm
2000-800mm
2009-1 billion

African population projected to double by 2050

Between 1900 and 2000, US population tripled. World population quadrupled. African Octupled during the last century.

Hunting is indeed a conservation tool. Whether hunters are employed by the state of hunt under a license granted by the state, the game populations are kept in balance to not only minimize human/animal conflicts, but to use fees like hunting license fees to improve habitat, fund research, and promote similar initiatives. It lets local populations realize game has value, and works to change their perception from game as a nuisance in need of elimination to a resource in which they share.

As far as Joubert goes, he is a panderer. He needs people to fund his films, and doing a documentary on successful conservation efforts is not news. Plus, it seems that the liberal interest groups have cash readily available to maintain their cadre of parasitic leeches.

You often hear that there are too many elephant in this or that country. We should be honest and say that there are only too many elephant in say Zim because the human population is rising and pushing the elephant into smaller areas. How long can we hunters keep the animals alive and healthy? 20 years? 40 years? 60? It may be easier and smarter to get the neutrals and anti-hunters to support human control than to support hunting.

Heck even in the USA there are overpopulated areas such that you can't even hunt with a rifle.

Keep bringing those SCI blue bags if you want.

Aren't you guys reinventing the wheel?

We already have several organisations out there such as John Jackson/Conservation Force and also SCI to mention just two......

Surely yet another organisation is just going to fragment the hunters and their arguments even further?

I'd suggest that if you want to do something, you should give money to JJ/CF who has been doing a very fine job on what is probably a relatively limited for a considerable number of years.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Aren't you guys reinventing the wheel?

We already have several organisations out there such as John Jackson/Conservation Force and also SCI to mention just two......

Surely yet another organisation is just going to fragment the hunters and their arguments even further?

I'd suggest that if you want to do something, you should give money to JJ/CF who has been doing a very fine job on what is probably a relatively limited for a considerable number of years.

First came the cart then came the porsche...

Only joking and no disrespect to any of the hunting organizations who do a fantastic job and who I wholeheartedly support. And you are right, it is obvious that John Jackson is a mover and does a lot of excellent work.

But I don't think we are trying to reinvent the wheel, I think we are trying to make sure we have a spare in the trunk because the road is long and rutted. Let me speak for myself here. Although these hunting organizations do much good (please note that I have always backed them), I don't think they are aggressive enough in their efforts to discredit the antis delusional stance. Fight fire with fire is what has been said and I agree 100%. The point is that we should stop patting each other on the back - jolly good show chaps, we have done good for that community - but rather proactively take on those who constantly tarnish hunting. Take them on when and where they trash us and where it counts, on the popular networks etc. Denounce their claims and accusations publicly, bring them to book. Soft hands have proven to be a pointless way to engage this menace, the gloves should come off. Yes, I am surprised that SCI can't/don't want to put a team together to take on all the anti-hunting tripe that is broadcast to millions of people daily. After all, so much of it is completely false that it couldn't be that difficult to discredit.

Now let me talk from a Zim perspective. What I want to do is post regular, up to date reports about what is really going on out there, with comment from wildlife fundis, locals, local chiefs, operators, clients... everyone involved. Photos, reports, stories, documentaries, whatever it takes. Chuck as much truth out there as possible, get people thinking more, target the majority neutrals. Back the existing hunting bodies to the core as we always do, just help them, with on the ground reporting. I can assure you that if we were pumping out positive hunting news on a regular basis, the likes of John Jackson and SCI would only be too pleased. Or they should be anyway. We are all on the same team, after all.

What I would really like to see is a public debate with our team vs Joubert and the likes of him. Imagine what a coup it would be for hunting to discredit Joubert publicly? We have guys who are able to do that. And even if that didn't come about - whenever he makes a post on his blog/facebook etc, immediately follow up, trashing what needs to be trashed there and then, online. When he strikes, immediately strike back harder.

Some of us don't have any money to give to John Jackson, that's why we are thinking of other ways to contribute, strategy which won't need so much money but will help the likes of Mr Jackson to spread the word. I see there is very little concerning Zim on his site and I hope to help him change that in the near future. There is a lot of hunting area out there and I should imagine it's very hard for a particular body to cover it all, we could be doing more to help. I don't believe it would have any negative effect whatsoever, on the contrary. Britain would have received a good hiding in both world wars if it weren't for its allies. When engaging as powerful a force as that which opposes us, the more allies and the bigger the weapons cache the better.

Anyway, just my opinion as usual..I will write to John Jackson and see what he thinks.

Dave

Quote "Aren't you guys reinventing the wheel?"

They are, Steve. I'm not. I'm proposing a global NGO based upon the principle of sustainable-use. Hunting is just a subset of that ... and trophy hunting just a subset of that subset.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Quote "Aren't you guys reinventing the wheel?"

They are, Steve. I'm not. I'm proposing a global NGO based upon the principle of sustainable-use. Hunting is just a subset of that ... and trophy hunting just a subset of that subset.

Okay Steve, that's great, I can't fault any of your logic. So what do we do? How do we get out of the starting blocks? What can I do? There's no reason why both or more ideas can't be implemented, it should all go hand in hand, hunting would obviously be a big part what you propose. Let's take the first step then.

Dave

Please understand a few things gentlemen/ladies. I do not claim to know or think I know it all, on the contrary, that is why I started this thread, to pick the minds of people who have the same interests and concerns as me, and to glean information and ideas from you all. I just feel we could be doing more and have felt that way for some time. I am very willing to sign up to any program which will uphold our right to hunt, maintain and indeed improve our environment and put back into the communities. My only agenda here is to further wildlife, hunting and the communities which depend on hunting. Please bear in mind that I am an 'on the bones of my ass' Zimbabwean outdoor writer with no backing whatsoever, and that I have been trying to find the support to do something positive on the ground for years now, with the communities, in the name of hunting. Something that will really make an impact. I don't yet have the right connections or resources, but I am nowhere near giving up. When I decided to set off on this Borderline Walk, I wrote to many hunting operators in this country, outlining my ideas for a proactive campaign to combat poaching, REALLY put into and manage what goes into communities, and enhance the name of hunting in Zim. The few replies that I did get were not encouraging. My enthusiasm has not been dampened in the slightest. In the meantime, I walked from Vic Falls to Chimanimani along the border, stopping for lengthy periods en route to, amongst other things, do temporary work so that the walk could continue. This is being done in the name of hunters and hunting. My plan was and still is to get this walk under my belt, get another book published and embark on a roadshow to anywhere and everywhere, conducting talk/slide shows about the walk and about hunting/wildlife/communities in Zim, to educate and create awareness amongst the presently unaware. My plan is to sell my impending Borderline book (60% complete) and the others I intend writing in order to raise money for a particular area, so that I can really get the wheels in motion and prove my theories on the ground. Don't get me wrong, I am no do-gooder type, I just realized one day that I could have a great adventure/adventures, educate myself and possibly do some good for my country along the way. I am no do gooder but I do know what I believe, and I believe that the end of hunting in Africa will spell the end of African wildlife and wild areas. I am not looking for praise, either now or when this theory is up, running and achieving, as it will be. I consider it my duty, I am a son of this land. When I do eventually complete this walk around Zim, during the forthcoming rain season, I will step up my campaign in a big way, it is being put in place right now. First I will take my show to Bulawayo and Harare, and then I will go abroad and speak to whoever will listen to me. This hearts and minds/anti-poaching/promoting sustainable use and hunting concept is not a new one, as many of you know, it's just that I have never seen it work in practice here, because it has never been managed properly on the ground. Africans do not need to be given, they need to be taught how to provide for themselves. This is my primary objective, and I will do it in the name of hunting, in my time, with the money I generate from my books and shows. I will target one area initially, in or bordering a hunting area, be it just one headman and twenty families to begin with, no matter. And then I will make it work. Above all of this will be flying a banner emblazoned HUNTERS FOR ZIMBABWE. Expect to hear a great deal more about this in the months and years to come.

I have no financial backing and this whole plan is still in its infancy, but I do have energy and very powerful allies who are crucial to the success of it all. Those allies are Zimbabwean people on the ground, and believe me I am extremely well connected with them. I already have several chiefs pumped up about this, and will have my choice of areas when I'm ready to kick off. It is my belief that once I prove everything by putting it into practice and making it work, on however small a scale, the big guns will come to the party. Then I will write another book or two, whilst I enjoy the sight of the impala frolicking between my house and the happy village down the road, in the communal land where I will be living...Yes, I have already been offered a number of retirement plots in some exquisitely beautiful areas...Ah, choices, choices...Zambezi or Gaerezi, Save or Ruenya...

Anyway, enough spouting off for now. I know I am considered a dreamer by many and that's okay. You know what they say about there being two types of person - practical fellows and dreamer types. The practical fellows always do okay because they buckle down from the word go, whilst the dreamers seldom fulfill their overly ambitious dreams. But stand back if a dreamer does manage to shake himself from his reverie and begin implementing.

Good day, David

Interesting stuff and you should be cloned.

My Kafue project may interest you? and what I have done there is to take a large block of dormant communal land of which the title is held by a communal Trust. The development company Royal Kafue who is also partnered with the Trust leases the land. Although hunting is one activity we have plans to create a bush home model, and to fence a portion of the land to breed common wildlife species for local consumption.

The concept is to prove the importance of wildlife and protected enviroments to the customary landowners and for them to profit from private sector activities and investments without alienating land.

I am very interested in what you are doing fairgame, I would like to visit at some stage and see it for myself, if you don't mind of course. All knowledge is gold. Breeding certain species for local consumption sounds like a fantastic idea, one I hadn't thought of. Makes much sense, will undoubtedly take pressure off the other game in the area. I would like an opportunity to discuss your gameplan in detail, but am really tied up for some time...Anyway, the internet is a great medium for discussion and maybe I will be able to head up your way in the not too distant future. Maybe we could exchange email addresses, will PM you with mine.

Thanks for that positive boost, Dave