So who is doing these counts? If you click on "about" on the right hand side of this table you will see USF&W's logo on there with other "rights" groups.

LINK

I know this is not the popular opinion, but if indeed we are all after the same thing, I think we need to learn to work with these organizations. I saw it in the BVC last year, the Lowveld Rhino Trust and the Cheetah Conservation Project of Zimbabwe, were very involved.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...6321043/m/9651002591

This org listed in the "about" looks like they are active in the Save Conservancy.

http://www.tuskusa.com/save-valley-conservancy.asp

It would be great to know who are the "hunter friendly" and "hunter accepting" organizations operating in Africa. For example, the WWF accepts hunting as a conservation tool.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill C:
I know this is not the popular opinion, but if indeed we are all after the same thing, I think we need to learn to work with these organizations. I saw it in the BVC last year, the Lowveld Rhino Trust and the Cheetah Conservation Project of Zimbabwe, were very involved.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...6321043/m/9651002591

This org listed in the "about" looks like they are active in the Save Conservancy.

http://www.tuskusa.com/save-valley-conservancy.asp

It would be great to know who are the "hunter friendly" and "hunter accepting" organizations operating in Africa. For example, the WWF accepts hunting as a conservation tool.

Bill,

I'd be all for teaming with them if they were able to admit that hunting dollars actually contribute to the anti-poaching well being of the Elephant in Zimbabwe.

I could be wrong but from poking around that site it looks like anyone can upload census data. Perhaps a present accurate (as can be ) count is what is needed.

Cheers
Jim

Jim, I totally agree, it would be spetacular if they publicly embraced hunting, but I doubt it is reality (although the WWF did release a statement supporting hunting as a conservation tool in certain circumstances). We just may need to find common ground behind closed doors with these organizations (the ones that are actually doing conservation work). We should want these organizations that truly work to save the elephant/rhino/cheetah/painted dog/brown hyena/etc to be successful. We are after the same objectives (preserve habitat and biodiversity, combat poaching, etc).

It's OUR job to present ourselves as being conservation-minded, and break the stereotypes. I truly think they would be surprised about how passionate we are.

Sport hunting is an easy mark because we allow it to be such, and controversial topics such as captive-bred lions IMO hurt us in the long run.

We are also vulnerable because we look beatable, serve as a rallying cry to raise money, and seen by some as a short-term fix (as Jobert basically said, "if I can stop lion hunting, I will save enough lion to maintain the population a few years until we can get a handle on poaching").

I guess the question is, why is there no pro-hunting organization listed as participating in this census, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the others? Is this DSC, or SCI, or SOAZ, or some entity yet to be founded?

We keep focusing on the USFWS, but I cannot help but to think the real battle is taking place in Africa. As I wrote before, if Zimbabwe had their house in order, the USFWS would have had no grounds to do what they did. I'm more inclined to write the the Director General of Parks, and urge them to demonstrate that they are serious, respond to the USFWS's requests for information, and do everything in their power to flush out if indeed there are the "hidden agendas" that everybody is assuming.

Just some random thoughts per the multiple active threads on this general topic, and not at all directed to you or your post Jim!

I don't know - working with them in a vacuum is fine. But the reality is they just don't work under the normal rules of work : a) you have to work hard to survive (in their world, its all pretty much guaranteed), b) the smarter / harder working you are, they father you get (I won't go there, its obvious), c) the goal is to advance and push toward consensus / common good+goals (again, not going there...), d) we are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our facts (again, they seem to defy this on a regular basis - especially when they use as "facts", figures that are compiled by outside organizations with other goals like WWF and Green Peace), and finally e) meddle in things that don't F8cking Concern them : the purpose of USFWS as per their charter is to be an "Agency with mission of conserving, protecting and enhancing fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats in the United States, for the continuing benefit of the American people."... don't they have enough to do here, and not meddle in things they don't understand? Hell, even the locals in charge of this stuff don't agree on the facts and solutions... how do a bunch of guys in smokey outfits sitting in Washington think they're qualified to have an opinion?