quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
The old are still the one to take because that is the way nature takes them out to make room for the next generation. There is no difference between a satellite male taking him out and a hunter taking him out the result is the same.

The difference is if he is pushed out or killed by a satellite he is past his prime.

Vs if a hunter spends a few minutes or seconds observing him, at night, with a spotlight he simply has no idea if he really is past his prime and no longer the pride male, as the incident proves.

To those who are morally outraged by a hunter killing a lion or any other animal on a legal hunt .... write your senator/council member/prime minister/president or whatever, and spare us your bizarre theories. In return we won't try to impose our world view on you. You see we are morally outraged that people like you are allowed to breed. We think there are too many people on this planet, causing loss of wildlife habitat and effectively killing millions of wild animals that would otherwise roam the earth for us hunters and other predators to pursue; so our world view is that we humans ought to be selective about who can breed. Get it?

It's mortuary not moratorium.

quote:

Originally posted by Russ Gould: We think there are too many people on this planet, ... so our world view is that we humans ought to be selective about who can breed. Get it?

Not that it's relevant to the original topic of this thread, but that argument was made (and very few people in the world know this so you're getting a little bit of inside knowledge here which you can use to impress people at cocktail parties ... (or barbeques)) ... ...

... anyway, that argument was made by Garrett Hardin in his almost universally misunderstood, misinterpreted and misapplied essay "The Tragedy of the Commons" (Science - 1968).

<> <> <>

quote:

Originally posted by RichardAustin:
Lizzy, are us poor dumb bastards to assume your singular experience is now the definitive law of nature?

Of course not. I had many experience and the law of nature......to kill or be killed!!!
But that doesn't count in your eyes.
Why not respect them, watch them and enjoy them without killing! Take photos or videos and leave them for someone else to enjoy them.

I hear so many times "we love wildlife".
I hope you don't love me as that will endanger my life....

WTF... Sorry I had nothing constructive to add. I'm at a loss for words.

Lizzy, you are free to stop lion hunting in Zim if you wish. All you have to do is purchase every tag tendered and the funds will go to the locals so they can continue to eat and survive and you can dart and remove animals so that there is not an over population problem and move your lions to a private reserve.

Presto, no lions are killed and everyone can enjoy them. You can name them, dress them up, hold tea parties, dances, whatever.

So stop whining and do something positive about your convictions. If you want to stop the killing, do something about it. Otherwise you're a noise making hypocrite.

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:
extremely detrimental to the long time viability of species. The anti hunting people simply do not understand the conservation methods that are best for the continued balance and longevity of any species.

The ethical hunter is the salvation of the long term viability of any game animal. This places a value to the wildlife to the local people, that insures their protection by the locals.

Nothing is wasted from legally taken game in Africa. The local people not only get employment in the camps but get the meat in most cases that is not used in the hunting camps or it is sold to the locals. This stops most poaching in the hunting areas. People only poach to get the meat but organized poaching armies are usually out of the larger cities and kill anything that has meat, or ivory. These people do not care if they kill everything then move on to other places. Hunting takes only the legal surplus indicated by government surveys.

.................................................................

I know someone who grew up with Derrick. He said that Derrick was never anti-hunting until he got the contract with Nat Geo. Basically he sold his soul to deliver their agenda concerning animals and anthropomorphizing them while blaming hunting for any of their problems.

I would rather get my information from real scientists, not filmmakers, such as Dr. Colleen and Keith Begg in Mozambique.

Niassa Lion Project

They understand and support the role that hunting plays in habitat protection.

Cheers
Jim[/QUOTE]

Thank you Jim, I read this link and watched the video presentation of Dr Colleen Begg.
No where is she supporting hunters....she is trying to educate the local villages and the solution for lions and elephants. Like Bee hives, not killing the so called trouble elephants.

The number of lions increased because poaching decreased. Education is the solution.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Lizzy, you are free to stop lion hunting in Zim if you wish. All you have to do is purchase every tag tendered and the funds will go to the locals so they can continue to eat and survive and you can dart and remove animals so that there is not an over population problem and move your lions to a private reserve.

Presto, no lions are killed and everyone can enjoy them. You can name them, dress them up, hold tea parties, dances, whatever.

So stop whining and do something positive about your convictions. If you want to stop the killing, do something about it. Otherwise you're a noise making hypocrite.

Over population of lions? Their numbers went down from 200.000 to 20.000 so where does hunting conservation kicks in!
If I win the lottery ticket of the Euro million, I will first buy up the lions who are living in the beast wagons of circuses and give them a good life.Then I will pay money direct to anti poaching (not through hunting co-operations who pay this to corrupt governments that pocket this money while the anti poaching units have nothing) Already organisations are asking for donations to support the anti poaching units directly.

What do you think about "canned hunting"! The lions being bred special for hunters to be killed?
it might save the wild lions but it is disgusting.

The same photos with smiling faces next to their kill. Wow what a heroes.....

quote:

Originally posted by Russ Gould:
To those who are morally outraged by a hunter killing a lion or any other animal on a legal hunt .... write your senator/council member/prime minister/president or whatever, and spare us your bizarre theories. In return we won't try to impose our world view on you. You see we are morally outraged that people like you are allowed to breed. We think there are too many people on this planet, causing loss of wildlife habitat and effectively killing millions of wild animals that would otherwise roam the earth for us hunters and other predators to pursue; so our world view is that we humans ought to be selective about who can breed. Get it?

Well Russ, I agree with you.....how many did you bred? I didn't as I knew there are too many people in this world, heading for a fall at 10 billion people.....but you live in now a different world....our ancestors were not farmers but hunters and gathers and they only kill for food, not for trophies and that is the difference.
But on the other hand it were the farmers who grow food so that society could do something different...civilisation, like arts, science, education, inventions as we didn't have to hunt anymore for food....

AND you call yourself a predator with other predators....they hunt for food, antelopes or buffalo's not other predators and that is what hunters are doing, taking out (bagging) predators.
Trophy hunting is what gets people upset,not hunting ducks or rabbits for food. Think about it and how many did you bred? Future hunters?

quote:

Originally posted by Lizzy:

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Lizzy, you are free to stop lion hunting in Zim if you wish. All you have to do is purchase every tag tendered and the funds will go to the locals so they can continue to eat and survive and you can dart and remove animals so that there is not an over population problem and move your lions to a private reserve.

Presto, no lions are killed and everyone can enjoy them. You can name them, dress them up, hold tea parties, dances, whatever.

So stop whining and do something positive about your convictions. If you want to stop the killing, do something about it. Otherwise you're a noise making hypocrite.

Over population of lions? Their numbers went down from 200.000 to 20.000 so where does hunting conservation kicks in!
If I win the lottery ticket of the Euro million, I will first buy up the lions who are living in the beast wagons of circuses and give them a good life.Then I will pay money direct to anti poaching (not through hunting co-operations who pay this to corrupt governments that pocket this money while the anti poaching units have nothing) Already organisations are asking for donations to support the anti poaching units directly.

What do you think about "canned hunting"! The lions being bred special for hunters to be killed?
it might save the wild lions but it is disgusting.

The same photos with smiling faces next to their kill. Wow what a heroes.....

Every canned lion that is killed is one in the wild that is not.

And lions do over populate and that is largely why so many are killed by the locals. Lion cattle encounters are on the rise and the outcome is poisoning or shooting. Over 80 have been killed this way so far this year just around Etosha in Namibia. The locals see lions as pests and will protect their cattle at the cost of the lion.

Photographic hunts and well meaning benefactors cannot stop this. So hopefully you will win the lottery and save all the lions and pay for all the locals who lose their hunting revenues. In the meantime, please don't tell the rest of us what we can legally do thank you very much.

quote:

Originally posted by Sean Russell:
lizzie

Bless your big heart and little bitty pea picking brain-

Saying the Jouberts are wildlife scientists is the same as calling Steven Spielberg a rocket scientist because he made the Star wars movies.

Taking pictures is not scientific research.

Professor Marc Bekoff is....he is an American.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Is anyone here seriously trying to argue LOGIC with a female???

Do you have a mother or a wife or a daughter?

Apparently he does.

Silly question...

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

She is also under the misconception that taking of the oldest specimen of a particular species is denying his genes to the species community. The oldest have already spread their genes for many years, and at a advanced age they stop breading altogether or are driven out by younger stronger males.

Only the lion in question had cubs, apparently was still breeding and hadn't been driven off by younger rivals.

So the end result is that the strongest and fittest specimen was killed, the offspring of the strongest and fittest were put in jeopardy of survival and passing on those genes and an inferior male unable to currently, if ever achieve that position was given the opportunity.

You understand what I mean Doug. Thank you...

quote:

Originally posted by maxenergy:


It's the emotions of the animal rights loons that I am referring to. Look at the tenor of your post as it is fraught with emotion. You and your ilk make decisions based on your emotions. There is nothing rational about it. And no, I don't name animals that reside on my wall. Y'all remind me of Timothy "bear scat" Threadwell who tried befriending wild and dangerous animals.

I just find it sad that your ilk somehow finds human life to be cheaper than animal life. Very sad.

Max where did I find human life cheaper than animals? I was very open about what I observed, including the death of my husband of 34 years and the dog involved as part of the family.

I have seen 22 birth as a student nurse and have seen many more death in CCU, ICU, Emergency and later as the matron of an old age nursing home.
Death to me is not strange but natural. We all are going to die.

I just gave examples that mammals have the same emotions as humans.That is not strange because we are mammals as well. Unless you are a fundamentalist religious (Christian, Muslim ....) and believe that we were created instead a product of evolution.

As we are heading towards 10 billion people, (when I was born there were less then 3 billion), it is scary. Every day 200.000 people are born and less then 66.000 die everyday. So every day there are 134.000 more people here then the day before. That means that every year there are 49 million more people in this world then the year before.

Think about it as there are only 20.000 lions left in the wild and 300.000 elephants.
In that aspect yes I feel more for the life's of the wild animals then of humans. (wars, drug
dealers, gang warfare, terrorists, politicians, wildlife traffics, circuses, bankers, insurance frauds, lawyers, rapists, priests, imams.....fill in the rest)

If hunters, and I have seen many photo's on FB, are celebrating their kill without any respect for the animal then I think it is disgusting. Like that female hunter lying next to a giraffe she killed. What is more easier then killing a giraffe. She acts like a hero....in my eyes she is someone who has no respect for animals at all.

Yes human life is cheaper than animal life, as animal life has a value while human life does not.
50.000 dollars for Cecil and one bullet for any one killed on the streets in the USA!

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Apparently he does.

Silly question...

and they have no LOGIC!
He acts like females are a different specie.

Yep pretty much.

What does hunting have to do with whether it's easy or hard? Everything you say makes almost no sense. It's all emotion. She killed a giraffe while hunting, whether it was an easy, dangerous, hard or any other type of hunt has nothing to do with the purpose.

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
What does hunting have to do with whether it's easy or hard?

Because for thousands of years "hunting" and to be successful at it required knowledge and skills to find and kill the prey.
Skills and strategies that took time to learn and hone.
In short, it was hard and not everyone had the aptitude, skills and drive to be successful hunter.

With most of these professionally guided "easy" hunts the difficulty, required skills and knowledge are simply purchased from another that has those skills.

So from a traditional viewpoint, the hunter is no longer a hunter but simply a shooter, and really how good a shooter do you have to be with modern equipment, shooting at an animal at close range illuminated and blinded by a spotlight?

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
What does hunting have to do with whether it's easy or hard?

Because for thousands of years "hunting" and to be successful at it required knowledge and skills to find and kill the prey.
Skills and strategies that took time to learn and hone.
In short, it was hard and not everyone had the aptitude, skills and drive to be successful hunter.

With most of these professionally guided "easy" hunts the difficulty, required skills and knowledge are simply purchased from another that has those skills.

So from a traditional viewpoint, the hunter is no longer a hunter but simply a shooter, and really how good a shooter do you have to be with modern equipment, shooting at an animal at close range illuminated and blinded by a spotlight?

100% Bullshit. No hunter ever developed all the skills and all the knowledge to the extent that they couldn't be improved upon.

There are hunters today who have highly developed skills and knowledge. But even those who just book a short plains game hunt on a 10,000ha high-fenced ranch in SA learn a great deal and are doing more for conservation than the other 99% of humanity who just complain about things. Maybe that's the best they can do. Maybe they'll do better next time. Who are you to judge? Don't be such a twit.

<> <> <>

quote:

Originally posted by Lizzy:

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Funny how the folks who were tracking Cecil haven't disclosed his range patterns. It is very typical for the older males to visit multiple prides and wonder all over hell's half acre looking for easy kills - like cattle and goats and the occasional tourist.



If Cecil excuse me, the freaking lion was known to the landowner, and apparently he was, then the freaking lion had a very large range. Sooner or later he would have been shot by another landowner like so many other roaming lions and that would have been that.

This is a BS story. Cecil had a pride and was lured outside the park with bait. Any one using bait to get a lion or a leopard is not a hunter in my eyes. Second the lionesses are the ones who go out for a hunt, not the male. He does help if the prey is a big buffalo but normally they don't hunt. Too heavy for the sprint. They are territorial and will not visit other prides! Those prides have also a Lion to protect them. If a lion is killed, his cubs will be killed by a new lion taking over his pride. So killing one lion causes the death of 5 - 10 cubs.

Cecil was not a roaming lion, why should he!
Cattle is sometimes killed by an old lioness.
No tourists are killed by lions because they move around in land-rovers.

Have not read further so excuse me if repeating what may have allready been explained to this dimwit .
Baiting is the safest way to determine sex and age of the animal being harvested for conservation purposes ( hunting) , when predators are harvested by tracking one seldom has a good view of the cat due to them being extremely alert and evasive. So anyone who makes a statement that baiting is not a good thing is absolutely clueless and should expand their research from coffee table books written by anti hunting evangelists to more biological based research journals freely available from any academic institution - I know becoming informed requires effort - knowledge is not accurate from either Nat Geo or Animal Planet they are |Disney style entertainment channels.
Second if you took the time to understand lion behaviuor you would know males do hunt when not with prides and esp after being evicted from their mother pride , when moving between female sub prides they do hunt - all recorded by biologists.
The natural cycle of lion biology is that the males must be removed regularly for genetic biodiversity , as the named LION was over 6 years old he had more than passed on the required genetics - if the bleeding hearts took the time to understand conservation dynamics they would realize how important it is for cat genetics to be diversified and not bottle necked , but if they cant take the time to learn the basics we cannot expect them to understand the advanced stuff.
Nobody is or will condone an unethical or improper or illegal hunting act, but until a court of law makes its findings the anti hunting evangelists will continue to sour the minds of reasonable people with rubbish to the detriment of wildlife.

quote:

Originally posted by Lizzy:

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Lizzy, you are free to stop lion hunting in Zim if you wish. All you have to do is purchase every tag tendered and the funds will go to the locals so they can continue to eat and survive and you can dart and remove animals so that there is not an over population problem and move your lions to a private reserve.

Presto, no lions are killed and everyone can enjoy them. You can name them, dress them up, hold tea parties, dances, whatever.

So stop whining and do something positive about your convictions. If you want to stop the killing, do something about it. Otherwise you're a noise making hypocrite.

Over population of lions? Their numbers went down from 200.000 to 20.000 so where does hunting conservation kicks in!
If I win the lottery ticket of the Euro million, I will first buy up the lions who are living in the beast wagons of circuses and give them a good life.Then I will pay money direct to anti poaching (not through hunting co-operations who pay this to corrupt governments that pocket this money while the anti poaching units have nothing) Already organisations are asking for donations to support the anti poaching units directly.

What do you think about "canned hunting"! The lions being bred special for hunters to be killed?
it might save the wild lions but it is disgusting.

The same photos with smiling faces next to their kill. Wow what a heroes.....

#


LIZZY , your information is definitly gleened from anti hunting propaganda , there is no scientific count of lions showing there were 200 000 lions , it is a thumb suck number thrown around mainly by Ian Mitchler ( a Failed stock broker who found himself on some wildlife excursion and misleads people he is some sort of biologist - a jeep jockey ( tourist guide ) no more no less). One of the first scientific lion surveys were undertaken by Dr Butch Smuts in the KNP which resulted in a lion cull, but the next main fact that came out of it was that lions recover in numbers very very fast if there is food and habitat - both conditions hunting provides and has provided - making it the number one lion conservation strategy. In other words the culled lions ( over 300) were replaced within 2 years.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:
guys,
the best lion experts concluded that on average, male lion become pride males around 4 years old and have an average pride tenure of 2 years (exceptions exist) and in that 2 year period, on average, they are able to raise 2 sets of litters to independence and that thereafter they naturally get replaced/ousted by other younger males. Hence why a 6+ year old male lion is the best individual to be hunted. Any resulting death of existing litter at the time a 6 year old male is killed - either naturally or through hunting - or ousted from the pride is not a long term threat to the overall local lion population numbers!

Read the above carefully, as science is rarely wrong!

I find it hard to believe that is accurate given that the lion was still the alpha 7 years or 3.5 times beyond the average rein.

That is one heck of a deviation!

I did state that "exceptions exist"......and Cecil at that age was a rare exception by all accounts. The research that confirms my simply put statement is out there......and it wasn't published or sponsored by hunters either

Lizzy and Doug W, pls research the Bubye Valley Conservancy as an example of the wildlife conservation benefits of a pro-utilization strategy, including conservation of lion. In a very short timeframe - in evolutionary terms - they have hit maximum carrying capacity for lion! They now face some very tough decisions with regards lion management under the advice and recommendation of none other than Oxford University resident research program!

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:
Lizzy and Doug W, pls research the Bubye Valley Conservancy as an example of the wildlife conservation benefits of a pro-utilization strategy, including conservation of lion. In a very short timeframe - in evolutionary terms - they have hit maximum carrying capacity for lion! They now face some very tough decisions with regards lion management under the advice and recommendation of none other than Oxford University resident research program!

<> <> <>

LIZZY one last comment from me
I trust that in your home ants, fleas , bugs , mozzies , bacteria cockroaches , maggots , grass and trees are not touched or harmed in any way as they have every right to life as any other creature , you do not have the God given right to determine what lives or dies according to your needs or rules. We dont interfere with your activities of cleaning out your neighbourhood of Gods other creatures and the horrific impact you have on earth with the carbon transmissions from your vehicle and rectum or the rubbish you send to land fills , the exploitation of a rare resource such as drinking water ( mostly purified to remove other organisms you deem unsuitable to drink or let live ).
But lets profile you -
You voted for Clinton and Obama ( support abortion or the taking of human life - your opinion is more important than any life ) , you are anti guns - like Australia you want the criminals to be armed but not the victims , you are OK that Clinton and Obama's body guards can carry firearms to protect them and their families but others may not do the same to protect their families , you are anti hunting but wear leather use soap eat tuna, maybe eat chicken and eggs , or fish , you use toilet cleaners and insect repellent , you use plastic in any form be it food rappers /containers / or to carry your groceries - all barbaric ways of using animal products, or killing our lesser creatures . You may or may not be religous but I think you are probably one of those who lean towards intolerance of other religous believes. AND NOW YOU WANT TO JUDGE OTHERS - do the planet a favour and get off it.

The uninformed do not want to be informed because reality will frighten the hell out of them.

arguing with a fool only proves there are two.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
What does hunting have to do with whether it's easy or hard?

Because for thousands of years "hunting" and to be successful at it required knowledge and skills to find and kill the prey.
Skills and strategies that took time to learn and hone.
In short, it was hard and not everyone had the aptitude, skills and drive to be successful hunter.

With most of these professionally guided "easy" hunts the difficulty, required skills and knowledge are simply purchased from another that has those skills.

So from a traditional viewpoint, the hunter is no longer a hunter but simply a shooter, and really how good a shooter do you have to be with modern equipment, shooting at an animal at close range illuminated and blinded by a spotlight?

I agree for 100% with your reply.
In the old days, animals had a chance to get away. Today they don't even know what hit them.
Shooting a giraffe is not hunting.

I'm slightly curious enough to pose the question - If sport hunting is so easy, why are there any lion left in Africa? After all, there are far more hunters each year than lion. So if your "logic" were correct, there would be no lion left.

Seems you have a serious logic disconnect somewhere...

Another fun question - Would you want to hazard a guess how many lion are killed by the locals via poisoning and poaching vs hunters each year?

quote:

Originally posted by Lizzy:

I agree for 100% with your reply.
In the old days, animals had a chance to get away. Today they don't even know what hit them.
Shooting a giraffe is not hunting.

Of course you do. Can I ask what you hope to gain by posting here? Seems to me that your mind is already made up and that no amount of fact will change your position.

Explain to me why shooting a giraffe is not hunting? You do realize that this is the only animal that comes equipped with a watch tower making approach very difficult not to mention a stride that allow it to cover lots of ground rather rapidly, do you not?

quote:

Originally posted by Lizzy:

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
What does hunting have to do with whether it's easy or hard?

Because for thousands of years "hunting" and to be successful at it required knowledge and skills to find and kill the prey.
Skills and strategies that took time to learn and hone.
In short, it was hard and not everyone had the aptitude, skills and drive to be successful hunter.

With most of these professionally guided "easy" hunts the difficulty, required skills and knowledge are simply purchased from another that has those skills.

So from a traditional viewpoint, the hunter is no longer a hunter but simply a shooter, and really how good a shooter do you have to be with modern equipment, shooting at an animal at close range illuminated and blinded by a spotlight?

I agree for 100% with your reply.
In the old days, animals had a chance to get away. Today they don't even know what hit them.
Shooting a giraffe is not hunting.

Our ancestors hunted for trophy, absolutely! They didn't have taxidermy tools and chemicals to preserve "trophies" so they recorded their hunts through rock art, song, culture and folklore. They practiced hunting for social status within their clan, etc. They hunted for religious beliefs as well as simply for pleasure or responding to an opportunistic situation.

They made jewelry from their trophies too

Funny how the US Bison population was almost completely wiped out without modern weapons and spotlights in their precious little eyes.

Oh brother

quote:

Originally posted by Lizzy:
Today they don't even know what hit them.

indeed that is the purpose of modern firearms and hunting equipment..........to euthanize humanely as quickly as possible.

AR Moderators
Remove these people. Exchanging ideas is fine, but they are not doing anything other than trying, poorly at that, to change minds here. Lady, we are here because we enjoy hunting, love Africa, hunt Africa, and leave our hard earned money in Africa. If you disagree, fine. But get off our site, you are neither wanted or needed here!

What I want to know is, do antis really believe that hunters want to destroy all the game? How would that advance our sport? How would that benefit us? It makes no sense.

quote:

Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:
LIZZY one last comment from me
I trust that in your home ants, fleas , bugs , mozzies , bacteria cockroaches , maggots , grass and trees are not touched or harmed in any way as they have every right to life as any other creature , you do not have the God given right to determine what lives or dies according to your needs or rules. We dont interfere with your activities of cleaning out your neighbourhood of Gods other creatures and the horrific impact you have on earth with the carbon transmissions from your vehicle and rectum or the rubbish you send to land fills , the exploitation of a rare resource such as drinking water ( mostly purified to remove other organisms you deem unsuitable to drink or let live ).
But lets profile you -
You voted for Clinton and Obama ( support abortion or the taking of human life - your opinion is more important than any life ) , you are anti guns - like Australia you want the criminals to be armed but not the victims , you are OK that Clinton and Obama's body guards can carry firearms to protect them and their families but others may not do the same to protect their families , you are anti hunting but wear leather use soap eat tuna, maybe eat chicken and eggs , or fish , you use toilet cleaners and insect repellent , you use plastic in any form be it food rappers /containers / or to carry your groceries - all barbaric ways of using animal products, or killing our lesser creatures . You may or may not be religous but I think you are probably one of those who lean towards intolerance of other religous believes. AND NOW YOU WANT TO JUDGE OTHERS - do the planet a favour and get off it.

You are really funny. I can't stand Democrats and hate the Clinton's and Obama.
But I am not American so I can't vote. My favourite was Ronald Reagan.
I did live in Texas as an immigrant from the age of 15 till 18 and my dad had weapons and I learn to shoot on the shooting range as well on a deserted beach. I also shot with an FN and a shotgun in Rhodesia and even owned a small pistol.
In Belgium my dad shot a burglar (which was allowed in Belgium,not in Holland) He had a Magnum 44, rifle, a pistol (stolen from a dead German officer after he escaped from a concentration camp) and a revolver.
I am not against weapons. In Holland I cycled with a bottle of teargas in my pocket on my way to night-shift. Used it once against an attacker.
Teargas is illegal in Holland....but that country is totally mad so I left.

Further I am not religious and more an atheist and think that religion is the root of all evil.
(look at history and religion, so many wars in the name of one or an other other god...) Richard Dawkins is one of my hero's.
Walked out of the church in Texas at the age of 15 because I can think for myself.

Insects: there are more insect species then any other species in this world. And their numbers as well.
Maggots?? They become flies and they live on rotten meat. No I don't have them in my house.
I do have Gecko's and they hunt mozzies so they are welcome in my home.
So are spiders and in Zimbabwe the wall spiders live behind my paintings, coming out at night to hunt mozzies.

Food: I do eat chicken and eggs (not in Holland as they taste terrible) black pork but not much beef, don't like the taste except minced fillet steak and then raw with salt and pepper. With a braai I eat my steak almost raw as cooked steak becomes tough.
Fish...special shellfish, crab, prawns with piri piri. Salmon and Tuna also raw. The Japanese way.
Leather only as a by product from farm animals and not fur from wild animals.

Plastic? I go to the market for veggies and fruit and take a shopping bag with me.
Remember I help cleaning the beaches in October and most what we collect are plastic bottles and fishing lines, nappies and condoms and open tins.
Making sure they don't end up in the ocean. Left behind by families or fishers.

I don't understand hunting the big cats, you can't eat them and they are hunted for trophies and for nothing else. The are predators not prey.
Buffalo's and Impalas I have no problem with, elephants yes as they are highly intelligent animals with a complex family life.

Cars: the first time I owned a car was at the age of 30. Before I had a bicycle to to get around. Even in Zimbabwe.

Abortion! Well here a certain Marc who claims that certain people shouldn't breed! But what has this to do with looking critical at hunting?
I often read this with pro-hunters!!! Don't see the connection but I don't understand the thinking either.
When abortions became legal in NY and in LA, 15 years later the crime figures went down because to future criminals were never born.
Further it is the choice of the woman and not an issue of politics. Better a safe abortion then a unsafe one in a backroom.
Women who choose this have a reason so why would a man be against it? Who is paying the bill? YOU?

You want more information or are you convinced that I am not a raving left-wing lunatic!
I am more a Libertarian then anything else.
PS I lived in 8 countries and 4 continents so it can be confusing where I come from.

I think we need to take a look at events of the recent past concerning the anti's level of organization and use of social media as an inroad to gaining main stream media attention.

I enjoy and often learn from a legitimate well reasoned debate. That's NOT what's happening here. Lizzy and Doug W are not here to intelligently debate the benefits of hunting vs non-consumptive conservation models. They are trolling for statements that can be taken out of context and used to support their ideologies in the next social media viral attack against hunting ... facts be damned!