i have a question about the whole shebang on cecil - How did it start. Lots of animals are shot every year. some of them illegal, thousands are poached - no press of anything. now a lion gets shot on a hunt that no one even knows the full facts on. How did this whole thing hit the press?? it wasn';t the dentist, ph, landowner etc. releasing the story, so just who did?? and how did the information get out to him??

Look no further than the folks who put the collar on the lion. They were simply waiting for an opportunity to draw attention to their existence and fund raising efforts.

I would say they hit Jackpot.

From what I understand the Oxford Researchers have not adopted an outright anti hunting stance and this is not the first collared Lion to be shot. At age 12+ I reckon they can appreciate the value of the hunt as opposed to a Lion just wasting away to die an old age. Remove Lions from the Matetsi quotas and it will jepordise the large, well managed buffer zone around a significant portion of Hwange. That should beat being surrounded by subsistence communities with maize crops and cattle in anyones books.

Give a person a few years on the ground in Africa; while they may not hunt , they will definitely have a strong appreciation for the positive effects of well managed buffer zones of privately funded GMAs/Hunting concessions surrounding national parks

I reckon a lot of the info to the press and the hype have been courtesy of Jonny Rodrigues in an effort to attract attention and donations......

Manyathelo
you are very correct about Rodrigues , i do believe he is start of all this BS

Manyathelo - just for the record, adult old male lions seldom die of old age. In reality, very few animals in Africa die of old age. Hunted, starved, attacked by younger males, yes. But sitting in a rocking chair minding the kids and enjoying the sun? Not too often.

quote:

Originally posted by poprivit:
Manyathelo - just for the record, adult old male lions seldom die of old age. In reality, very few animals in Africa die of old age. Hunted, starved, attacked by younger males, yes. But sitting in a rocking chair minding the kids and enjoying the sun? Not too often.

I don't think any wild animals ever die of old age.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Look no further than the folks who put the collar on the lion. They were simply waiting for an opportunity to draw attention to their existence and fund raising efforts.

I would say they hit Jackpot.

I don't think the Oxford Researchers had any part in this. I was in the Bubye Valley last year and actually went with Paul, who is an Oxford Researcher, and removed a collar from and old male lion. He defiantly didn't have an anti hunting attitude. The Oxford researcher set the record straight when Jonny Rodrigues reported that Cecil's "brother" was killed.

From what I've read the Oxford researchers on the ground do not appear to be anti-hunting at all. Saw this on the BBC website today.

BBC Article

While they may appear on the surface not to be anti-hunting, the majority of their donors are. Like every other NGO in Africa today, the reality is they depend on donated funds. They also know that if the hunting dollars stop their existence will also stop.

I will say in at least two other instances in Namibia, NGO's are taking advantage of the Cecil freakin lion story.

Never let a good crisis go to waste.

interesting that this dead lion has almost completely removed from the public conscience the Planned Parenthood videos... coincidence? perhaps.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:

quote:

Originally posted by poprivit:
Manyathelo - just for the record, adult old male lions seldom die of old age. In reality, very few animals in Africa die of old age. Hunted, starved, attacked by younger males, yes. But sitting in a rocking chair minding the kids and enjoying the sun? Not too often.

I don't think any wild animals ever die of old age.

Don't you realize that all animals have old animals homes, where the old and those that cannot look after themselves are catered for??

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Look no further than the folks who put the collar on the lion. They were simply waiting for an opportunity to draw attention to their existence and fund raising efforts.

I would say they hit Jackpot.

I think you are absolutely right in this.

And, I suspect the criminally minded trio of hunter, PH and landowner had a lot to do with it too.

And people like Johnny Rodrigues had a great opportunity to make a few bucks out of it too.

What real bastards these lot have been, and the damage they have done to hunting.

quote:

What real bastards these lot have been, and the damage they have done to hunting.

Agreed that there has been a lot of damage to hunting BUT what I have noticed, and feel good about, is the way we hunters have fought back with fact after fact on all social media platforms.

So often we have sat back and criticized the anti's, leaving them to their thoughts and radical tirades, laughing them off as uneducated fools. Not this time. Many, many Pro Hunters, hunters and scientists have bombarded social media with fact upon fact, and unless I'm mistaken the anti's have gone very quiet. Let's hope some of them are taking cognisance of what experts are saying.

There is no such thing as bad publicity, and whereas the alleged illegal shooting was wrong, a lot of good has come of it.

Living in Zimbabwe, I believe I saw the very first and original post through Face Book on The Lion which came from a local Zimbabwean by the name of Brian. He posts a lot of general information and many pictures on various locations and Parks around the country promoting Zimbabwe. As far as I can determine, he is not anti-hunting, though not a hunter himself. I saw the original picture he posted, and remember the day well as I expected a local outcry of some kind. He commented the “famous” Cecil had been killed by a hunter outside the park, and was simply lamenting his passing, but did invite comments on why lions are hunted. This was picked up by a local email newsletter which goes out daily, and solicited quite a debate locally for a few days. Brian's original post and subsequent local discussion was not an attack as such, but lamenting the passing of a lion many Zimbabweans knew of. The Lion certainly is famous now.

Many of the pictures and video you will have seen came from Brian, and I saw a couple of weeks ago that he has since deleted or removed all his pictures and video. He certainly did not realise what was about to happen when he did the posting, and was more than a little upset his material had been taken over by media worldwide, without his permission.

People like Johnny “I will post any rubbish I like” Rodrigues have certainly taken advantage of the situation, but like him, many have fallen on their faces if their propaganda was flawed. An issue like Cecil, cannot be glossed over quite so easily when the whole world is watching so closely.

After our Cecil article on the African Hunter website, we have had (like many I suspect) unprecedented traffic on the site, and much feedback. Quite a bit of this has been from those “on the fence” people. I see on FB too, that many very good articles and comments have been posted about the significance of hunting in conservation, and many of those have been widely circulated on the back of Cecil’s fame. Like other posters here, I believe this has been a victory more for hunting than the short-term negative effects of the Cecil explosion. People are listening and have become more understanding and accepting... from what I have seen and my own interactions.

quote:

Originally posted by Neil-PH:

quote:

What real bastards these lot have been, and the damage they have done to hunting.

Agreed that there has been a lot of damage to hunting BUT what I have noticed, and feel good about, is the way we hunters have fought back with fact after fact on all social media platforms.

So often we have sat back and criticized the anti's, leaving them to their thoughts and radical tirades, laughing them off as uneducated fools. Not this time. Many, many Pro Hunters, hunters and scientists have bombarded social media with fact upon fact, and unless I'm mistaken the anti's have gone very quiet. Let's hope some of them are taking cognisance of what experts are saying.

There is no such thing as bad publicity, and whereas the alleged illegal shooting was wrong, a lot of good has come of it.

I tend to agree with you Neil.....and when I suggested this should be our approach in managing this crisis, I was labelled a clueless dreamer by some on here. I noticed that wherever I countered with facts, the particular social media thread died rather quickly thereafter.

I do not think we are out of the woods yet in terms of public sentiment but it's not a bad time to go on the counter offensive and flood social meda and press with pro utilization, fact filled articles! And this is where I think our various hunting clubs and pro utilization orgs around the world need to take the lead.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

Originally posted by Neil-PH:

quote:

What real bastards these lot have been, and the damage they have done to hunting.

Agreed that there has been a lot of damage to hunting BUT what I have noticed, and feel good about, is the way we hunters have fought back with fact after fact on all social media platforms.

So often we have sat back and criticized the anti's, leaving them to their thoughts and radical tirades, laughing them off as uneducated fools. Not this time. Many, many Pro Hunters, hunters and scientists have bombarded social media with fact upon fact, and unless I'm mistaken the anti's have gone very quiet. Let's hope some of them are taking cognisance of what experts are saying.

There is no such thing as bad publicity, and whereas the alleged illegal shooting was wrong, a lot of good has come of it.

I tend to agree with you Neil.....and when I suggested this should be our approach in managing this crisis, I was labelled a clueless dreamer by some on here. I noticed that wherever I countered with facts, the particular social media thread died rather quickly thereafter.

I do not think we are out of the woods yet in terms of public sentiment but it's not a bad time to go on the counter offensive and flood social meda and press with pro utilization, fact filled articles! And this is where I think our various hunting clubs and pro utilization orgs around the world need to take the lead.

Precisely Mich!

I sent out an e-mail to a few key members and since dropped the ball myself due to family vacation...but horse racing veterinary world has a model we should explore called the: "on-call team."

This team rotates to various equine orthopedic experts to ready if a famous horse breaks a leg at a race. Every time it happens...there is an outcry to stop racing. The "on-call" team is ready to field questions, do interviews, etc etc immediately to defuse a crisis such as this.

It has been very successful thus far and has helped put horse racing back into public favor.

I think Lane's description of an emergency response team provides an excellent opportunity. I can see how organizations like SCI, DSC, B & C, FWS, etc. could accomplish this cooperatively. This time it was a lion in Africa. Next it could be a bighorn in Mexico or an Argali in Tajikistan.

quote:

Originally posted by Brice: I can see how organizations like SCI, DSC, B & C, FWS, etc. could accomplish this cooperatively.

[Quote:]

Like other posters here, I believe this has been a victory more for hunting than the short-term negative effects of the Cecil explosion. People are listening and have become more understanding and accepting... from what I have seen and my own interactions.


[Quote/:]

All the major airlines have stopped shipping Big 5 trophies, the Empire State Building in NY had a photo of "Cecil" projected on it, etc. Tell me again how we won this little skirmish!!

Somehow I think we are overestimating our "circles of influence" if we think we came out on top with this issue.

DSC also contributed to the Oxford research so I doubt they are an anti-hunting group.

On the other hand I read an article that in recent weeks antis made individual donations to them approaching 500,000 pounds. Probably in the mistaken belief that they are on their side!! Oxford said this surge in cash would enable them to expand their research efforts to other countries.

http://www.theguardian.com/env...wildlife-researchers

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwanamich:

quote:

Originally posted by Neil-PH:

quote:

What real bastards these lot have been, and the damage they have done to hunting.

Agreed that there has been a lot of damage to hunting BUT what I have noticed, and feel good about, is the way we hunters have fought back with fact after fact on all social media platforms.

So often we have sat back and criticized the anti's, leaving them to their thoughts and radical tirades, laughing them off as uneducated fools. Not this time. Many, many Pro Hunters, hunters and scientists have bombarded social media with fact upon fact, and unless I'm mistaken the anti's have gone very quiet. Let's hope some of them are taking cognisance of what experts are saying.

There is no such thing as bad publicity, and whereas the alleged illegal shooting was wrong, a lot of good has come of it.

I tend to agree with you Neil.....and when I suggested this should be our approach in managing this crisis, I was labelled a clueless dreamer by some on here. I noticed that wherever I countered with facts, the particular social media thread died rather quickly thereafter.

I do not think we are out of the woods yet in terms of public sentiment but it's not a bad time to go on the counter offensive and flood social meda and press with pro utilization, fact filled articles! And this is where I think our various hunting clubs and pro utilization orgs around the world need to take the lead.

Precisely Mich!

I sent out an e-mail to a few key members and since dropped the ball myself due to family vacation...but horse racing veterinary world has a model we should explore called the: "on-call team."

This team rotates to various equine orthopedic experts to ready if a famous horse breaks a leg at a race. Every time it happens...there is an outcry to stop racing. The "on-call" team is ready to field questions, do interviews, etc etc immediately to defuse a crisis such as this.

It has been very successful thus far and has helped put horse racing back into public favor.

I have made this suggestion directly to the president of SCI. I termed it a Rapid Response team. SCI still has not responded. DSC responded so late they might as well not have bothered as we got killed.

We need to be able to have social media work for us. Not run and hide from it. We also need to be engaging social media at all times as to the virtues of hunting and wildlife management. This would be a far better solution than waiting until a crisis blows up on us.

We have three audiences at all times. Those that are with us. Those that are against us and those that are the fence sitters.

The fence sitters is where these battles are won or lost. And boy did we lose badly this last time around.

We need to learn and learn fast how to manipulate the Sheeple.

Jeff

I know the Oxford Research team. They are not anti-hunting and realize the importance it brings to the table. I have even spoken to some of the scientists at Oxford thru this. They are just trying to stay out of the fray as it is true...they walk a fine line with donors.

Had this hunt been a legal hunt...you might have seen a more positive hunting position taken by them.

The positives that came from this was light shed on on quota transfers and the shady things some the "new" land owners do.

Also...it has shown us how easy it is for social media to go wrong.

Negatives...as Todd says...in large metropolitan areas...the places where today's politics are decided...sport hunting has received a black eye that NO steak can soothe.

Might be a good reason for Republicans to consider Trump. A person who doesn't sweat special interest and who's sons are avid African hunters...just saying...

Seems the Oxford Research team could be doing a lot more to unwind much of the hype surrounding lions and human/cattle conflicts.

The thing that is puzzling to me is the Oxford group were the ONLY one's who knew that they had a lion down. If the landowner was breaking the law, seems he would have been the last person to draw attention to the kill. So someone talked and pushed the story to the media. The lion in question was certainly not the only lion killed in and around the park so why was this one made into such a firestorm? Seems someone with an agenda got behind this and orchestrated the story. Generally when this happens, there is money to be made and the only folks who would benefit is the Oxford group. Innocent or not it sure smells bad.

Maybe it's time they went public and told the real story...

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Maybe it's time they went public and told the real story...

Doubt that will happen. They stand to lose too much funding if they do that. Remember that field research of this nature is exorbitantly expensive.

Sure hope I'm wrong though because it would be impressive if they did.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Seems the Oxford Research team could be doing a lot more to unwind much of the hype surrounding lions and human/cattle conflicts.

The thing that is puzzling to me is the Oxford group were the ONLY one's who knew that they had a lion down. If the landowner was breaking the law, seems he would have been the last person to draw attention to the kill. So someone talked and pushed the story to the media. The lion in question was certainly not the only lion killed in and around the park so why was this one made into such a firestorm? Seems someone with an agenda got behind this and orchestrated the story. Generally when this happens, there is money to be made and the only folks who would benefit is the Oxford group. Innocent or not it sure smells bad.

Maybe it's time they went public and told the real story...

You're correct in that someone attempted to push this for monetary gain, but it wasn't Oxford.

It was Johnny Rodrigues!

EVERYTHING Ant said! Great post Ant!

If one has any connections in Zimbabwe (real connections) Mr. Williams not only hit the nail on the head, he hammered it in 100% perfectly all the way. Indeed Johhny my boy is what a homo gets when one drags a OLD Zimbabwe $1.00 bill through a grass village near Makuti. He in my humble opinion and from my sources do not feel he is worth a U.S. 1.00 bill. The ones that they give in change at the tool booths which have more diseases than a Ebola farm.

Don't overlook the effect that change.org and other so-called "social media" sites had on spreading the word about the lion. Even before news about Cecil hit, change.org was scheming to end hunting in Africa and had collected nearly a half million signatures on its petition to ban Big Five shipments.

Bill Quimby