quote:

Originally posted by cow-trader:
Yes we knew about this, old news.

It's a small area right up against the park station at mbalahoeta(spelling) it was part of Nixon's area and it was decided, begining of last year, it would for the time being, be swallowed up into the park and managed by fzs.

I think it just dragged on a year because Nixon kicked up a legal stink.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Question is why are they collaring 22 large elephant bulls? Research or protection?

Does it matter? Hunters are not the only user of theses animals. If we don't play nice we may not get to play at all.

1) The publicity is bad for all PH’s business in the long run. I AGREE

Has not hurt MP

6) They think the “I did not see it” was a lie.
EVERYONE IS ENTITLES TO AN OPINION

How many times does the same guy get to use the same defense before someone calls BS?

7) They know how extremely rare these bulls are.
ITS A HUNTING AREA, THERE'S A QUOTA

There is an agreement to not shoot those animals. Break the agreement and perhaps you should be closed out of hunting the area.

9) For a variety of circumstances...they don’t consider these bulls “fair chase.”
BULLSHIT ANTI HUNTER TALK

No the professional hunting group says that

quote:

My opinion strictly, I think the collaring of these bigger / older bulls is absolutely a way to "protect" them from hunting, under the umbrella of "research".

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

My opinion strictly, I think the collaring of these bigger / older bulls is absolutely a way to "protect" them from hunting, under the umbrella of "research".

That is the naked truth!

In the name of "scientific research" it would make more sense to collar several mature herd bulls that move with their herds than to monitor solitary spent animals.

The same criteria is applicable to Lions; its always the older, heavily maned ones that seem to be collared.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Ok guys - DON'T shoot the messenger! Actually you all know - I'm ok with that too, I never take offense to any of this. I too want what's best for Africa - but that doesn't mean my position is always the same as yours, etc. Dr. Easter and I are great friends - but we disagree sometimes too. Like many of you - I too have friends in Zim. Here's some info / feedback I have received in the past 24 hrs or so - take it for what you will.

My opinion strictly, I think the collaring of these bigger / older bulls is absolutely a way to "protect" them from hunting, under the umbrella of "research".


Some Info / Facts from PH's:

FZS has done an awesome job in a JV with parks in Gonarezhou, in fact it is a success story!
Lloyd Yeatman shot the second bull and has approached the DSG in Harare for clarification on a few points.

How many permits have FZS been issued to collar elephant in Gonarezhou? Anwser from head office.... zero!

Hugo, the guy in charge of FZS stated he collared 10 bulls of which 2 were poached, 3 were shot by hunters, now he has stated 22 bulls! Question is why are they collaring 22 large elephant bulls? Research or protection?

Hugo is also the guy who got Nixon out and turned Malapati into a non hunting zone, he also attempted to do this with naivasha and Mahenya!!
He went to communities and offered more money to stop hunting, he has a serious agenda.

He constantly flies over Lloyd while he is on a legal safari, disturbing elephant in the hunting area.

He has attempted to make a law to state no driving on the boundary road.

From another Zim PH below. I am simply transposing the info here guys.

1) The publicity is bad for all PH’s business in the long run.
I AGREE

2) The ones in Zim know FZ are fine with hunting and want to keep the relationship good.
THEY CLOSED MALAPATI AND ARE TRYING TO CLOSE NAIVASHA.

3) All of them believe FZ contacted concession holders prior to the bulls being killed and asked for them to not be.
INCORRECT

4) It was well known by many that these bulls were there, they had been seen before, and even discussed.
INCORRECT

5) Zim PHs pride themselves on Bushcraft and feel the whole “I didn’t see it” thing makes them look stupid.
PERHAPS

6) They think the “I did not see it” was a lie.
EVERYONE IS ENTITLES TO AN OPINION

7) They know how extremely rare these bulls are.
ITS A HUNTING AREA, THERE'S A QUOTA

8) These 2 bulls were NOT collared for research, they were collared to protect them, and that was common knowledge. They as a group (ZPHGA) agree with that concept.
ILLEGAL TO COLLAR TO PROTECT, PERMITS ARE FOR RESEARCH IF THERE ARE ANY

9) For a variety of circumstances...they don’t consider these bulls “fair chase.”
BULLSHIT ANTI HUNTER TALK

I am an ardent and hardcore hunter...I especially like ele hunting...even cow ele hunting. Now I am speaking about these 2 bulls specifically and from what I know to be fact...I feel that way as does every PH I know well enough to speak frankly about it.

10) Successful parks are a critical for the survival of wildlife in Africa...they want these parks to be successful for photo-tourism...photo-tourism requires subjects to draw tourists.
ANTI HUNTING

see above response

11) Some...not all...look at these ele like the habituated camp-dwelling animals that many camps enjoy for viewing in the evening which many concessionaires maintain a hand-off.
ABSOLUTE CRAP
See above reponse again

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
My opinion strictly, I think the collaring of these bigger / older bulls is absolutely a way to "protect" them from hunting, under the umbrella of "research".

Hugo, the guy in charge of FZS stated he collared 10 bulls of which 2 were poached, 3 were shot by hunters, now he has stated 22 bulls! Question is why are they collaring 22 large elephant bulls? Research or protection?

quote:

Originally posted by cow-trader:
Aaron mate,
you may want to investigate getting some, shall I say, more enlightened sources

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

But for ZPHGA to claim it is unethical seems wrong.

Dr. Butler,
The majority of PHs in Zim look at these 2 bull as national treasures. They feel that PHs in their association should work in unison with orgs like FZ.

Every Zim PH that I know that I would hunt with does feel it is unethical to shoot these large collared bulls.

I agree with them.

Why would they say its unethical?

Most of the guys I know are in the bush and unable to say much right now. I haven't heard anything about this.

A few years back a few guys, including one poster here shot some really large elephant with Nixon Dzingai right on a park border and no one said anything about it being unethical.

I'm trying to get my head around how shooting any one bull in a fair chase manner is any less ethical just because of a collar.

I certainly see the PR side of it, and can sympathize with that. But just because the photo folks want them protected doesn't make them unethical to hunt.

I would agree the aggravation over shooting one of them is more than I would want to put up with and that it will have an adverse effect on hunting...what I don't get is if the great tuskers are "national treasures" why don't they just say like SA does near Kruger? Why is a collared 100 pound bull a national treasure but an uncollared 100# bull not?

PH’s don’t make the laws...they only follow them.

Being in the bush does not stop coms like it used to and I have spoken with several.

Why they consider it unethical:

1) The publicity is bad for all PH’s business in the long run.
2) The ones in Zim know FZ are fine with hunting and want to keep the relationship good.
3) All of them believe FZ contacted concession holder prior the bulls being killed and asked for them to not be.
4) It was well known by many that these bulls were there, they had been seen before, and even discussed.
5) Zim PHs pride themselves on Bushcraft and feel the whole “I didn’t see it” thing makes them look stupid.
6) They think the “I did not see it” was a lie.
7) They know how extremely rare these bulls are.
8) These 2 bulls were NOT collared for research, they were collared to protect them, and that was common knowledge. They as a group (ZPHGA) agree with that concept.
9) For a variety of circumstances...they don’t consider these bulls “fair chase.”
10) Successful parks are a critical for the survival of wildlife in Africa...they want these parks to be successful for photo-tourism...photo-tourism requires subjects to draw tourists.
11) Some...not all...look at these ele like the habituated camp-dwelling animals that many camps enjoy for viewing in the evening which many concessionaires maintain a hand-off.

quote:

We are going to have to learn to work with these groups of non-consumptive but not antihunting orgs or we will be legislated out completely soon.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

We are going to have to learn to work with these groups of non-consumptive but not antihunting orgs or we will be legislated out completely soon.

Very true!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

We are going to have to learn to work with these groups of non-consumptive but not antihunting orgs or we will be legislated out completely soon.

Very true!

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
FZS are not anti-hunters. They realize Gonarezhou has a limited carrying capacity of ele. They realize hunting blocks increase habitat and provide migration corridors. Work with them and they will work with hunters.

We are going to have to learn to work with these groups of non-consumptive but not antihunting orgs or we will be legislated out completely soon.

quote:

Originally posted by Skyline:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
FZS are not anti-hunters. They realize Gonarezhou has a limited carrying capacity of ele. They realize hunting blocks increase habitat and provide migration corridors. Work with them and they will work with hunters.

We are going to have to learn to work with these groups of non-consumptive but not antihunting orgs or we will be legislated out completely soon.

The problem we have these days Lane with hunters, is they still think that they have some sort of sway. We do not, best we can hope for is to keep enough on side to carry on for another decade or so.......but we do not have any power any longer. If you think about the fact that hunters who like to hunt dangerous game like elephant, lion, brown bear and polar bear, etc are only a fraction of one percent of hunters. Not the overall population...hunters!!!!!

Now factor in how many percent of the population in any given country hunt. In the US I think it is around 9 percent. So those who hunt dangerous game, heck just any foreign big game, amount to a very tiny fraction of a percent of the US population. So where is all the push going to come from and what politician is going to put it on the line for so few?

All the boys and girls need to get a clear picture of the numbers. Piss them off...them being the masses, including most normal everyday hunters, and it will be over in the blink of an eye. Heaven forbid that we talk nice and kiss butt.....no lets give them the old hard pitch and tell them they are wrong and we will kill bull elephants with collars. Hell it is legal. You don't like it? Too bad!! I do what I want!!

Legal. Ethical. Biologically sound. None of that matters. We are in a situation now where facts and game management strategies mean nothing.

Look at British Columbia.......grizzly closed. Period. Lots of bears and sound management but the majority of the general populations said "we don't like it" and that is that. No grizzly hunting.

California is looking at banning the import of African trophies into California by residents of the state, Just like they did for mountain lion decades ago.

I have it from a reliable source that the next thing on the chopping block up here in Canada is mountain lion in BC and Alberta. I have also been told that they (anti's) plan to get back at attacking the black bear seasons. We also have First Nations groups getting their backs up about black bear hunting.

The picture is not rosy. People need to get a grip on their attitudes. Being RIGHT means nothing these days. So I for one can get by just killing a 60 pound bull and letting a collared 80 pounder walk and continue to provide all people...photographers/viewers and hunters...with the thrill of just seeing them. Is that so much to ask in the great scheme of things? (Easy for me to say as I cannot afford an elephant hunt anyways. )

How long do you have to be alive before we begin to realize that the "me" and "look at me" attitude is what is killing hunting these days.

quote:

Originally posted by Skyline:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
FZS are not anti-hunters. They realize Gonarezhou has a limited carrying capacity of ele. They realize hunting blocks increase habitat and provide migration corridors. Work with them and they will work with hunters.

We are going to have to learn to work with these groups of non-consumptive but not antihunting orgs or we will be legislated out completely soon.

The problem we have these days Lane with hunters, is they still think that they have some sort of sway. We do not, best we can hope for is to keep enough on side to carry on for another decade or so.......but we do not have any power any longer. If you think about the fact that hunters who like to hunt dangerous game like elephant, lion, brown bear and polar bear, etc are only a fraction of one percent of hunters. Not the overall population...hunters!!!!!

Now factor in how many percent of the population in any given country hunt. In the US I think it is around 9 percent. So those who hunt dangerous game, heck just any foreign big game, amount to a very tiny fraction of a percent of the US population. So where is all the push going to come from and what politician is going to put it on the line for so few?

All the boys and girls need to get a clear picture of the numbers. Piss them off...them being the masses, including most normal everyday hunters, and it will be over in the blink of an eye. Heaven forbid that we talk nice and kiss butt.....no lets give them the old hard pitch and tell them they are wrong and we will kill bull elephants with collars. Hell it is legal. You don't like it? Too bad!! I do what I want!!

Legal. Ethical. Biologically sound. None of that matters. We are in a situation now where facts and game management strategies mean nothing.

Look at British Columbia.......grizzly closed. Period. Lots of bears and sound management but the majority of the general populations said "we don't like it" and that is that. No grizzly hunting.

California is looking at banning the import of African trophies into California by residents of the state, Just like they did for mountain lion decades ago.

I have it from a reliable source that the next thing on the chopping block up here in Canada is mountain lion in BC and Alberta. I have also been told that they (anti's) plan to get back at attacking the black bear seasons. We also have First Nations groups getting their backs up about black bear hunting.

The picture is not rosy. People need to get a grip on their attitudes. Being RIGHT means nothing these days. So I for one can get by just killing a 60 pound bull and letting a collared 80 pounder walk and continue to provide all people...photographers/viewers and hunters...with the thrill of just seeing them. Is that so much to ask in the great scheme of things? (Easy for me to say as I cannot afford an elephant hunt anyways. )

How long do you have to be alive before we begin to realize that the "me" and "look at me" attitude is what is killing hunting these days.

quote:

Originally posted by BEGNO:
Total bummer about Nixon and Malipati. I loved hunting there. Shot a 65 lb. Elephant and two 43" Buffs there. I was hoping my son would get a chance to hunt there with Nixon. The animal lovers and tree huggers f up everything. They couldn't care less about the well being of the surrounding communities.

quote:

But, it is still up to the individual to do what they think best or what they like.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:

quote:

Originally posted by BEGNO:
Total bummer about Nixon and Malipati. I loved hunting there. Shot a 65 lb. Elephant and two 43" Buffs there. I was hoping my son would get a chance to hunt there with Nixon. The animal lovers and tree huggers f up everything. They couldn't care less about the well being of the surrounding communities.

Nixon was the reason Malipati was lost as a hunting concession.

quote:

Originally posted by buckeyeshooter:

But, it is still up to the individual to do what they think best or what they like.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
The “Me” and “Look at me”

Was created by SCI.

Suported and nourished until it has become a horrible shadow over what we normal people call hunting!

quote:

Originally posted by cow-trader:
Mates,
Going to clue some people in since this a done deal now.

The issue with Malapati was mostly all Nixon's fault. The community does not like him there and the Park definitely does not like him.

This friction has been rubbing for a while. As far back as 2015 though, there was a deal working with a reputable outfitter taking over Malapati. FZS was going to sign off on it as well as mbalahoeta community.

Only one problem, the new were of the wrong color and Nixon pulled strings to muddy the water. Now, real-estate lost to hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by BEGNO:
I don't believe that for a minute. I don't know if the last two posters have ever been to Malipati or hunted with Nixon. I have been there several times and Nixon treated everybody he met with great respect and the communities seemed to worship him for all he was doing for them. I doubt anybody could have been on better terms with parks and the communities.
I do know that there was a lot of jealousy by other operators of Nixon's success and his areas.
At any rate Nixon didn't have anything to do with the two collared elephants.
I will choose to believe what I have seen first hand.

quote:

Originally posted by BEGNO:
IMHO it is extremely unlikely that a safari company with the best and biggest elephant hunting in Zim is going to self destruct.
The simple truth is the Anti hunters have more money than we do and Malipati was targeted by them and now they will focus on the second and third best elephant areas until they have control of all of them.

quote:

Originally posted by BEGNO:
IMHO it is extremely unlikely that a safari company with the best and biggest elephant hunting in Zim is going to self destruct.
The simple truth is the Anti hunters have more money than we do and Malipati was targeted by them and now they will focus on the second and third best elephant areas until they have control of all of them.