Gents:
A question I have posted prior but not received suitable replies to is this: We have all read the attacks on canned lion hunting--lion behind fences. Please tell me why so many are against lions hunted this way but not plains game? Like many of us here, I have hunted on ranches in South Africa where the kudu, gemsbok, etc., are in fenced enclosures of various sizes. I have seen some with only one water hole in the enclosure so the game is easy to shoot (rifle or bow). Why is this acceptable (or at least tolerated) with the plains game and not lion? Just curious as to your opinion. For that matter buffalo are also hunted in fenced areas in SA without the attacks that lion hunting behind fences brings.
Is it the nobility factor? What say you?
Cheers,
Cal

Cal I can give my opinion, In my opinion is that it has gotten to the point where some of these hunts the animal being sought is drugged brought on property prior to the client showing up and having clients walk right up to the Lion and shooting them from 20 yards, Then the real problem occurs where they show it off on the internet like it some kind of true wild free range hunt. When we hunt plains game they are not drugging them to make it easier for us to hunt. This is just my opinion on the subject take it at that.

No difference to me.

I do find it extremely repugnant, however, that anyone would be proud to have killed the king of beasts, when the poor bastard had been raised by hand from a kit, and then tamed like a dog during the process, and all the while fed by bottle and hand held meat until grown to young adulthood, and then kept caged like a zoo animal, until he was ultimately released hapless, if not drugged, to be shot by the proud "hunter" like a slaughterhouse hog.

Why does the so-called "hunter" not stay home instead? At least then, pretend is truly pretend.

Mr Pappas, I will give you a different idea and it has nothing to do with the size of the enclosure, and does not have much to do with Africa, but more to do with the species involved and human concepts concerning the species involved.

Here in Texas, it is common practice to shoot deer from an enclosed box blind while it is feeding under a timed throw, spin feeder broadcasting whole corn. It is widely accepted here.

I have had some really heated debates with fellow Texans concerning hunting Black Bear from an elevated blind watching a bait pile. The majority of them, feel that shooting a bear that way is totally unfair and approaches unethical.

In my opinion, for whatever it is worth, hunting predators draws on a different group of beliefs/ideas/concepts than hunting traditional prey species.

Yes, I can see the aversion to shooting drugged cats in enclosures just barely big enough for them to turn around in, but I just do not understand why, if all else is equal predators are viewed differently than hoof stock.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
No difference to me.

I do find it extremely repugnant, however, that anyone would be proud to have killed the king of beasts, when the poor bastard had been raised by hand from a kit, and then tamed like a dog during the process, and all the while fed by bottle and hand held meat until grown to young adulthood, and then kept caged like a zoo animal, until he was ultimately released hapless, if not drugged, to be shot by the proud "hunter" like a slaughterhouse hog.

Why does the so-called "hunter" not stay home instead? At least then, pretend is truly pretend.

MR - No beating around the bush on this one!!!

Cal, there's quite a difference as listed by MR above. Generally, the lion is released into the "hunting" area, just prior to the "hunter's" arrival. Much different than the PG that are usually in there all of the time.

Although you see lots of folks referring to the lion as "drugged", frankly in most instances - that's not the case. The lion is however, so accustom to people, and often confused with its new surroundings, that it simply lays there watching as the "hunters" approach/shoot! From what its experienced up to that point, there's nothing to be fearful of? The "hunts" definitely vary from one place to the next, but when seeing the extremely habituated (to people) lion, his reaction is usually nothing more than curiosity/confusion - its a much different experience than seen when "hunting" most other species within a high-fence property.

Personally, I have nothing against it. I just wish folks would keep it off Youtube/Television, and please just call it what it is - "killing" a lion, not "hunting" a lion. Stop trying to fool people, or insinuate it's something that its not - that's all.

Gentlemen,
I agree with the idea that dangerous game hunting draws on a different set of values than does plains game hunting. It seems to be okay with most people that one "collects" a PG animal, but DG needs to be hunted "proper", i.e. that taking an animal such as a lion that has been habituated to human presence is cheating.

Hi Cal,

I think much of it has to do with a properly run high fence PG ranch would have a "wild" breeding herd within the fence, not put and take. These animals grow up on the land and assuming the ranch is large enough, it often exceeds the species' normal home range size. If this is the case, then the PG animal learns the land, knows the escape routes, places to hide from predators (including man of course), locations of food sources, alternate food sources, as well as primary and alternate water sources, etc.

Of course your example of a ranch with one water hole doesn't appear to meet the criteria of what I would consider a "Properly run high fence ranch" as it would not be large enough for the animals to live a "wild" existence as described above.

In the case with the lions, they are released a couple of days (maybe) prior to the hunter pursuing them. There is no opportunity for the cat to learn escape routes. Furthermore, the cat expects to be fed when it hears / sees the truck and often comes running toward the truck, all the while the PH is telling the hunter that it is stalking / charging them or some other bullshit story for effect.

Bottom line to answer you question about the differences:

PG: 1) Knows the land and how to escape.
2) Is not comfortable with the sight, sound, and smell of man and exhibits "wild" reaction to man's presence and runs away or hides.

Lion:1) Does not know the land and how to escape.
2) Is comfortable with the sight, sound, and smell of man and does not know to run away or hide.
3) Expects man to feed him when he sees man or the truck and often approaches the truck or party if on foot.

Buffalo: Since you also mentioned that one.
1) Tend to act more like the PG in the above example.
2) Exhibit extreme "Wild" reactions to man's presence (assuming they have been running loose for some period of time). I've hunted them in RSA before and found them to be quite difficult to get close to as they know exactly what the truck or man means. They can be every bit as skittish as Whitetail Deer. Where the wild buff might stare at you awhile out of curiosity, the ranch buff will take one look, or one sniff, and beat feat to the other side of the ranch, probably not to be seen again that day s they don't calm down quickly after being spooked. That's been my experience but I was hunting on a very large ranch where the buff had been pursued on a regular basis. I've done it on three different trips. It isn't the same as hunting wild herds (which I prefer by far) such as in Zim, but it can be lots of fun and pretty tough to get a shot, especially if you do the entire hunt on foot on a large ranch.

Suffice it to say however, that if the PG or Buffalo operation is put and take, then it probably isn't much different from the canned lion deal.

Cal,

Would you feel it satisfying to hunt the Wood Bison being held by Alaska Fish & Game for release in the pens they are in now?

Personally it wouldn't be much different than hunting a Bison at Hollembeak Ranch in Delta. If you want to fill the freezer with Buffalo great. Would you call it a hunt?

Your call!! It's legal as is hunting pen raised Lions in RSA, or PG in high fenced RSA and Namibia.

I don't find a difference between any of it. When I walk in Africa with a rifle in my hands I like to think I'm in wild Africa and the animals I see are wild as well.

To all their own.

Cheers
Jim

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:
When I walk in Africa with a rifle in my hands I like to think I'm in wild Africa and the animals I see are wild as well.

Agree with that sentiment 100%.

I enjoyed the RSA experience early on but don't have any desire to go back. Not meaning to insult the RSA guys and operations, but I just don't get excited by the ranch experience at this time. I think the ranch hunts have their place, especially for starting out in Africa if a person hasn't done a lot of overseas hunting or is on a tight budget. They really do cater to taking care of the folks new to international hunting. For the guy who has spent most of his hunting career sitting in a Whitetail deer stand with maybe a couple trips out West for an Elk or Pronghorn, it is a great next step. JMO of course.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
MR - No beating around the bush on this one!!!

Cal, there's quite a difference as listed by MR above. Generally, the lion is released into the "hunting" area, just prior to the "hunter's" arrival. Much different than the PG that are usually in there all of the time.

Although you see lots of folks referring to the lion as "drugged", frankly in most instances - that's not the case. The lion is however, so accustom to people, and often confused with its new surroundings, that it simply lays there watching as the "hunters" approach/shoot! From what its experienced up to that point, there's nothing to be fearful of? The "hunts" definitely vary from one place to the next, but when seeing the extremely habituated (to people) lion, his reaction is usually nothing more than curiosity/confusion - its a much different experience than seen when "hunting" most other species within a high-fence property.

Personally, I have nothing against it. I just wish folks would keep it off Youtube/Television, and please just call it what it is - "killing" a lion, not "hunting" a lion. Stop trying to fool people, or insinuate it's something that its not - that's all.

I think Aaron has it nailed as to the difference between the so-called plains game, and lion “HUNTED” in enclosures! There is definitely a real difference between them as far as hunting goes. The fact is that many places are large enough so the area is larger than the animal’s natural range in the case of most plains game. Where the lion only hides to get close to his prey, while prey animals hide to stay alive. If any amount of cover and waters source all a plains game animal has to do is get behind the first bush to be out of sight. If you can’t see him you cant shoot him. Still all plains game fear everything, and hide or run from everything, because everything wants to eat them.

On the other hand a lion that is used to being around people is not shy about showing himself to people, only hiding from a potential meal till he can pounce. As was said earlier most plains game were born on the property where they are hunted, with only occasional additions as supply or breeding stock gets low. Most are quite familiar with escape routes and hiding places on the property, so are not a sure thing like the lion is. I assure you you will not see leopards turned out in a large enclosure because he will start to reduce the population of plains game immediately, and will shy away from the sound of humans. He will not be the push over that a hand raised lion will.

On most plains game hunting ranches the animals are hunted so often that they become very wary and if there is sufficient cover is in the property these type animals can be very challenging to hunt if you are looking for trophy animals and not just any member of the species. I really remote hunting country the prey animals may be easier to hunt than the same animal species in a game ranch, because they are hunted more often. In my opinion lions are not suited to this type of hunting, simply because they are top dog where they live and fear little, while plains game fears everything and make themselves scarce at the least indication of something being out of the ordinary, and head for the thickest crap they can find. The fence has little to do with this it is simply the nature of the two types of animals.

If you hunt on foot and be choosy about the age and quality of the game you can be proud of a good trophy taken on a quality game hunting ranch, However, there is no such thing as a quality trophy when hunting lion in a fenced enclosure, because you can be assured that he hasn’t been there long enough to know the property, and by the nature of being used to people he is not worried about them and will not usually run like a totally wild lion will.

In the final analysis a fence does not a CANNED HUNT make. The type of animal does!
........................................................... .............

Much of my opinion has already been expressed by Todd, but I have a bit to add. I have hunted SA, and enjoyed my time there greatly. Would I return? No. Is it good for the average hunter of PG? Of course!

PG have much smaller home ranges than lions. They adapt to the ranch, learn its nuances, and present something almost resembling fair chase. Lions, on the other hand, have huge home ranges. Hunting them on a fenced ranch can never, never be fair chase, or anything resembling it. I stand by this statement.

Another thing that served to make me so strongly against fenced lions is the quality of life that the lion enjoys. PG on a ranch live a fairly normal life. They have their herds, their preferential habitat, etc. Lions cannot have this. There will never be lions on a fenced ranch that the lion does not know about.

I spent some time on a 36,000ha ranch. This was a preserve, with no hunting allowed. With ample game, water sources, and habitat, what did the lion do? He spent almost all of his time walking the fenceline, always looking for a way out. He knew he was fenced in, and it went against his very nature to be fenced. The king of beasts deserves better than to be fenced and shot in an unnatural habitat.

Cal,
I also echo Todd's sentiments. I also feel that the "nobility factor" is a reason many folks find fenced lion hunting unattractive, to say the least. As stated a few times in this thread, lions are oft considered the " king of beasts"...seems reasonable to not want to see the king drugged, tamed, or held captive.

I am headed to western tanzania for a big simba, maybe or maybe not but it is the difficulty of getting a big old lion that keeps me from SHOOTING a SA lion.I have hunted plains game in SA and never felt a fence at all and the plains game was as wild as the plains game I have hunted in Tanzania, zambia, zimbabwe and others so in my opinion which is all it is,plains game in SA is a good honest hunt in the places I have been but a lion dropped off is not.

We have to define what we are talking about otherwise we'll compare apples to oranges.

Canned lion: Captive breed. Put on a farm to get shot a short time before the client arrives.

High fenced Plains game: Plains game roams free on a highfenced farm. It is "wild" and has to be hunted.

quote:

Originally posted by Overland:


PG have much smaller home ranges than lions. They adapt to the ranch, learn its nuances, and present something almost resembling fair chase. Lions, on the other hand, have huge home ranges. Hunting them on a fenced ranch can never, never be fair chase, or anything resembling it. I stand by this statement.

That's correct and is the main difference. Plains game can life wild, in a self sustaining population on a high fenced farm. Lions are normally "put and take" hunts.

Unless I'm mistaken, SA law now requires Lions to be released and self-supporting for 2 years prior to their being hunted which, if so, makes most of the comments posted here misinformed and irrelevant.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Unless I'm mistaken, SA law now requires Lions to be released and self-supporting for 2 years prior to their being hunted which, if so, makes most of the comments posted here misinformed and irrelevant.

Steve - I wish I was, but trust me - I'm NOT mis-informed, and neither are the others.

If the above was officially en-acted, and practiced - it might work. But, not only would many of the lions die long before they were ever "hunted", for all sorts of reasons. The cost to support the lion/s, would make this "lion hunt", a whole different ball-game my friend. Good in theory, but theory is rarely reality.

Re: comments about plains game in fenced ranches being "wild" ...If an animal spent any time in a truck or pen or has been handled in any manner...is that "wild?" I 've hunted on a 19k acre ranch in Namibia, and I saw the fenceing a few times too many...Do guys hunting on ranches request to NOT be shown any fencelines? Just asking...

quote:

Originally posted by joester:
Re: comments about plains game in fenced ranches being "wild" ...If an animal spent any time in a truck or pen or has been handled in any manner...is that "wild?" I 've hunted on a 19k acre ranch in Namibia, and I saw the fenceing a few times too many...Do guys hunting on ranches request to NOT be shown any fencelines? Just asking...

joester, If the question you ask in bold above is meant to insinuate that the animals so handled would not be wild afterward, then let me ask you a question that in your opinion may or may not have the same answer!

My question to you is; Are wild animals that are trapped by the Parks and Wildlife departments in over populated areas and transported to better habitat relieving the population problem in both areas still wild animals? The reason I ask this is, because of urban development, or in the case of building an artillery range the animals are often trapped ad trucked to other places and released. By your insinuation that these animals would no longer be wild animals I assume you would not hunt these animals!... NO?

In my opinion just about any place in the USA or Europe , and many places in Africa where animals are hunted, by your definition of “wild” you couldn’t be sure if you were participating in a canned hunt, so you would simply not hunt at all because animals a re moved around all the time by the parks dpt. My definition of wild has to do only with the wild attitude of the animal when confronted by a hunter. If you mean moving the animal from one location to another makes the animal domesticated, then I strongly disagree with your take on this subject. An animal that has been hand fed by humans till he come to a dinner bell is domesticated, while trapping and moving to a second location is quite another thing! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,JUST ASKING!

Now a lion is another matter because he is expensive to feed, and cant be kept too long without him assuming people ar not a threat! So-called plains game dont have to be fed at all, and can be very quickly transported and reliesed, with little human contact. These animals avoid humans as they do any other species and so hide or fleep from anything that aproaches them.

Even domestic cattle if left alone for a short time to fend for themselves, will revert to a wild state and will keep a distance from humans and become wild feral like wild feral hogs. Nothing I know of are more wary than a feral hog, and nobody who has hunted hogs on foot without the aid of dogs would call hunting them a canned hunt, even behind a fence where they have cover! Plains game that are hunted regularly are no different!

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

I still continue to find it amazing that Americans who build blinds, hang tree stands, plant food plots and have "feeders" on land they control way smaller than RSA high fenced operations have the balls to criticize.....

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Unless I'm mistaken, SA law now requires Lions to be released and self-supporting for 2 years prior to their being hunted which, if so, makes most of the comments posted here misinformed and irrelevant.

Steve - I wish I was, but trust me - I'm NOT mis-informed, and neither are the others.

If the above was officially en-acted, and practiced - it might work. But, not only would many of the lions die long before they were ever "hunted", for all sorts of reasons. The cost to support the lion/s, would make this "lion hunt", a whole different ball-game my friend. Good in theory, but theory is rarely reality.

So is the the 2-year release time-lapse period SA law or not?

quote:

High fenced Plains game: Plains game roams free on a highfenced farm. It is "wild" and has to be hunted.

Except for the thriving market in SA for breeding animals with good genetics, all in order to 'farm' big heads. There are put and take PG operations too, just like HF whitetail operations in some areas.

If they're not subject to the predation natural to that area, in my mind they're not 'wild' regardless of the enclosure size relative to their home range. Isn't that the whole point of the fence? They won't be as wariy, lean, skitish, plentiful,or large. I can't remember where but I recently read that more +60" kudu have been shot in the last 10 years than in all of history up til then. Coincidience?

quote:

I still continue to find it amazing that Americans who build blinds, hang tree stands, plant food plots and have "feeders" on land they control way smaller than RSA high fenced operations have the balls to criticize.....

I find that equaly repugnant as canned lions if you term it hunting. Nothing wrong with it if you're just filling the freezer, but at some point you cross over from hunting to ranching and are killing livestock rather than wild game. To each his own.

My own opinion, nothing more.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Unless I'm mistaken, SA law now requires Lions to be released and self-supporting for 2 years prior to their being hunted which, if so, makes most of the comments posted here misinformed and irrelevant.

Steve - I wish I was, but trust me - I'm NOT mis-informed, and neither are the others.

If the above was officially en-acted, and practiced - it might work. But, not only would many of the lions die long before they were ever "hunted", for all sorts of reasons. The cost to support the lion/s, would make this "lion hunt", a whole different ball-game my friend. Good in theory, but theory is rarely reality.

So is the the 2-year release time-lapse period SA law or not?

Steve, to my understanding, that was proposed as law but has not been passed or implemented. Currently, the Lions offered in SA are put and take.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Unless I'm mistaken, SA law now requires Lions to be released and self-supporting for 2 years prior to their being hunted which, if so, makes most of the comments posted here misinformed and irrelevant.

Steve - I wish I was, but trust me - I'm NOT mis-informed, and neither are the others.

If the above was officially en-acted, and practiced - it might work. But, not only would many of the lions die long before they were ever "hunted", for all sorts of reasons. The cost to support the lion/s, would make this "lion hunt", a whole different ball-game my friend. Good in theory, but theory is rarely reality.

So is the the 2-year release time-lapse period SA law or not?

NO

I echo many of the sentiments expressed by Todd Williams who seems to have a very good insight into the problems.

quote:

Originally posted by SteveGl:
Unless I'm mistaken, SA law now requires Lions to be released and self-supporting for 2 years prior to their being hunted which, if so, makes most of the comments posted here misinformed and irrelevant.

Unfortunately SteveGI is indeed mistaken. It is quite true that Kortbroek van Schalkwyk attempted to introduce the minimum two years between release and being shot into regulations. As is typical for any ANC politician, he also screwed up and a court ruling reversed that futile attempt, to what the situation was before the totally failed legislation to stop "canned" lion shooting was introduced. Now in the Free State Province a captive bred and released lion has to live "free" for 3 months before shooting it becomes legal. However, in the North West Province the period between release and shooting is only a miserable four days!. I do not have, or indeed care to know, what the procedure or time requirements are in other provinces.

Now three months is quite enough for any administered tranquilizing drug to have worn off. But with the proper injection procedure the most often used drug is still quite effective after 4 days! On most, or at least many, lion shoots of such released captive bred lions in the Kalahari region of North West Province the lion is still significantly under the influence of the tranquilizing drug administered to facilitate easy transport when the shooting client arrives. Aarons views about the severe human habituation is also quite true, even un-drugged lions will just lie there and watch!

This brings up a point raised by Brian Clark. By injecting a massive dose of tranquilizer into a deep muscle of an antelope [read: Put & Take] before it is transported from the game dealers’ holding kraals to the “hunting farm” the effect of the drug can be seen for as long as many days after release. So, yes, many kudu, waterbuck, and a host of others, are "hunted" as Put & Take animals while they are still drugged! Probably result in my backside being kicked again, but some time ago I posted a few things about the "Put & Take" plainsgame shooting industry in South Africa.

In good hunting.

The ethical issues are multi level and the argument can be bought from different view points.

From a sustainable use point of view, breeding lions in cages and having some idiot pay a small fortune to go and shoot one for convenience is no problem.

As for the sporting interest of shooting plains game in fenced areas, well it is a cull of farm animals by other methods and may appeal to some. It is cheap, serves an economic purpose and provides sport in the mind of the shooter - otherwise he would not do it.

The sporting argument dissipates when the areas are huge and hunting is much as if it were entirely open, animals wild and chance of success just as unsure.

One is often caught up in one's own personal distaste when contemplating ideas such as 'sportsmanship' and what is admirable.

If a man shows a lion mounted in his study, which was killed by him while he was living in Africa and he shot it, at risk to himself, to save 'the village' from a threat or the actual killer of their people or cattle etc, that is perhaps the image a lot of lion hunters aspire to.

It doesn't happen any more. a safari is an approximation - a few weeks playing the intrepid white hunter (nothing wrong with that). The kudos of having bagged a dangerous cat and there he is siting in your study, all big teeth and muscle, perhaps shows the hair on your chest to visitors.

I think the revulsion many feel about the canned lion hunt is the contempt they feel for the inadequates who want to make up the big tough hunter story about themselves. As Holden Caulfield might have said - it is the phonyness that irritates us.

Go to Kotto safaris in the CAR. That's 5 million acres (2 M ha) just for You. Guaranteed sport and no fences as they can't afford it. No canned lion as they can afford it. No plain games from auctions as they can afford it and there are no auctions there.
Everything is genuine, and junk , game apart.

I watched a TV show yesterday of what I believe was a BS canned lion hunt, my opinion is based on what I've read posted on this forum. I found two parts disgusting: the lion had no idea it was now being hunted and it was fairly "tame". The hunter had no idea that the lion was newly released and she shot what was little more than a zoo creature. It was very hard to watch that show.

I've hunted high fence PG in SA and felt it very challenging to get within 150 to 200 yards to get a decent shot. Many times the stalk involved crawling on hands and knees or "low crawling" through grass with puff adders and cobras still about. Usually we made several stalks which resulted in being "blown" by too many eyes or a shift in the wind. I'm very satisfied with the quality of those hunts and the animals we took.

Thanks, Andrew, for the detailed reply. It’s been a difficult issue to follow for a variety of reasons. In his ruling of June, 2009 (HERE), Judge Van Der Merwe writes (using four negatives) “I am not convinced however that the respondent is wrong in saying that the 24 months self-sustaining provision will not necessarily put an end to the industry by making it financially not viable. …. “ Huh? But considering the amount of culling done on many ranches, I believe that van Schalkwyk and the Judge are correct in that assessment.

I expect that this is not a dead issue and there will eventually be a change in SA law requiring something similar to the 2-year self-sustaining provision. I also expect that that will not satisfy either the antis or many AR members. But even SAPBA, in its 2011 Annual Report called for “moving in the direction of a national release period”, and I believe PHASA and WRSA are also in favor of it.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom In Tennessee:
I still continue to find it amazing that Americans who build blinds, hang tree stands, plant food plots and have "feeders" on land they control way smaller than RSA high fenced operations have the balls to criticize.....

I know what you mean, sort of like Africans bulding blinds, and placing baits for lion, leopard and Hyena in Africa, and shooting at night with artificial light!

Hunting is done in many ways world wide. In the case of shooting from tree stands and ground blinds in the USA over food fields is no different from placing baits for African game. Neither is a sure thing. In the USA this is usually a rule set by the land owner so he is protected from liability of hunters shooting each other while stalking the woods on foot. The placement of the stands makes the shooting lane so as not to be pointed or in range of another stand.

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