http://animals.nationalgeograp...om/animals/big-cats/


This is from the June 2010 National Geographic issue "Nevertheless, some experts warn that within 25 years there may be no lions left outside the biggest, best run parks. Wildlife biologist Craig Packer says for lions to survive, parks must be fenced and heavily guarded-perhaps by the United Nations".

Craig Packer is an absolute, complete freakin moron!!

Agreed! And he's stupid as well!

quote:

Wildlife biologist Craig Packer says for lions to survive, parks must be fenced and heavily guarded-perhaps by the United Nations".

Packer is scientifically smart but he is a far-left winged socialist.

He is one of the reasons I have worked hard to promote TAMU's research as they are NOT.

I would not let the UN guard my outhouse. In my opinion...the UN is one of the scourges of Africa and especially its wildlife. I have found UN officials to be arrogant ass-holes...to put it politiely!

Did any of you watch the Documentery on TGTS anti-poaching project???

They reckoned UN camps were hotbeds for selling bush-meat.

The formation of the UN has been one of the great debacles of world history.

Guard the wildlife...hell...the most dangerous part of my last trip to Africa was dodging the F@*&ing UN vehicles as they tried to run you off the road.

Craig Packer and UN =>

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Wildlife biologist Craig Packer says for lions to survive, parks must be fenced and heavily guarded-perhaps by the United Nations".

Packer is scientifically smart but he is a far-left winged socialist.

He is one of the reasons I have worked hard to promote TAMU's research as they are NOT.

I would not let the UN guard my outhouse. In my opinion...the UN is one of the scourges of Africa and especially its wildlife. I have found UN officials to be arrogant ass-holes...to put it politiely!

Did any of you watch the Documentery on TGTS anti-poaching project???

They reckoned UN camps were hotbeds for selling bush-meat.

The formation of the UN has been one of the great debacles of world history.

Guard the wildlife...hell...the most dangerous part of my last trip to Africa was dodging the F@*&ing UN vehicles as they tried to run you off the road.

Craig Packer and UN =>

Plus, notice one of the main things the site is asking for, MONEY!!! That's because SCI & Conservation Force are no longer funding Packer's way. Funny how he jumped ship so quickly, once the money ran out???? Do gooders will believe anything, especially if Nat Geo says so.

To any person with a lick of sense, and a bit of knowledge about his past work history, his credibility should count for nothing! He's just following the money, nothing more!!!

I have not perused Kathi's link but at first glance it appears to be about the Jouberts' and not Packer? Where is the statement from Packer about the UN guarding lions on that sight?

Packer is a scientist/researcher for hire, a prostitute. Dereck Joubert's single focus is to have the African lion uplisted to CITES Appendix I. He was extremely miffed that it did not even come up for discussion at the last CITES meeting in March.

He has now started a campaign, using the resources and influence of National Geographic, to makes sure that the uplisting issue is brought up at the next CITES meeting. He has no interest in helping to implement the various national lion action plans that were agreed upon by CITES members, which were based on scientific facts, not emotion. All he is interested in is promoting himself as the saviour of the lion, elevating his image of National Geographic's "explorer in residence", whatever that means.

I have read his debates with researchers and other interested parties such as John Jackson in various African lion forums and whilst he is not particularly intelligent, he is extremely influential and dangerous.

There has never been a greater threat to the survival of the African lion than what we are now facing with the likes of Joubert.

Below is an article that he wrote for the Washington Post in October of 2009.

Saving the Last Lions
By Dereck Joubert
Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Just 50 years ago there were close to a half-million lions in Africa --
about 450,000 in all. Today there are between 16,000 and 23,000. And
yet, unlike elephants (a far more numerous species), lions have no
protection under the international accord governing such matters.

Big cats are in trouble everywhere. The number of tigers has dipped
below 3,000. Indeed, as we look at the lion population today, it's the
shadow of the tiger's history that scares me most. Tiger bones are used
extensively in the East for medicines and mythological (read nonsense)
cures for ailments or limp libidos, and the demand is increasing. A
growing demand and a disappearing supply is a formula for disaster.

The solution we are seeing play out is a switch from tiger bones to lion
bones, which can be easily sold off as tiger bones. It's ironic that the
most famous animal in Africa, perhaps in the world, can't even be
poached on its own value but only as a "mock tiger."

This week the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
(CITES) is meeting to decide whether lions, whose numbers have declined
by 50 percent in the past 20 years, are worthy of protection under
Appendix I to the convention: the listing of the most endangered
animals. The problem is that the safari hunting industry and buyers in
Asia are opposing it, because such a decree would limit what they can do
with the trophies. Fact: Appendix I does not mean you can't shoot a lion
-- it means you can't import the skin to hang on the wall. And the
answer to the question we are asked a thousand times is: Yes, you can
still go to Africa to kill a lion.

CITES needs a country to sponsor the motion for lion protection. We
can't, so far, get one to put its hand up first, to take on the issue
and save lions. No one will risk offending big safari hunting lobbies.
It would seem that many are just not thinking this through. Extinction
threatens by the year 2020. Then there will be no lions to hunt, or to
protect.


(Meanwhile another ominous development poses a further threat to
wildlife. A pesticide is being used by poachers to kill lions and many
other animals. Sprinkled on meat, it kills lions, hyenas, vultures and
other creatures in minutes).

We don't have much time. The biggest threat isn't hunters, poachers or
poison makers -- it is our own complacency, the lazy hope that someone
else is taking care of the great beasts of Africa.

Lions and other large predators are disappearing even as we learn more
about the collapse of entire ecosystems. The $200 billion a year reaped
from ecotourism will be lost, causing suffering among communities all
over Africa that rely on this trade.

As explorers in residence at National Geographic, my wife, Beverly, and
I are calling on everyone with even a remote interest in big cats, or in
Africa, to make sure that these wild systems keep working well.
Scientists, conservationists -- everyone -- must come together, work
together and support this effort now: the Big Cats Initiative. It's a
movement that doesn't want to exclude a single soul or leave out any
idea on how to reduce the conflict. We have a short window of time in
which we can remedy this. It is closing very rapidly.

Dereck Joubert and his wife, Beverly Joubert, are National Geographic
explorers in residence. They have spent years making films and writing
about the big cats of Africa.

i have read through this forum and cannot believe that some people do not realise that lions are on the decline and at a fast pace. The figures stated that 50 years ago there were half a million lions and today there is in the region of twenty thousand is 100% correct. But still people think it is ok to hunt lions... I am a guide in zimbabwe and have guided in zambia,botswana and SA and have seen it for myself in my lifetime that you do not see lion like you used to ten years ago let alone fifty years ago. I want to ask the "lion hunters" on this forum politely to reply to this and tell me how they can justify still wanting to hunt lion?

One of the best things about AR is that it allows a free exchange of information and opinion and I have to say, I find this thread fascinating.

Although the UN are really a side issue on this, I'll agree that they're as much use as a chocolate teapot and do far more damage to
Africa than good..... largely because they're a military force governed by politicians and I have no time whatsoever for politicians. The fact that they're also a bunch or arrogant bastards doesn't help either.

As for CP. Although I don't agree with everything he says. I think it ridiculous to suggest he's an idiot. He's been head of the longest running lion study project in Africa and has contributed an immense amount of knowledge to the subject. Anything he says, is worth listening to and considering at the very least. I'm not suggesting we should take every word he utters as gospel truth but I do think his opinions are always well worth considering.

I think Zimgiuide makes a very good point and I'll add that lions and elephants have very different management problems than the other species and that we as hunters don't do anywhere near enough to acknowledge that when we hunt those species.

Whether we should have a moratorium of hunting lions is another matter and one I don't feel qualified to comment much on, other than to say I believe we should consider whether we want African hunting in general and lion hunting in particular to continue into the next generation and that perhaps a short term (5 years or so) moratorium might be a possibility.

Joubert also makes a very good point when he says "The biggest threat isn't hunters, poachers or poison makers -- it is our own complacency"

Zimguide,

As a guide you will know that lion populations recover very quickly with good habitat and a stable prey base and that is what we need to be focused on. The hunting of lion by sports hunters is not a factor in any decline in lion numbers. The African lion is not endangered per se. This is a link to a status survey that was carried out by Phillipe Chardonnet http://conservationforce.org/p...oftheafricanlion.pdf

Steve,

There is no doubt that Packer is a leading expert in lion research and that is what makes it so galling, he was pro-utilization until a better offer came along.

A moratorium on lion hunting across Africa is not a good idea as one size does not fit all. In areas where it is necessary, certainly cut back on quota in or even a temporary ban but not a complete ban across Africa.

Below is extracts from a script for a documentary that we did for Conservation Force in 2004 when Kenya, whose puppet strings are pulled by the anti-hunting movement, proposed that lion be moved from CITES Appendix II to Appendix I at that meeting. They were defeated that time but they are regrouping for another battle.

Not long after the CITES meeting Botswana reopened lion hunting for a short while. They closed it again with pressure from the likes of Dereck Joubert and his connections to President Khama.

Now that the lion in Botswana has no value, they are killed indiscriminately with poison, snare and gun. Cattle ranchers are allowed to kill lion and I have heard of Sunday afternoon jaunts where they all pile into the back of a truck and go and run down and shoot any lion that they find.

When Joubert talks about "complacency" he should take a look in his own back yard before prescribing a formula for the rest of Africa.

Sorry I have got carried away, below is the script.

The Fate of the African Lion.

How many lion were there in Africa 10 years ago and how many are there today? How many should there be and why? Is the African lion on the brink of extinction? Complex, emotive questions to which there are no simple answers. Issues that can and have been used to fire up public sentiment for a variety of sometimes questionable motives.

CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is an international agreement between Governments. Its aim is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.

CITES works by subjecting international trade in specimens of selected species to certain controls. These require that all import, export, re-export and introduction from the sea of species covered by the Convention has to be authorized through a licensing system.

The species covered by CITES are listed in three Appendices, according to the degree of protection they need.

* Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction. Trade in specimens of these species is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

* Appendix II includes species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival.

* Appendix III contains species that are protected in at least one country, which has asked other CITES Parties for assistance in controlling the trade.

Kenya has proposed that Panthera leo, the African, lion be moved from CITES Appendix II to Appendix I because they believe that the species faces a high risk of extinction. Their conclusion is based on a couple of selective reports as well as the fate of the animal in their own country.

To get an exact lion count is not practically possible as lions are notoriously difficult to count. Even with extensive and expensive research an approximation using theoretical modeling, estimates and projections, is the best that can be hoped for. The first comprehensive attempt to evaluate continental lion populations was only undertaken in 2002 by researcher Chardonnet. It is therefore impossible to know how many lion there were 100 years or even 10 years ago.

The Kenyan proposal admits that a 1996 population figure for the continent was considered to be an educated guess, and that many of the current figures are also guesses.

Using these guesses it estimates that minimum population size today is 45 percent less than that estimated in 1996 (16,500 down from 30,000), while the estimated maximum population size today is 70 percent less than that estimated in 1996 (30,000 down from 100,000).

These are nothing more than speculative guesses and not the results of methodical surveys. The figures cannot be used as a suitable benchmark on which to evaluate lion numbers and it is therefore not possible to draw any conclusions regarding any shifts in lion numbers over the last decade.

The two recent lion surveys by Bauer and Van der Merwe in 2004 and Chardonnet in 2002, suggest that the lion population in Africa is currently about 16 500 – 47 000, with 30 000 being the likely actual number. Bauer & Van der Merwe results are widely recognized as being an underestimate as many areas in East and Southern Africa were not reported on. An example is in the case of Tanzania, home to the largest population of lion in Africa, where a major omission was made. In their survey the only areas that were included were Manyara, Ngorongoro, Selous, Selous buffer zone and Serengeti giving a countrywide estimate of 7,073 (minimum 5,323 and maximum 8793). Every other area in Tanzania where lion occur was excluded.

The report of Chardonnet is more comprehensive and more reliable. Under the auspices of the International Foundation for the Conservation of Wildlife (IGF) and Conservation Force this survey drew on the expertise of over 40 researchers and authorities through a network that covered the continent. This involved people that had many years of field experience in wildlife conservation and management. His estimates for Tanzania, based on a compilation of research results, are 14,432 (minimum 10,409 and maximum 18,215). In the regions that were covered by both surveys the results were within the same range. The disparity between the two countrywide surveys is 7359 lions. Chardonnet figures show that there are twice as many lion in Tanzania alone compared to Bauer and Van der Merwe’s results. Some field wise authorities such Packer and Rolf believe that Chardonnet’s figures are conservative. They believe that there may be more lion in Tanzania alone than Kenya acknowledges in all of Africa.

The Kenyan proposal to upgrade the African Lion to CITES Appendix I uses the Bauer and Van der Merwe figures to justify the endangered status of the species. The two authors state clearly that they only “present an inventory of available information” which often does not contain much more than a set of educated guesses and leaves out many areas with substantial lion populations. The Kenyan proposal recognizes the inadequacies of their results, but still cites them as if they were perfectly accurate while conspicuously ignoring the more comprehensive Chardonnet report.

According to the CITES guidelines for a species to be placed on Appendix 1 is as follows: a decrease of 50% or more in total within 5 years or two generations, whichever is the longer. A generation in the case of lion is estimated to be 6,5 years. This is a guideline and not a threshold of what constitutes a decline. Chardonnet concludes that the population is generally stable. Even if the decline were true, it could not be due to trade.

But how many lion should Africa have?

It is obvious 200 years ago there may have 500 000 or more lions in Africa but a lot has changed since then. A human population explosion along with expanding agriculture and livestock has forced lion populations to shrink into national parks and other protected areas. According to Kenyan wildlife authorities lion today occur only in 9-12 percent of their former continental range. This may be so but the days of 500 000 or even 100 000 lions in Africa are gone. The continent can no longer accommodate those numbers. Instead of being obsessed with numbers the conservation effort should focus on protecting and maintaining the current range and habitat of the lion and its prey species.

The Kenyan proposal attempts to put a monetary value on individual lions, a radical departure from the normal protectionist philosophy. Using an undisclosed formula, the proposal calculates the tourist value of a male lion in Kenya's Amboseli National Park to be $128,750 annually while claiming that a 21-day lion-hunting safari in Tanzania is only worth about $35,000.

The choice of the Amboseli National Park in Kenya is a good one. In 1990 the total lion population of Amboseli was 2. Systematic poisoning by local communities, apparently in response to a failure by the government to react to stock killing lions, combined with habitat changes and prey availability were the main reasons for the scarcity. Between 1991-1993 the lion population was zero. In 1994, 2 lions entered from neighboring areas, followed later by others. The population has since recovered somewhat and there are presently around 40 lions in the park. They are, however, by no means safe and could be wiped out again for exactly the same reasons which have nothing to do with trade.

The value of a lion whilst resident in the park may be $ 128,750 and 35 cents but the minute it steps out of the park its value is zero as are its chances of survival. There is one positive aspect that Kenyans can take from this and that is the total value of the remaining lions in the park goes up with each one that leaves.

A gross amount of around US$ 27 million is generated annually by the hunting industry across the border in Tanzania of which approximately US$ 10 million is paid to the government Wildlife Division. Lion hunting is a crucial component, one of the main draw cards in bringing tourist hunters to the country. It is difficult to put an exact value of lion to the industry because without lion on quota many hunters would not go to the country to hunt. Without lion hunting the industry would not be as viable.

The loss of revenue to a poverty stricken country such as Tanzania would be significant. Tourist hunting is one of the few industries that brings economic incentives to the remote rural areas of the country. It is the major source of revenue that sustains the game reserves and game controlled area network in the country. These represent 70% of the protected area network with an area of over 200,000 km2. It pays for the conservation of the lion and other species, and it works.

Hunting and photographic tourism are not competitive but rather complementary forms of wildlife use. Lions are important to the photographic tourist industry but most are never even seen by tourists. Hunting safaris normally take place in areas with little or no tourism potential. Hunting is comparatively more lucrative than photographic tourism and has a lower impact on the ecology of the area, as little infrastructure is required. Camping in the bush is part of the experience, so large tourist hotels and extensive road networks are not necessary. As a result, negative environmental and cultural impacts associated with more intensive forms of mass tourism are minimized.

A crucial aspect to tourist hunting is the concept of buffer zones. In most of Africa’s major hunting destinations such as Tanzania the national parks are surrounded by or have boundaries with hunting areas. Some of these areas are government controlled safari areas where others are traditional tribal areas. These areas are vitally important, as not only is an extended habitat for the wildlife afforded, but also a buffer zone is created between the people and the national parks. Human encroachment on protected wilderness areas is held in check. In these tribal areas, wildlife has a value to the community and pressure on the individual not to poach is increased tremendously. This is in stark contrast to an area such as the Amboseli National Park in Kenya where there is zero value to a lion outside of the park and it’s chance of survival, minimal.

The Kenyan proposal charges that there is an over hunting of lion by tourist hunters. It is generally accepted that a 2-4% per annum off-take of trophy male lions has little overall effect on populations. If Tanzania’s lion population is 14 000 a 2% off-take would be 280 lions and 4 % would be 560. If there were only 10,500 lions then the comparable figures would be 210 and 420. The actual number of lions taken and exported between 1992 and 2002 was 2,791 lions or 254 lions per year. Between 1996 and 2003 only 51 % of the quota, on average, was taken annually in the Selous game reserve. The proposal insinuates that quotas and the number of animals taken are one in the same, deliberately clouding the issue.

Tanzania has more lions than any other country in the world, and the majority of these animals live outside the national parks. If lion trophy hunting were stopped, they would have no economic value and there would no longer be any incentive to conserve them. Opponents of trophy hunting have provided no alternative mechanism for equal funding of the large-scale conservation efforts required to protect not only lion but also other wildlife species.

Lions are deadly adversaries to the rural African and his livestock and confrontation is inevitable. Lions are trapped, speared or poisoned with agricultural chemicals in order to protect life and limb as well as livestock. Sometimes they are killed simply on principal. The number of lions killed in this way each year is far greater than from any other cause. Where there is no lion-derived income for local people, there is little incentive to tolerate lions or to adopt expensive and time-intensive protection strategies.

Snaring is another major cause of lion fatalities. Wire snares set by meat poachers for other animals sometimes catch lion. There is no significant market for lion products although the body parts are sometimes sold for traditional medicines and witchcraft.

The Kenyan proposal claims that lions are being decimated by FIV (feline immunodeficiency virus) and distemper. Extensive studies in the Serengeti, by far the most exhaustive investigations on lion health, found no evidence that FIV causes significant health effects. A wholly unrelated Canine Distemper Virus did cause a 35% decline in the Serengeti lions in 1994/95. Their numbers dropped from 3000 to under 2000. But lion are prolific breeders and have a potential growth rate of over 20% per year. Within 5 years the population recovered completely and today the population is back to an all time high of around 3,800 in that ecosystem.

The reasons which have led to a decline in lion populations in Kenya or in West-Africa are not connected to international trade or tourist hunting. To upgrade the lion to CITES Appendix I as proposed by Kenya would not address any of the issues that adversely affect lion populations., i.e. loss of habitat to agriculture, problem animal control, poaching and killing of lions by pastoralists. It would however, make the hunting of lions by tourist hunters more difficult or even impossible in most instances. Controlled tourist hunting is sustainable. Giving a value to a species is one major element in a range of conservation tools that has and must continue to be successfully applied to protect the future of the lion.

The Kenyans have manipulated statistics to reflect a desired result. Through omissions, additions along with a portion of double-speak, their hypothesis is presented as fact, served up to an uninformed and unsuspecting public and devoured by a sensationalist media. Unfortunately this is a process that is all too common in the ideological disputes that occur in wildlife conservation.

Kenya, rather than leading the way in lion conservation, provides a perfect example of how not to manage lion and indeed any wildlife population. There has been no trophy hunting of lion in Kenya for 27 years. Outside of protected areas lions are considered worthless which has led to high levels of lion-human conflict and the ultimate demise of the species.

CITES brief is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. There is no substantial international market for lion or lion products as with elephant ivory.

Banning the imaginary trade in lion is not going to kill any black market. All that this proposal sets out to do is to give exposure to Kenyan wildlife authorities as the supposed leaders of African wildlife conservation. This is a fantastic way to generate money for their various organizations and agendas, much as the burning of the ivory scam was. The Kenyan proposal is a direct attack on the tourist hunting industry and is aimed squarely at undermining it with little regard to the damaging effects to genuine conservation efforts throughout the continent.

Zig,

I see your point but I'm not saying we should have a moratorium on lion hunting just that we should consider it if it'll mean the continuance of lion hunting for the next generation.

I agree with you that the populations increase quickly which is why I suggested if we did have a moratorium, it should only be a relatively short one..... Just five years or so would make a big difference.

The other issue I think we need to address is the taking of appropriate/inappropriate lions.

It's very common for people to get into the supermarket hunting mentality and take the wrong lions with the attitude of 'hell, I've paid umpteen thousand dollars and hunted for umpteen days and I want to shoot a lion come what may' and then pull the trigger on a youngster or on a prideholder etc.

Whilst I don't mean to criticise individual hunters and/or forum members, I believe that hunters need to be educated out of that attitude and into the attitude of accepting that there are no guarantees when it comes to hunting lions and if they pay a lot of money and fail to take a trophy, then so be it...... and frankly, that ain't gonna be easy.

If we don't learn to manage our lions properly now we won't have any lions to manage in the future. I reckon Joubert is dead right when he says, "The biggest threat isn't hunters, poachers or poison makers -- it is our own complacency"

Zig, perhaps you can tell us exactly which part of Joubert's article you disagree with? Perhaps it is the hunting part? So your solution to a non existent problem ("The African lion is not endangered per se.") is to do everything EXCEPT limit hunting? This kind of knee jerk reaction is EXACTLY why conservationists will not make common cause with hunters. Hunters like you have the view "Do whatever you want but don't gore my ox". Moratoria on hunting CAN be just as effective as fishing moratoria, which have been proven to work but are hated by fishermen! "Hey it ain't my fault!". The question is "Do you want to be part of the solution?". It seems not.
Peter.

Peter,

The lion is not endangered because I say so, much wiser heads have already figured that out and that is why it is not on CITES Appendix I. I did not say that I don't agree with a moratorium on lion hunting on a case by case basis, I do think that that it should be applied where necessary. I don't agree with a blanket ban because it will actually hurt conservation efforts in areas lion populations are stable and where revenue from hunting lion is important in keeping those areas going.

Joubert's anti-hunting stance is exactly why I don't agree with him. He does not consider hunting as a conservation tool.

By saying "conservationists will not make common cause with hunters" you are insinuating that hunters are not conservationists. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hunters are the greatest conservationists.


Steve,

I agree education and management are the most important issues that need to dealt with.

A visitor to Africa since 1995, like many of you, I have seen for myself what is readucing game populations and it's not hunters.
I'd have a lot more time for the antis if they did one thousandth as much as the hunting community to maintain habitat and security for the continent's fauna.
If hunting was banned and the animals were left in the sole care of the local politicians just how long do you think they would last? We all know the root of the problem and it's not us. Nothing we do will stop the lunatics from trashing the asylum.

Guys - First off, I doubt seriously Zimguide is actually a Zim guide??? His knowledge level is way below par for anyone that spends as much time in the industry as he should, if he actually was a PH.

Secondly, listen to what Zig says, he's spot on! He's obviously done his research on the subject, much as I have.

Steve - Come on man!!! A temporary close on lion hunting, dude get real. First of all, close it once, and good luck ever getting it open again. BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR! Secondly, you know as well as I do. MONEY needed for all the "conservation" tools used to help provide for wildlife, including lions, in ALL of these areas, would be greatly reduced without lion hunting for any period of time! NOT A GOOD IDEA! See below. Dude for once, don't disagree just to disagree, you know what Zig says is right. I know you know that!!!

For those of you that don't agree with what Zig says, I'm sorry, but you just haven't spent much time on the subject. Or spent time in all of the areas across southern & eastern Tanzania as Zig & I. LIONS need regulated, controlled hunting if they are to survive!! One needs ONLY to look at Kenya. The Lions HAVE no value to the natives, so the next best thing is to eliminate them. Natives only know one thing, either there is a value to "something", or there's not, there's no in between. They couldn't care less about conservation, etc. Either "it" helps them or it competes against them. If the latter is the case, "it must be eliminated, period!!!!

Do away with Lion hunting, and do away with Lions, period!!!!

Aaron

Aaron,

You need to re-read my post. I didn't say we should ban lion hunting or even should have a moratorium on lion hunting, I said we should consider a fixed term moratorium IF (note the big IF) one was needed.

Moving on. Zig agrees with me that education and management are the most important issues that need to dealt with.

Therefore how can you agree with him but disagree with me?

Incidentally, you should note that Zimguide doesn't claim to be a PH, he claims to be a guide..... and I have no reason to disbelieve him.

BTW, I agree with you when you say: "Do away with Lion hunting, and do away with Lions" but the point I was trying to make is that if we don't educate our hunters out of the supermarket hunting mentality which makes them shoot the wrong lions and manage our lions properly we won't have any lion hunting or lions either.

As I see it, the only thing we disagree on is that you (in your words) think that "Craig Packer is an absolute, complete freakin moron!!"

Whereas I think that he's a well respected expert in the field of lion study and whilst I might not agree with everything he says, anything he says is well worth serious consideration.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Aaron,

You need to re-read my post. I didn't say we should ban lion hunting or even should have a moratorium on lion hunting, I said we should consider a fixed term moratorium IF (note the big IF) one was needed.

Moving on. Zig agrees with me that education and management are the most important issues that need to dealt with.

Therefore how can you agree with him but disagree with me?

Incidentally, you should note that Zimguide doesn't claim to be a PH, he claims to be a guide..... and I have no reason to disbelieve him.

BTW, I agree with you when you say: "Do away with Lion hunting, and do away with Lions" but if we don't educate our hunters out of the supermarket hunting mentality which makes them shoot the wrong lions and manage our lions properly we won't have any lion hunting or lions either.

As I see it, the only thing we disagree on is that you (in your words) think that "Craig Packer is an absolute, complete freakin moron!!"

Whereas I think that he's a well respected expert in the field of lion study and whilst I might not agree with everything he says, anything he says is well worth serious consideration.

Education & Management, yes we certainly agree! Zimguide is a prime example, no education on the subject!!

Packer might have credentials that qualify him an expert to some!! But, when he plays both side of the fence as he has, and then goes to the side of the one who is paying him at the time, his opinions, ideas, and suggestions, DESERVE NO RESPECT or CONSIDERATION! The man has proven to tell those who are paying him, what they want to hear. period!!! Try to disagree with that?

Shakari, I know you mean well, most of us do. But man, this lion thing gets me so worked up. Some many folks giving opinions, with Absolutely NOT one stitch of education or experience in the matter.

quote:

As for CP. Although I don't agree with everything he says. I think it ridiculous to suggest he's an idiot.

quote:

Packer is scientifically smart but he is a far-left winged socialist.

quote:

I have no time whatsoever for politicians.

Steve,
Please look at the 3 quotes I listed above. Then read below.

CP is smart. His research on lions is valid and useful.

But...he is part of the political machine. And...I may add...a part which I vehemently disagree with.

quote:

Originally posted by zimguide:
i have read through this forum and cannot believe that some people do not realise that lions are on the decline and at a fast pace. The figures stated that 50 years ago there were half a million lions and today there is in the region of twenty thousand is 100% correct. But still people think it is ok to hunt lions... I am a guide in zimbabwe and have guided in zambia,botswana and SA and have seen it for myself in my lifetime that you do not see lion like you used to ten years ago let alone fifty years ago. I want to ask the "lion hunters" on this forum politely to reply to this and tell me how they can justify still wanting to hunt lion?

Because...if done properly...hunting will NOT disturb the dynamics of prides, it brings worth to the lions to be alive (read the poisoning thread in Uganda), it brings in money to the community, it provides a means for problem animals to be controlled humanely and also bring in money at the same time, the hunters keep tabs on the lion numbers, and there presence helps keep poaching down.

They key words here are: "done properly".

quote:

Joubert also makes a very good point when he says "The biggest threat isn't hunters, poachers or poison makers -- it is our own complacency"

Agreed!!! Hence, my constant writing on the subject of..."lets do SOMETHING"

quote:

The other issue I think we need to address is the taking of appropriate/inappropriate lions.

It's very common for people to get into the supermarket hunting mentality and take the wrong lions with the attitude of 'hell, I've paid umpteen thousand dollars and hunted for umpteen days and I want to shoot a lion come what may' and then pull the trigger on a youngster or on a prideholder etc.

Whilst I don't mean to criticise individual hunters and/or forum members, I believe that hunters need to be educated out of that attitude and into the attitude of accepting that there are no guarantees when it comes to hunting lions and if they pay a lot of money and fail to take a trophy, then so be it...... and frankly, that ain't gonna be easy.

Exactly!

quote:

"Do away with Lion hunting, and do away with Lions" but the point I was trying to make is that if we don't educate our hunters out of the supermarket hunting mentality which makes them shoot the wrong lions and manage our lions properly we won't have any lion hunting or lions either.

quote:

"Craig Packer is an absolute, complete freakin moron!!"

He is both smart and a moron at the same time. This makes him a very dangerous person.

dam I feel like I'm in camp at kidepo again we had parts of this same topic with a tree hugger who could not see the forest for the tree's an who idolized his teacher so much be refused to listen to a expert because he's teacher told him different.
without a doubt something needs to be done. cool minds and normal ie. common sence is the ay to do these things. not with emotions like the tree huggers.
Lane made some very good and every insightful suggestions while in Uganda and as far as I know he is moving forward with his ideas. keep up the work and if I can help let me know

What the lion needs is more hunting industry leaders like TGTS, Friedkin family, etc.

We're all actually on the same page on this but one problem I see is that most of us (perhaps with the exception of Lane) probably think we know more than we do. (Myself included)

The reason I reckon Lane might be the exception is that he's a very well respected vet and has probably forgotten more about lions than the rest of us know combined.

Frankly, the rest of us, myself included are really nothing more than a bunch of blokes who have killed a number of lions and read a few books about lions. ........ but that doesn't make any of us experts in lions or pride dynamics etc. We've never done a formal study on lions and don't have any relevent qualifications etc.

Where CP is concerned, I'm sure he knows considerably more about lions than all of us..... whether he takes the side of whoever pays him or whether he takes the side of the lions, I simply don't know.... but would suspect, he takes the side of the lions most of the time at the very least.

I agree with Lane completely that we need to do something about managing our lions responsibly. To me the first thing we need to do is get hunters out of the supermarket hunting mentality and I think it's possible for us to do that..... not easy, but possible.

The second thing is considerably harder and more expensive and whilst I'd love to see it happen, I can't see it happening in my lifetime.

What we need is for every single individual hunting area to have someone who studies the lion populations of that area and keeps track of pride dynamics and populations etc and works in conjunction with people in the surrounding areas on similar studies and also with a (for want of a better term) a supervising body.

These people would then know what lions can and cannot be taken without causing damage to the surviving population.

I'd love to see it happen but don't believe it will.

Lane - I agree on all of your points!! Well said my friend. Education on the subject brings out the best advice.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
What the lion needs is more hunting industry leaders like TGTS, Friedkin family, etc.

Lane type louder Steve can't hear you

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Guys - First off, I doubt seriously Zimguide is actually a Zim guide??? His knowledge level is way below par for anyone that spends as much time in the industry as he should, if he actually was a PH.


Aaron, i never claimed to be a PH. i am however a Zimbabwean Professional Guide, which if you have spent as much time in the industry as you say you have you will know is the toughest and most respected guiding license in Africa as is our PH license. I am a fifth generation Zimbabwean and have been a guiding for ten years all over southern africa. May i ask where you are from Aaron? I went to the same proficiency exam as the PH's and passed with best student on proficiency when i did so for you to say that you dont think i know what i am talking about is a bit bellow the belt my friend or maybe you should read up on what i takes to become a Zim Pro Guide. I am not trying to have arguments with anyone here. I have in the last three years that i have been guiding in Hwange and the Zambezi Valley since returning from Zambia had three seperate occasions where i have found drag marks leaving one of the less used areas of the private concession i have been guiding in and followed them to over the boundry from the photographic concessions into the hunting concessions and have walked straight to a lion bait so forgive me if i have a problem with SOME lion hunters. ( i pissed on the bait all three times)In every instance they were SA hunters who had come to Zim to hunt and because of our laws they are able to just hunt with a scout and not a Zim PH ( i am not bad mouthing SA PH's but sadly a few of them have given a lot of them very bad name in Zimbabwe) There was a lion ban in the areas around Hwange National park for five years, however hunters still came and shot the lion on baits in the surrounding concessions and claimed they had been shot in other areas. ( the lion research team in the area had DNA of the lions shot and are now working with the US Dept Fish and Wildlife as i write this to get DNA samples from that lion which is now is the US and bust the again unfortunately SA PH that was doing the hunting here) As a guide and as hunters i am sure you all know what happens when you shoot the dominant cat in an area??? Again while i was in hwange, the resident pride of lions in the concession i was guiding in there has the prode male shot on two occasions over five years...the result of this is that the pride has now failed to raise a single cub to maturity on over seven years ( the second of these pride males was the one shot while the ban was on, he was collared and the collar was just cut off and left about three hundred metres from the hunting camp in questions skinning shed. So to reiterate Aaron i am not trying to have an argument with you here but i am telling i am guide and a zimbabwean who has spent the last ten years in the bush of southern africa....Lions are on the way out and i am not saying that hunting is the only cause but i am saying that it definitely is not helping there cause...

quote:

Originally posted by ddrhook:
Lane type louder Steve can't hear you

You can laugh you bastard ....... I've just been quoted US$3000 for a pair of hearing aids that'll also cut out gunfire.

I think I'm gonna take a look at the Walker's game ears before I spend that kind of money!

that loud screatching in your head is Susan telling you to stop spitting on her key board. can you hear it now???????????

quote:

We're all actually on the same page on this but one problem I see is that most of us (perhaps with the exception of Lane) probably think we know more than we do. (Myself included)

You can throw me into the mix! I am definitely NOT an expert at all.

But...like Aaron education of ourselves and the public with "proper knowledge" and NOT propaganda is the way forward.

To the perpetuation of the Lion: !!!

quote:

Where CP is concerned, I'm sure he knows considerably more about lions than all of us.....

Me included. I just don't like where he is headed.

quote:

What we need is for every single individual hunting area to have someone who studies the lion populations of that area and keeps track of pride dynamics and populations etc and works in conjunction with people in the surrounding areas on similar studies and also with a (for want of a better term) a supervising body.

Steve,
I think that IS DOABLE and as you...I believe it is too the way forward.

quote:

....Lions are on the way out and i am not saying that hunting is the only cause but i am saying that it definitely is not helping there cause...

Zimguide,
Hunting does help if properly conducted (to see how, see previous post to you). Fighting Mad Bob's regulation of what goes on in Zim, as you know, is an uphill battle.

Definitely there are some bad apples in the hunting industry. We need to out them. And the rest of us need to put our best foot forward.

'Cause...the lions only chance...is to have worth!!! This is more true in Africa than anywhere else. How long do you think cattle would be around if they did NOT have worth...0000 days!

Hunting gives them worth and a lot of PH's are caretakers of the environment...not all...but a lot.

Read the Allen Lowe thread...hell he loved ele so much that he probably took a greater chance than needed to keep from shooting a cow. Many PH's like him are around.

There are some PH's in Zim that shoot far too many ele in self defense. These records are kept. These PH's are probably NOT the stewards we seek to uphold the cause for proper lion hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

Steve,
I think that IS DOABLE and as you...I believe it is too the way forward.

Lane,

Do you think there are enough suitably experienced/qualified people to operate such a project and also the will to do it and the money to finance it?

Personally, I have my doubts..... and even if there were, I'd have thought it would make the cost of hunting a lion horrendously expensive.... Hell, people bleat about the cost of lion hunts now. Just think how they'd squeal if they had to make a contribution to that project as well.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

Steve,
I think that IS DOABLE and as you...I believe it is too the way forward.

Lane,

Do you think there are enough suitably experienced/qualified people to operate such a project and also the will to do it and the money to finance it?

Personally, I have my doubts..... and even if there were, I'd have thought it would make the cost of hunting a lion horrendously expensive.... Hell, people bleat about the cost of lion hunts now. Just think how they'd squeal if they had to make a contribution to that project as well.

Steve,
We are working on getting a project going right now where we train safari companies an PH's in scientific methods and study and then offer help to them conducting there own pride dynamics studies and DNA collection. Population genetics...IE: genetic diversity...will offer great insight as well.