quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:

We actually had that as a mandatory class in HS...We had a field trip where went on a tour of a Dairy farm and listened to the farmer talk about his operation and then went to a slaughter house and watched cattle walk in and by the end were steaks/burger. This was in the 90's and I'm pretty sure they still do it.

The F.F.A (Future Farmers of America) still have a strong presence in the Education system in the Midwest.[/QUOTE]



Imagine the outrage if we had to do that today in most places.

We did a trip like that in grade 7 in my days.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
If hunting organizations wanted to make a difference...in the holiday season...they would run ads depicting ele/rhino poaching/miscellaneous snaring versus organized hunting anti-poaching.


Also...they would show what ele do to poor-folk farms and lions killing livestock/people and how hunting blocks around parks are intended as buffer zones while also contributing to habitat and providing migratory corridors.

This is where the battle could be won.

Right and put those commercials on the History Channel, A and E, Fox News, and local big three affiliates in cities like St Louis and Louisville.

If they did do such out reach, guess what it would be shown on NRA's Wild Skies. Good show, but preaching to the converted.

PHASA sure uses a lot of words to say:

We endorse the killing of captive bred lions and were changing the definition of "canned hunting" to allow us to do so.


Just come out and say:

As long as we can legally do so, we can make tons of money off of fat Americans who shoot lions in cages and brag about it to all their friends so we are endorsing it, under a different name.

https://economist.com.na/30861...hical-hunting-rules/



PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS CASTIGATE THEIR SA COLLEAGUES FOR BENDING “ETHICAL HUNTING” RULES

Posted by Intern | Nov 27, 2017 | Speak your mind |

Professional hunters castigate their SA colleagues for bending “ethical hunting” rules
Statement by Danene van der Westhuyzen, President of the Namibia Professional Hunting Association

The Namibia Professional Hunting Association (NAPHA) feels compelled to issue this statement in reaction to the decision reached by the Professional Hunting Association of South Africa (PHASA) to, by way of amending a constitutional definition, now allow for and condone, inter alia, the “hunting” of captive bred lion.

NAPHA, cannot sit idly and allow actions which we firmly believe to be contrary to both our aims and objectives, as well as the internationally recognized principles of ethical hunting in Africa, to go unanswered

PHASA decided at their Annual General Meeting held on 22 November 2017 that, in future, their constitution would define the term “ethical hunting” as: “Ethical hunting shall mean all types of hunting permissible by law”. This amended definition was approved at their AGM by majority vote.

NAPHA is shocked and deeply disappointed that PHASA has decided to take the low road by amending its constitution to include a bland and superficial definition of the word “ethical” that now leaves the door wide open to abuse and exploitation by those who clearly have no concern for the future of hunting in Africa, or around the world.

It must also be unequivocally stated that this amending of the PHASA definition of the term “ethical” flies in the face of the Code of Ethical Sport Hunting Conduct for Africa, co-signed at Victoria Falls in 1997 by the late Mr Basie Maartens, acting as president of PHASA, as well as the Operators and Professional Hunting Associations of Africa Memorandum of Understanding, also co-signed by PHASA, which clearly define what these bodies deem to be termed ethical.

NAPHA recognizes that the majority vote which approved this constitutional amendment was achieved by a vote of less than one third of its membership. NAPHA wants to believe that the majority of hunters in South Africa do not support this change in constitution as well as condemns any form of Captive Bred Lion practices, and shall therefore continue to have NAPHA’s support in rectifying this grievous wrong.

NAPHA would like to place it on record that there is a distinct and profound difference between the definitions of the concepts of “legal” and “ethical” and that, just because something might be legal (or not yet deemed to be illegal), it is therefore ethical.

There is no law expressly forbidding knowingly shooting a pregnant animal, or animal with dependent young but, by any definition of the word ethical, this would be condemned by any right minded human being with even the vaguest comprehension of what ethical means. In terms of the amended definition approved by PHASA, this type of action would now be deemed by them to be ethical.

By reaching this decision, PHASA has decided to ignore the majority opinion of both the hunting and the non-hunting community around the world and, by so doing, has placed all the hard work undertaken by various institutions in support of sustainable hunting as a tool of conservation, in jeopardy.

Both NAPHA and numerous other African Professional Hunting Associations have, in the past, warned PHASA that, by even considering this course of action, they are heading down a very slippery slope where short-sighted decisions would be detrimental to the entire hunting industry worldwide.

In addition to this, the decision taken by the majority of PHASA members now leaves the door wide open in South Africa to engage in Captive Bred Lion Shooting (please note that NAPHA, along with the majority of African Hunting Associations affiliated to OPHAA (Operators and Professional Hunting Associations of Africa) as well as APHA (African Professional Hunting Association), considers this type of activity to be in direct contravention of what we consider fair chase and ethical hunting, therefore, cannot be called hunting).

There is a very fine line between Captive Bred Lion Shooting and Canned Lion Shooting, if any; and this activity has been condemned around the world.

PHASA, by engaging in fancy semantics, attempts to veil or justify their decision but, irrespective of what PHASA might choose to call it, canned and captive shooting are rejected by all ethical hunters who believe that there is small difference between the two. In addition to this, semantics aside, this decision will be met with shock and disgust by the non–hunting public worldwide.

Despite this, PHASA has chosen to ignore the warnings of numerous Hunting Associations in Africa and world opinion and now allows for the shooting of Captive Bred Lion.

As such, NAPHA has no choice but to condemn this short-sighted and ill-advised decision by PHASA in the strongest possible terms and has no choice but to distance itself from this decision which has severely tarnished the reputation of the entire African hunting industry.

We shall continue to stand firm in our beliefs and support Hunting Associations throughout Africa and the world who share our mission and vision, whereby ethical and fair chase hunting outweighs any short-sighted focus on financial gain.

Well done NAPHA.

"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do."

~Potter Stewart

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Well done NAPHA.

"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do."

~Potter Stewart

Yes.

I’ve never understood those who merely point to a law as a definition of proper ethics. The law, like a building code, defines the lowest acceptable form of behavior (or building practice) , not the highest.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Isn't this what we do to millions of cattle, sheep, pigs, chicken every day? Where is the outrage?

The problem is the bit in the middle where the so called 'hunter' shoots the animal before it knows which way is up & then brags to his friends what a hero he is.......... Quite honestly these people might just as well stay home & just buy the skin direct from an abattoir.
Oh and just wait for the next story about the situation where it says that PHASA not only condones the practice but have changed their constitution & removed the word ethical & replaced it with the word legal to accommodate it!

What were they thinking?

Please provide proof where the word ethical was replaced with legal . There were no def of ethical hunting in old Constitution . People react on misinformation and then spread it .....

quote:

Originally posted by SAF:


Please provide proof where the word ethical was replaced with legal . There were no def of ethical hunting in old Constitution . People react on misinformation and then spread it .....

I rather believe they did have the word ethical in the constitution & if the fact that you suggest the word didn't occur speaks volumes........but one they haven't (yet) changed is the PHASA facebook page which has on the banner (in capital letters) the words "BE AN ETHICAL AND RESPONSIBLE HUNTER"

Then there's the issue that the links on this page now show error 404 messages suggests I'm right

I mean.........FUCKING REALLY?

You guys need to check your geography & grammar because you seem to think ethics is a county in England!

The error message to access the prior constitution speaks volumes.

Did Peter Flack not try to bring a standard of ethical hunting only to be blacked balled by PHASA. The result was he was so disillusioned that he quit.

Thanks Steve for your reply . I merely asked where the words ethical was changed to lawful in the Vonstitution as this os the core of the whole debate .

Obviously our values differ as I would not use the kind of language you do on a public forum .

I leave it up to individuals to make up there own minds on this issue.

Whose ethics are we supposed to follow??

How many things do we see in our daily lives that many consider totally unethical??

We are going down a very slippery slope here.

Each one of us has his own ethics, and he should apply them to himself.

Trying to force others to abide by them is totally wrong!

. . . you would have fit right in at Enron.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by SAF:


Please provide proof where the word ethical was replaced with legal . There were no def of ethical hunting in old Constitution . People react on misinformation and then spread it .....

I rather believe they did have the word ethical in the constitution & if the fact that you suggest the word didn't occur speaks volumes........but one they haven't (yet) changed is the PHASA facebook page which has on the banner (in capital letters) the words "BE AN ETHICAL AND RESPONSIBLE HUNTER"

Then there's the issue that the links on this page now show error 404 messages suggests I'm right

I mean.........FUCKING REALLY?

You guys need to check your geography & grammar because you seem to think ethics is a county in England!

Here it is.

2. MISSION STATEMENT
PHASA supports the conservation and ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources, for the benefit of current and future generations, through the promotion of legal hunting.
2.1 The Professional Hunters’ Association of South Africa (hereinafter referred to as “the Association”) acknowledges that the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996) governs the conduct of all persons in the Republic of South Africa. The Association and its members undertake to comply with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and to apply Constitutional principles between itself and its members and between itself and third parties.

2.2 The Association is founded on the fundamental principle that legal hunting is an effective conservation tool and that legal hunting contributes to the conservation and management of wildlife and, sustainable use of wildlife. Legal hunting shall mean all types of hunting permissible by law.

2.3 The Association undertakes to support socio-economic transformation and skills development to previously disadvantaged individuals.

These caged lion shoots are the same as "Driven Bird Shoots" as created by the Brits of yore.
They are NOT hunting experiences because there is NO HUNT, just shooting at the target that
WILL BE, NOT MIGHT BE, ENCOUNTERED.
Poachers should face sentences of incarceration within these enclosures that contain the drugged
lions that get shot by paying customers.
Paying customers aught to have the opportunity to pay a higher fee to use tranquilizer injecting
dart guns to shoot the incarcerated poachers, i.e. "Green Hunting" poachers.
Then there could be a foot race between the drugged, caged lions and the humans to see who gets
to the "downed" convict first.
If the humans arrive first then the convict is injected with the antidote to offset the tranquilizer.
If the lions arrive first... a new convict is admitted to the enclosure.

One thing is for sure and that is it should not be called hunting.No need to associate hunting with this sort of activity as it is not hunting.A new name should be given to it.On the question of if it is ethical or not? There are other things like baiting animals, using dogs,shooting young animals, shooting females, shooting pregnant females, culling etc...that may be considered as offensive as breeding animals and fencing them.The problem is when someone tries to force his ethics on others and makes their way of doing things illegal.That in itself is unethical.

I do not know what is so ethical about using any weapon to kill an animal!

"Fair Chase," is the ethical, sportsmanlike, lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over such game animals.

The killing of a canned lion or buffalo in an enclosure can hardly be called fair chase or considered ethical.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
How does reason with brainless idiots??

No memorial to those that end up in the KFC kitchens?

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
How does reason with brainless idiots??

No memorial to those that end up in the KFC kitchens?

No sympathy to chickens eaten by humans

Just goes to show you how stupid these nuts are

quote:

"Fair Chase," is the ethical, sportsmanlike, lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over such game animals.

So a couple of land rovers, a brace of trackers, a PH and a scope sighted large bore rifle does Not give a hunter an Unfair or Improper advantage over an animal walking around in the brush quietly grazing???????????????

I hope I am wrong but if hunting or shooting is to survive into the latter part of the 21st. century, it will only do so on high fenced/private properties where the animals are nothing more than Private Livestock.

Free range hunting of animals that basically belong to the PUBLIC/State is dying. Enjoy it while you can!

Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2017/...chase/#ixzz4zkrc6fPW
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution


Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

Boone and Crockett Club: The Long Arm of Fair Chase

Ammoland Inc. Posted on November 28, 2017 by Ammoland Editor Joe Evans

Boone and Crockett Club: The Long Arm of Fair Chase


MISSOULA, Mont. -(Ammoland.com)- The Boone and Crockett Club today applauded the action of organizations and companies that have chosen to say “no more” to African captive-bred lion shooting.

The recent announcement made by the Professional Hunters' Association of South Africa (PHASA) on November 22 that they had adopted a new constitution that accepts the practice of captive-bred lion “hunting” has left founding PHASA members, organizations, and sponsors disappointed, furious, and distancing themselves from this once-leading industry organization.

The Operators and Professional Hunting Associations of Africa (OPHAA) said in a press release, “The practice of captive-bred lion hunting inevitably brings the entire African hunting industry, in every African nation where hunting is permitted, into ill repute. PHASA's actions completely disregard one of the fundamental concepts of hunting, namely fair-chase…” OPHAA has indefinitely suspended its membership to PHASA. The Wild Sheep Foundation, BookYourHunt.com, Sports Afield magazine and global travel insurance provider, RipCord, have canceled their affiliation and sponsorship of the organization.

“It's time to draw a hard line,” said Boone and Crockett Club President Ben Hollingsworth Jr. “Breeding lions or any wild animal to be shot in a bogus situation is not hunting, not good for the future of hunting, should not be passed off as hunting, and people should not confuse it with hunting.”

The concept of fair chase referenced by OPHAA was originated and popularized by the Boone and Crockett Club in the late 1800s as a conservation ethic for sportsmen – defining it as the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals. The Club has long opposed canned “hunting” in North America as a violation of the principles of fair chase and an affront to the time honored traditions of hunting.

“Although the Club's focus is on wildlife conservation in North America, we are pleased that fair chase has become a universal concept among sportsmen throughout the world.” explained Hollingsworth Jr. “The power of fair chase is that it is based on doing what is honorable and appropriate, and this applies to ethical hunting anywhere. Just because an organization makes the statement that captive-bred lion shooting is “legitimate” hunting, does not make it so. This flies in the face of the ethical standards sportsmen have carried with them for more than 100 years.”

Canned shoots should be of great concern to all sportsmen and sportswomen, not only as a matter of doing right by the game we hunt, but because those who do not hunt confuse the activity with ethical fair chase hunting-a gross misconception that undermines public support for hunting.

“Remaining quiet and looking the other way is not in the spirit of fair chase or the Club's founder, Theodore Roosevelt,” Hollingsworth Jr. concluded. “We tip our caps to these organizations and companies who are doing the exact opposite.”

To learn more about fair chase, visit www.huntfairchase.com.

Boone and Crockett ClubAbout the Boone and Crockett Club:

Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship. Member accomplishments include enlarging and protecting Yellowstone and establishing Glacier and Denali national parks, founding the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System, fostering the Pittman-Robertson and Lacey Acts, creating the Federal Duck Stamp program, and developing the cornerstones of modern game laws. The Boone and Crockett Club is headquartered in Missoula, Montana. For details, visit www.boone-crockett.org.

Well done Boone And Crockett. Good to see hunters take a stand for ethical hunting practices.

I have no issue with using captive bred animals on a game farm and being shot by clients.

The animal is bred for that use. No different than the pork roast I ate tonight.

I do agree it isn't hunting unless stringent Fair chase criteria are applied. I suspect it's pretty hard to do this with predators, but would be reluctant to say never as I just don't know enough.

The best thing for us to do is educate people on what is ethical and what is not, without going overboard about it.

What many of us might consider ethical, has been thrown out of the window years ago by SCI, and has been encouraged ever since.

I know they keep bringing all sorts of different categories to satisfy the cravings of the "look at me" bunch of idiots they support so much.

All one needs do is look at some of the top trophies in their record book and see the culprits.

Both clients and so called professional hunters.

Buy captured animals and transport them somewhere else to be tied to a tree and shot, so some low life idiot can claim a position in the record book.

If you do not find shooting farm raised animals as ethical or shooting animals behind high fence as ethical or shooting sleeping lionesses under trees as ethical then don't do it. If hunters do not support these practices, the industry will stop providing said hunts.

Pretty simple really.

Blathering about hunting ethics is a mindless folly. There are more than a few hunting practices that I find unethical and/or distasteful from my POV. But I am not suicidal and going to throw those practices under the bus to make me feel better about myself or delusional to believe that the anti's will be satisfied.

Hunters are their own worst enemy and those willing to surrender their rights are the worst. Wake up.

Lechwe or oryx in Texas, fenced impala in Limpopo, 1000 pheasant in the UK or Czech Republic or a lion(ess) in 5.000 h fenced farm ..... where do we / you / they draw the line?

I regularly shoot dove at a cattle feedlot near Sasolburg in RSA. Last visit they had 15.000 cattle feeding. The manager told me with a smile that they double their live weight in 3 months before going to slaughter!

Ethical, right, wrong, legal - who is to judge? I believe you have to be comfortable with what you see in the mirror in the morning. The rest is likely beyond control in today's world!

.

quote:

If you do not find shooting farm raised animals as ethical or shooting animals behind high fence as ethical or shooting sleeping lionesses under trees as ethical then don't do it. If hunters do not support these practices, the industry will stop providing said hunts.

Pretty simple really.

Blathering about hunting ethics is a mindless folly. There are more than a few hunting practices that I find unethical and/or distasteful from my POV. But I am not suicidal and going to throw those practices under the bus to make me feel better about myself or delusional to believe that the anti's will be satisfied.

Hunters are their own worst enemy and those willing to surrender their rights are the worst. Wake up.

And that is about as honest/accurate as it gets!

Wake Up and Grow Up! If "HUNTERS" were not WILLING to avail themselves of such practices, they would not be in demand!!!

FACT VS FICTION

To our Members

On behalf of the Professional Hunters’ Association of South Africa (PHASA) we would like to extend our sincere gratitude for the loyal support we as the Executive Committee (EXCO) have received from our members. EXCO and myself personally are immensely appreciative for the ongoing support and it is reassuring to know that we are doing what is right for the Association.

Our new constitution and resolution adopted at the 2017 AGM has been gravely misreported in the media and social media fueled by those fellow Associations who instead of communicating with EXCO have decided to lynch PHASA in the public domain. It is for these reasons that as an EXCO we wish to give clarity as to why the constitution was changed, and the new resolution adopted at the AGM.

On behalf of the Professional Hunters’ Association of South Africa (PHASA) we would like to set the record straight by separating the facts from fiction.

Under the previous PHASA constitution, the 2015 Resolution was fatally flawed, it could not be enforced and was inconsequential. PHASA is now in a far SUPERIOR position to apply stricter hunting regulations on ranched lions and can now legally implement disciplinary action against members who contravene the new 2017 Resolution.

To clarify any misperception; PHASA vehemently rejects any and all forms of canned or illegal hunting.

The PHASA Constitution was changed to facilitate higher standards of good governance and administration of our Association. We cannot allow the inconsistencies or mismanagement of our Association that resulted in the unprecedented Court Case of 2016 to repeat itself.
The hunting of lions was permitted under the previous PHASA constitution.
The 2015 Resolution “to distance”, did not change the previous PHASA constitution.
The riders that were added as an after fact to the 2015 AGM in an effort to give consequential action to the 2015 resolution were rejected by the High Court in the action of 2016 as being incorrect, misleading and wrong. They formed no part of the 2015 Resolution.
This court case made it clear that actions by EXCO must be accountable and in accordance with the laws of the land.
Issues that are subjective or morally selective such as ethics, are not clearly defined and can’t supersede the legal parameters of the South African Constitution.
Captive Bred Lion Hunting continued during 2015, 2016 & 2017 despite the 2015 PHASA Resolution.
2017 witnessed the introduction of a mobile app, allowing all members of the Association access to relevant information and access to voting rights. This innovative introduction finally broke the “proxy war” that had a skewed influence on previous AGM’s.
The 2017 Resolution (“PHASA accepts the responsible hunting of ranched lions on SAPA accredited hunting ranches within the relevant legal framework and/or according to recommendations of the applicable hunting association, such as SCI’s fair chase standards.”) was introduced to bring the legal hunting of lions in line with the responsible hunting standards as required by PHASA and International Hunting Associations.
There are currently only 8 SAPA Accredited Hunting Ranches in the country. PHASA members may only hunt ranched lions on these few ranches.
Unlike the 2015 Resolution, consequential actions were now introduced as part of the 2017 Resolution - “Any member who contravenes this resolution may face disciplinary procedures according to the PHASA constitution”
The claim that the New Constitution was introduced to allow for unethical hunting is not true. Our National legal requirement for the hunting of Predators is of a higher standard than the ethics of most other African or International Hunting Associations. South Africa’s Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) regulations stipulate that no large predator may be hunted, from or with the use of a:
- motorized vehicle, aircraft, bow, handgun or semi-automatic firearm, artificial lights, dogs, bait, poison, traps & snares luring with sounds or smell.
The claim that PHASA has turned its back on “Ethical” practices such as fair chase to adopt “Legal” lower standards is unfounded. THE LEGAL STANDARDS UNDER THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2004 (ACT 10 OF 2004): THREATENED OR PROTECTED SPECIES (TOPS) REGULATIONS “CODES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT AND GOOD PRACTICE” STATES:

CODES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT AND GOOD PRACTICE
52. The code of ethical conduct and good practices of a hunting organisation must –
require its members to act in strict compliance with-
legislation regulating the hunting industry; and
any conditions subject to which national hunting permits are granted to a member;
define criteria for the hunting of listed threatened or protected species in accordance
with the fair chase principle;
require its members to act in strict compliance with those criteria when hunting a listed
threatened or protected species; and
provide for disciplinary steps against any member who breaches a provision of the
code, which should include steps for the suspension or expulsion of such a member
from the organisation.

The newly adopted Constitution and Resolution of 2017 has placed PHASA in a stronger position in terms of accountability and regulating our industry.

FROM THE 2016 COURT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS CLEAR THAT PHASA’S 2015 RESOLUTION HAD NO LEGAL STANDING AND COULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED.
PHASA EXCO HAD DONE WHAT THEY PERCEIVED TO BE “ETHICALLY” CORRECT (ACCORDING TO THE PREVIOUS PHASA CONSTITUTION), BUT THIS ACTION WAS “LEGALLY” FLAWED.
IT IS FOR THIS REASON THAT IT WAS PARAMOUNT FOR THE PHASA CONSTITUTION TO BE REWRITTEN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE LAND.

We understand the concerns of fellow Hunting Associations and request that should you require any further clarity or information we will assist and address all concerns. Further, we urge you to abide with us as we strive to ensure that the benefits of this new dynamic at PHASA begin to flow into the South African hunting dynamic.

We look forward to our continued cooperation.

O.K. Will one of you lawyers shrink the above down for a lay person?

I don't consider fenced lion to be interesting.
However it must be very clear that a lion can be kept and hunted ethically in an enclosure. Hereby I mean a lion that lives in a fenced area and not a drugged cat that gets dumped somewhere.
That doesn't make it a challenging or interesting hunt but those who say it's unethical are going a very slippery road.

If a lion can't be hunted ethically behind wire what does that mean for all other fenced animals!? Where is the lion then?!

Well done Wild Sheep Foundation. Would be good to see DSC and SCI condemn PHASA's action as well . . . DSC maybe, SCI never.

The above lengthy post even refers to SCI’s fairchase standards. I didn’t know they had any!

quote:

South Africa’s Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) regulations stipulate that no large predator may be hunted, from or with the use of a:
- motorized vehicle, aircraft, bow, handgun or semi-automatic firearm, artificial lights, dogs, bait, poison, traps & snares luring with sounds or smell.

It pointedly does not say that you cannot drug the lion before killing it or that it cannot be killed inside of a cage.

IT is fascinating for me to see how Namibia suddenly became so critical about everything South Africa Funny that until the ban into the US on lion imports LOTS Of Namibian outfitters offered South African lion hunts just google it....What those ethical phs in Namibia FORGETS TO MENTION IS THAT 95% of there Sable blesbuck all colour variants Letswe comes from South AFRICA !! Some of the biggest buyers on all game auctions in South Africa are from Namibia, as we speak they are doing there level best to try and import buffalo from South Africa. BUT I AM SURE ALL THESE ANIMALS ARE JUST BEING DROP IN BIG FREE RANGE areas....

Most of the hunting done in New Zealand are on ranches hell you buy your stag per inch... very ironic is that few if any are ever bigger than what you bought I guess those guys really now how to judge...

The bottom line when it comes to MOST South African lion hunts is it will always be on a released basis 4 days 7 days 6 months. One more point that I want to make is there is a massive demand for these hunts hell 100s where shot and exported to the USA and all over, and that story that the client where told it comes from Botswana is also getting old hell these days if a client still believes that he wants to and on ALL the permits it clearly states it is A captive bred released lion.

Now it might not be everybody's cup of tea and we can debate this till kingdom come the bottom lion is once the antis get there way with lion they will simply move on to the next species.

I am sure I will now get a lot of negative press about my opinion but that is Ok in the end all I hope for is that we as hunters outdoors man or killers as we are so commonly referred to one day will all get along.

ALL THE BEST.

quote:

Originally posted by INTREPID SAFARIS:
IT is fascinating for me to see how Namibia suddenly became so critical about everything South Africa Funny that until the ban into the US on lion imports LOTS Of Namibian outfitters offered South African lion hunts just google it....What those ethical phs in Namibia FORGETS TO MENTION IS THAT 95% of there Sable blesbuck all colour variants Letswe comes from South AFRICA !! Some of the biggest buyers on all game auctions in South Africa are from Namibia, as we speak they are doing there level best to try and import buffalo from South Africa. BUT I AM SURE ALL THESE ANIMALS ARE JUST BEING DROP IN BIG FREE RANGE areas....

Most of the hunting done in New Zealand are on ranches hell you buy your stag per inch... very ironic is that few if any are ever bigger than what you bought I guess those guys really now how to judge...

The bottom line when it comes to MOST South African lion hunts is it will always be on a released basis 4 days 7 days 6 months. One more point that I want to make is there is a massive demand for these hunts hell 100s where shot and exported to the USA and all over, and that story that the client where told it comes from Botswana is also getting old hell these days if a client still believes that he wants to and on ALL the permits it clearly states it is A captive bred released lion.

Now it might not be everybody's cup of tea and we can debate this till kingdom come the bottom lion is once the antis get there way with lion they will simply move on to the next species.

I am sure I will now get a lot of negative press about my opinion but that is Ok in the end all I hope for is that we as hunters outdoors man or killers as we are so commonly referred to one day will all get along.

ALL THE BEST.

I agree Phillip and who are we to dictate others wildlife policies. The put and take industry incorporates all species and not just the Lion. Hunting is an industry, a business whose profits are derived from the sale of wildlife. As far as I am concerned RSA is a wildlife success story and caters for a variety of consumers that contribute significantly to an economy.

quote:

I agree Phillip and who are we to dictate others wildlife policies. The put and take industry incorporates all species and not just the Lion. Hunting is an industry, a business whose profits are derived from the sale of wildlife. As far as I am concerned RSA is a wildlife success story and caters for a variety of consumers that contribute significantly to an economy.

Indeed Andrew and if we expect it to flourish as intended, should have conditions which respect certain moral values and hunting ethics, all of which should be strictly adhered to.

We are living in troubled times (like it or not) and having to deal with a society whose genes have developed differently to ours. Our aim therefore is to create a situation within the industry so as not to give them the opportunity or reason for them to gain the upper hand.

Well Z.P.H.G.A. also wrote a very strongly worded document to PHASA condemning their position on CBL and will no longer recognize PHASA as a professional hunting body but only as a RSA based hunting body.

In RSA we have lost a huge amount of hunting clients because of bad choices that was made and the greed of some outfitters.