Thomas McIntyre has an article in July's issue of Greys Sporting Journal titled The Treatment of the Game. This is an informative read that points out some interesting statistics.

RSA 10,000 Game Ranches and 16 Million game animals.

In 2009 there was 18.3 Million USD spent at Game Auctions with a rise to 100 million in 2013.

25% of Africa Today remains wilderness some figures go as low to 10% while 40 percent of North America is wilderness. page 29.

He points out that if Angola, Congo and South Sudan would open back up to hunting that it would amount to 20% of the African land mass.

McIntyre also talks about the population boom in Africa and its effect on conservation. The author points out that we as hunters should start scholarships and grants for young deserving hunters so that can spend a month in Tanzania's Selous Game Reserve or northern Mozambique.

I did not write this nor am I sharing any of my personal opinions. I think that it is a good read that many of you would find interesting. This article is sure to cause some debate.

How do you get to the article?
I agree with the grants and scholarships
Excellent notion
Another thing SCI and DSC can start working on

quote:

Originally posted by boarkiller:

How do you get to the article?

Second ... couldn't find it HERE.

Article is on page 26 of the July 2015 copy of Grays Sporting Journal. I do not know where to find the electronic copy.

Info on Author.

http://www.ammoland.com/2014/0...-year/#axzz3gpUjOsbm

I was at a game capture last month in South Africa's Karoo. The capture team offered the farm owner $25k US for a pair of gemsbok bulls. A neighboring farm owner told me that there was greater profitability at the present time in raising breeding stock than there was in hunting. He did acknowledge, however, that ultimately the cost of breeding stock would have to be offset by hunting revenues. FTR, the area I was in was tens of thousands of hectares, most of it low fenced. Strong incentive to keep the area in native animals instead of sheep.

quote:

Originally posted by Tim Ferrall:
I was at a game capture last month in South Africa's Karoo. The capture team offered the farm owner $25k US for a pair of gemsbok bulls. A neighboring farm owner told me that there was greater profitability at the present time in raising breeding stock than there was in hunting. He did acknowledge, however, that ultimately the cost of breeding stock would have to be offset by hunting revenues. FTR, the area I was in was tens of thousands of hectares, most of it low fenced. Strong incentive to keep the area in native animals instead of sheep.

If those millions of animals are partly underwritten by the hunting industry... you'd think all of those thousands of game farmers (in all their forms) could provide a massive pool of funds to fight these anti bastards.

Fact is Matt , the game breeding is not underwritten by hunting. Its like a pyramid scheme. Breeders selling to each other , selling to new breeders. Its artificial. Especially the color phase animals -- golden and king wildebeest , black impala. Even Nyala and other " Common " game are fetching ridiculous prices. There's no end user to these breeding projects-- they are all " stud " breeders -- reminds one of the Ostrich breeding boom in the States back when. When no new breeders were drawn to the market , the market crumbled overnight. But the lure of easy big money keeps drawing new investors ,which keeps it alive , with BIG local and foreign money involved ( US , Europe and Middle East ), but when they dry up.....
In the meantime its causing the hunting industry a lot of harm. Some Ranches that always had resident good game ( by that I mean not put and take stuff ) on them with limited hunting , and great animals , are now closing hunting to some species , because a game capturer offered some crazy money for a 30 inch Nyala or 24 inch Impala or 60 inch Kudu. The prices they are getting are many times more than any trophy hunter is willing to pay. Sad situation , but it is the free market system at work.

Thanks for the insight bwana

We have had many similar industries in Australia (including ostrich)but these days would-be producers are very wary of it. I guess at least in the situation with RSA game they have more than one established end-uses for the animals, with demand (meat and hunting), so all will not be totally lost if it collapses. Just a pile of money.

Jan and Matt,
What you say is true, but not universally so. The farm I was on does not get the majority of its income from hunting OR breeder sales. They also own much of their own property, unusual perhaps, but more cost effective than bidding for a concession. Most of what is done there is out of love for the land and the conservation of the animals-particularly those native to the area. Daily rates and trophy fees are very reasonable. As far as the game farmers fighting the antis, many of them are in fear for their livelihood and lifestyles. South Africa is getting perilously closer to Zimbabwe style land reform, and rocking the boat could cost them the land that their families have been on for nearing two centuries. I agree that there is a Ponzi scheme in place in the game farming industry that is sometimes harmful to investors, but like all investments, caveat emptor should be the order of the day. All of this is little different than what we see here in the U.S. on whitetail deer farms, leases, and "hunting" reserves. Telling a landowner what he should do "for the greater good" of others is usually a non-starter.
Tim Ferrall