I have been arguing for awhile now that we need real math, numbers for what hunting conservatiion does that is a benefit. Simply, stating hunting is conservation or anti hunters are bad is not going to do anything.

Here is an example posted by Craig Boddington my wife sent me. It is not perfect. It is not what I would do, but it is much better than most.

Specifically, the job numbers and money raised for rhino conservation.

Talking points are useless. We are the distrusted side. We have to have data.

To whomever did the below. I say thank you, and good effort.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/wPVFgDBXPznonzqG/?

I get it and agree. The problem is getting credible information. I am sure some individual outfitters would be self serving.

True,
Essentially IMO one has to do (pay for) Macro Economic studies.
For example, I have seen very good ones in the past about the impact of the Pittman-Robertson act
I have seen good ones on Sportfishing in relation to Commercial Fishing (which clearly seem to show for example the recreational fisherman have a far better economic impact on quota yield than commercial)

How reliable are these? Think about every time a professional sports team is trying to get a new $250M or whatever from a city and they come up with bullshit (I mean economic) data saying what a deal it is for the City to pay for it.

But that’s exactly the type of thing you reference

The additional reality specific to hunting (especially in rural Africa) is that without these monies there would be NO monies in these areas. They can’t all be World Heritage sites like the Okavango Delta with viable tourism or Kruger etc.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I have been arguing for awhile now that we need real math, numbers for what hunting conservatiion does that is a benefit. Simply, stating hunting is conservation or anti hunters are bad is not going to do anything.

Here is an example posted by Craig Boddington my wife sent me. It is not perfect. It is not what I would do, but it is much better than most.

Specifically, the job numbers and money raised for rhino conservation.

Talking points are useless. We are the distrusted side. We have to have data.

To whomever did the below. I say thank you, and good effort.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/wPVFgDBXPznonzqG/?

I disagree to a point. It's really no different than two opposing political stances or beliefs.

Could I ever convince you that you're wrong politically, regardless of the proof I offer?

Sides are drawn, everyones mind is made up.

Mark Duda with Responsive Management comes about as close to what is described as I am aware of. He relies on data as well as focus group work to tailor messages based on audience receptivity. Unfortunately most of what I have seen from Mark has been focused on North American hunting. He recently did a podcast with Robbie Kroger (Blood Origins) if someone wants to learn a bit more about him and his approach. Also wrote a book, How to Talk About Hunting - Research Based Communications. Someone like Mark or with an approach similar to Mark’s would be great for African hunting. Not sure why groups like SCI or DSC have not pursued that sort of option. It would be exponentially more difficult than the work Mark has done on North America since you would need to address opinions across many countries.

Responsive Management

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Mark Duda with Responsive Management comes about as close to what is described as I am aware of. He relies on data as well as focus group work to tailor messages based on audience receptivity. Unfortunately most of what I have seen from Mark has been focused on North American hunting. He recently did a podcast with Robbie Kroger (Blood Origins) if someone wants to learn a bit more about him and his approach. Also wrote a book, How to Talk About Hunting - Research Based Communications. Someone like Mark or with an approach similar to Mark’s would be great for African hunting. Not sure why groups like SCI or DSC have not pursued that sort of option. It would be exponentially more difficult than the work Mark has done on North America since you would need to address opinions across many countries.

Responsive Management

The "How to talk about hunting" part of your comment is the biggest problem we face I think. Too many of us are "in your face" about it and almost seem to be looking for confrontation.

There is an art in convincing someone who is ideologically opposed to your discussion to keep them engaged long enough to at least listen.

So far, I have not seen ANYONE with a realistic objective do a study.

Everyone has an agenda to put forward.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I have been arguing for awhile now that we need real math, numbers for what hunting conservatiion does that is a benefit. Simply, stating hunting is conservation or anti hunters are bad is not going to do anything.

Here is an example posted by Craig Boddington my wife sent me. It is not perfect. It is not what I would do, but it is much better than most.

Specifically, the job numbers and money raised for rhino conservation.

Talking points are useless. We are the distrusted side. We have to have data.

To whomever did the below. I say thank you, and good effort.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/wPVFgDBXPznonzqG/?

I disagree to a point. It's really no different than two opposing political stances or beliefs.

Could I ever convince you that you're wrong politically, regardless of the proof I offer?

Sides are drawn, everyones mind is made up.

It is indeed like politics. The battle of for those without hard core feeling.

I have yet to meet anyone opposed to hunting to be convinced by any and all facts that hunting is maybe good
Some may not care but those who hate hunting will scream as loud as they can and they don’t care, they will go after hunters with money and lies until they create next generation of haters.
We are in twilight zone, where if I don’t like something you do I’m coming after you no matter what…it’s all about control and power

Our side is v.good at preaching to the choir. They need to do more outreach to people who are not hunters and also find avenues to publish articles, videos, talks etc to explain to people our viewpoint. There are a lot of people who do not have a strong opinion either way and they should be educated about the benefits of hunting.



Arjun Reddy
Hunters Networks LLC
www.huntersnetworks.com
30 Ivy Hill Road
Brewster, NY 10509
Tel: +1 845 259 3628

Watch GUNSTIX Shooting Sticks in action
Short version https://youtu.be/HYoF1nR9JFo?si=aUeCBW_G5OJAK26f
Long version https://youtu.be/NJ96K8T-ttc

2024 SHOW BOOTHS:
DSC (Dallas 11th-14th January) booth #950
SCI (Nashville 31st Jan-3rd Feb) booth #411
Western Hunting and Conservation Expo (Salt lake city 15th-18th February) booth # 319

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:
I have yet to meet anyone opposed to hunting to be convinced by any and all facts that hunting is maybe good
Some may not care but those who hate hunting will scream as loud as they can and they don’t care, they will go after hunters with money and lies until they create next generation of haters.
We are in twilight zone, where if I don’t like something you do I’m coming after you no matter what…it’s all about control and power

Well, I have seen anti hunters flip. I have seen active hunters I grew up with complain of loin and elephant hunting.

One of those hardcore hunters grew up farming. We were hunting pigs on his property. I asked, “How would you like these pigs to be 6 tons?”

“What?”

“That is what an elephant is to a lot of subsistence farmers. I 6 ton pig.”

Most people are not anti hunting. They are anti death for no better benefits than ego.

A good portion of US hunters are not going to support international conservation through hunting without real data points, math. Talking points are conclusionary statements that do us no good.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Mark Duda with Responsive Management comes about as close to what is described as I am aware of. He relies on data as well as focus group work to tailor messages based on audience receptivity. Unfortunately most of what I have seen from Mark has been focused on North American hunting. He recently did a podcast with Robbie Kroger (Blood Origins) if someone wants to learn a bit more about him and his approach. Also wrote a book, How to Talk About Hunting - Research Based Communications. Someone like Mark or with an approach similar to Mark’s would be great for African hunting. Not sure why groups like SCI or DSC have not pursued that sort of option. It would be exponentially more difficult than the work Mark has done on North America since you would need to address opinions across many countries.

Responsive Management

Thank you. Back to the top because this is important.

quote:

Originally posted by reddy375:
Our side is v.good at preaching to the choir. They need to do more outreach to people who are not hunters and also find avenues to publish articles, videos, talks etc to explain to people our viewpoint. There are a lot of people who do not have a strong opinion either way and they should be educated about the benefits of hunting.



Arjun Reddy
Hunters Networks LLC
www.huntersnetworks.com
30 Ivy Hill Road
Brewster, NY 10509
Tel: +1 845 259 3628

Watch GUNSTIX Shooting Sticks in action
Short version https://youtu.be/HYoF1nR9JFo?si=aUeCBW_G5OJAK26f
Long version https://youtu.be/NJ96K8T-ttc

2024 SHOW BOOTHS:
DSC (Dallas 11th-14th January) booth #950
SCI (Nashville 31st Jan-3rd Feb) booth #411
Western Hunting and Conservation Expo (Salt lake city 15th-18th February) booth # 319

Back to my analogy about politics-

Do you think ANYONE who is anti-Trump could be convinced he was a good president, no matter how much data you show them?

The same is true for hunting, specially when hunting Iconic African species like Elephants and the cats. LHeym's point about even local deer/elk/pig hunters being against it, is true.

I have had discussions with guys here in Arizona that are hunters. They just don't get why anyone "needs" to go to Africa just to kill an Elephant. They make statements like, "If conservation requires that money, why not just donate the money?"

In the past, I made declarative statements to the effect that perhaps flying under the radar and keeping things to ourselves might be prudent. I still stand by that, but it is obviously far to late for that.

Posting hero, shots that were used as fodder to infuriate a misinformed general population was doomed to make things harder on our demographic.