quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:

. . . we do need a plan. There are firms who specialize in this and they would know how to effectively mount a campaign. I think it goes without saying that this needs to be a proactive effort.

quote:

I agree with Lane that there needs to be greater involvement of scientists. They hold the key to influencing policy. Maybe we can start by reaching out to some and seeing if they are willing to speak out.

I would like to see SCI or DSC invite someone like Craig Packer (or even convene a panel) to give a presentation at a convention.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:

. . . we do need a plan. There are firms who specialize in this and they would know how to effectively mount a campaign. I think it goes without saying that this needs to be a proactive effort.

That is really the point. Instead of ad hoc films, articles and Facebook posts, there ought to be a strategy and each activity should support and be consistent with the overall strategy. Companies that do this very well and handle crisis communications well do not do so by accident. They are prepared, have a plan and their communications efforts all support the plan. It is not rocket science but it takes commitment and a firm that knows what it is doing.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:

. . . we do need a plan. There are firms who specialize in this and they would know how to effectively mount a campaign. I think it goes without saying that this needs to be a proactive effort.

That is really the point. Instead of ad hoc films, articles and Facebook posts, there ought to be a strategy and each activity should support and be consistent with the overall strategy. Companies that do this very well and handle crisis communications well do not do so by accident. They are prepared, have a plan and their communications efforts all support the plan. It is not rocket science but it takes commitment and a firm that knows what it is doing.

100%

This is one of the number one things we should have on our list to approach the orgs about.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

I agree with Lane that there needs to be greater involvement of scientists. They hold the key to influencing policy. Maybe we can start by reaching out to some and seeing if they are willing to speak out.

I would like to see SCI or DSC invite someone like Craig Packer (or even convene a panel) to give a presentation at a convention.

All the major lion scientists I met back when running the Lion Conservation Task Force are still good friends.

I would be happy to take on this role and get scientific speakers to speak if we get the orgs to have interest.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I am happy to see the inclusion of hunters in President Trump's panel to address new regulations for importation of trophies. However, I fear the lack of professional and researcher experienced scientific professionals.

If any one can get anyone's ear. I do not see why a Dr. Packer and other researchers cannot be added to this council.

quote:

but that was undoubtedly going to occur anyway regarding any conclusions that support hunting in a positive manner.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I am happy to see the inclusion of hunters in President Trump's panel to address new regulations for importation of trophies. However, I fear the lack of professional and researcher experienced scientific professionals.

If any one can get anyone's ear. I do not see why a Dr. Packer and other researchers cannot be added to this council.

I share the concern that the composition of the panel will make it easier for any conclusions of the panel to be dismissed as biased . . . but that was undoubtedly going to occur anyway regarding any conclusions that support hunting in a positive manner.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I am happy to see the inclusion of hunters in President Trump's panel to address new regulations for importation of trophies. However, I fear the lack of professional and researcher experienced scientific professionals.

If any one can get anyone's ear. I do not see why a Dr. Packer and other researchers cannot be added to this council.

I share the concern that the composition of the panel will make it easier for any conclusions of the panel to be dismissed as biased . . . but that was undoubtedly going to occur anyway regarding any conclusions that support hunting in a positive manner.

There are "some" appropriate people on that panel and "some" inappropriate. I will leave my comments at that.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I prefer to simply make an open and public invitation. SCI, through both Paul and Rick, have expressed a willingness to engage in a dialogue. DSC has a number of its senior leadership that post from time to time on AR, including Karl, Scott, Dave and others. The offer to share ideas and thoughts on how such organizations might be more effective in carrying the message forward regarding the conservation benefits of hunting has been made. If there is an interest in either organization in having such a conversation, they have multiple ways to contact folks. Personally, I am not interested in trying to push a wet noodle uphill. All the conversation and letters in the world will not force someone to listen that is not truly open to input. I am also not so presumptuous to believe that many ideas expressed have not already been vetted by these groups since their boards and committees are made up of smart people that are also passionate about hunting. That said, there are always new thoughts and ideas out there if you cast a broader net.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I prefer to simply make an open and public invitation. SCI, through both Paul and Rick, have expressed a willingness to engage in a dialogue. DSC has a number of its senior leadership that post from time to time on AR, including Karl, Scott, Dave and others. The offer to share ideas and thoughts on how such organizations might be more effective in carrying the message forward regarding the conservation benefits of hunting has been made. If there is an interest in either organization in having such a conversation, they have multiple ways to contact folks. Personally, I am not interested in trying to push a wet noodle uphill. All the conversation and letters in the world will not force someone to listen that is not truly open to input. I am also not so presumptuous to believe that many ideas expressed have not already been vetted by these groups since their boards and committees are made up of smart people that are also passionate about hunting. That said, there are always new thoughts and ideas out there if you cast a broader net.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I prefer to simply make an open and public invitation. SCI, through both Paul and Rick, have expressed a willingness to engage in a dialogue. DSC has a number of its senior leadership that post from time to time on AR, including Karl, Scott, Dave and others. The offer to share ideas and thoughts on how such organizations might be more effective in carrying the message forward regarding the conservation benefits of hunting has been made. If there is an interest in either organization in having such a conversation, they have multiple ways to contact folks. Personally, I am not interested in trying to push a wet noodle uphill. All the conversation and letters in the world will not force someone to listen that is not truly open to input. I am also not so presumptuous to believe that many ideas expressed have not already been vetted by these groups since their boards and committees are made up of smart people that are also passionate about hunting. That said, there are always new thoughts and ideas out there if you cast a broader net.

Mike,
I see from the date and time on HSUS suit thread...that Rick Parsons had been back onto AR...but mum’s the word to our questions.

Likewise, no one from DSC has made a comment. This has always been my experience. I have found that when we did push the envelope, DSC would listen and act if convinced by one’s data/opinion. SCI...not so much.

Thus, if we as concerned hunters want pro-action...it is my opinion we will have to drive the agenda.

Rx,
I would suggest that you call for PM’s of willing participants’ e-mail addresses and enact a “working group” via e-mail meeting and let’s get started trying to push an agenda before it is too late.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
To speak of my own thoughts on the subject...I will use my own Thread.

In regards to the recent collared tusker shot outside Gonarezhou:

If the goal is to save African Wildlife...the goal has to be to restore importability of ivory and lion parts to the USA...the market-share is too small with out that ability.

While again I will say the shoot was by all accounts legal...it hurt US (all hunters) immensely!

Why?

Because the USF&WS and the scientific community WILL view it as unethical.

Why? Because the bull was collared and KNOWN to be about.

They expect a pro in areas like this to be competent enough to look for a collar and know before shooting. They see excuses like the mopane was too thick as BS or worse...that we are just trigger happy fools happy to shoot first and look later. At the very least...I would expect the PH to at least say we saw the collar and then made a conscious decision to shoot a legal ele anyway...that would have made the optics slightly better as to professional qualification.

Agencies like USF&WS are looking for cooperation between orgs like Frankfort Zoological Society and hunters...not adversarial roles.

They are looking to see hunters take it upon themselves to make the conscious decision to let ele like these walk and coordinate with park scientific personnel.

When we start showing the world we can and will do these things...you will see the tides begin to turn against the rabid anti-hunters in favor of sustainable ethical hunting as conservation.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

They expect a pro in areas like this to be competent enough to look for a collar and know before shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Dr. Easter do your sources contend or maintain that the Outfitter was informed this bull was in the concession?

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
To speak of my own thoughts on the subject...I will use my own Thread.

In regards to the recent collared tusker shot outside Gonarezhou:

If the goal is to save African Wildlife...the goal has to be to restore importability of ivory and lion parts to the USA...the market-share is too small with out that ability.

While again I will say the shoot was by all accounts legal...it hurt US (all hunters) immensely!

Why?

Because the USF&WS and the scientific community WILL view it as unethical.

Why? Because the bull was collared and KNOWN to be about.

They expect a pro in areas like this to be competent enough to look for a collar and know before shooting. They see excuses like the mopane was too thick as BS or worse...that we are just trigger happy fools happy to shoot first and look later. At the very least...I would expect the PH to at least say we saw the collar and then made a conscious decision to shoot a legal ele anyway...that would have made the optics slightly better as to professional qualification.

Agencies like USF&WS are looking for cooperation between orgs like Frankfort Zoological Society and hunters...not adversarial roles.

They are looking to see hunters take it upon themselves to make the conscious decision to let ele like these walk and coordinate with park scientific personnel.

When we start showing the world we can and will do these things...you will see the tides begin to turn against the rabid anti-hunters in favor of sustainable ethical hunting as conservation.

+1

It is poor judgement for a ph who cannot see a collared elephant.

Shooting leopards when subject to strict penalities for female animals often become a massive committee decision in the save when ph don’t want to be subjected to penalities for wrong decisions.

No one bordering the Krueger ever ends up shooting one of their iconic tickets.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by SGraves155:
Obama and the tricksters at photobucket is what happened.

That and the repeal of Smith-Mundt Act in the 2012 NDAA. ---Now it is no longer illegal for the Media to use propaganda and manipulation on the masses.

quote:

Originally posted by Brian Canada:
Lane, That is wonderful! How old was he? ( My 9 year old grandson, Jaxon, will hunt some small plains game this year.)

You know how I hate talking about myself but I must tell you this story. This was 45 years ago.

We named our first son Russel. Yes, with one 'L'. We were living in Fort Simpson on the MacKenzie River in the NWT, at the time, and nobody knew how to spell "Russell".
Sandy was seven months pregnant with Russel when we took a long trip in our flat bottom scow, up the Laird River to Nahanni Butte The wind blew against the current and the waves were choppy. The boat slapped the water all day long.
I now tell people that's how Russel got the spelling for his name. The boat shook the "L" out of him. Brian