I am not so well versed in Social Media, so I cannot post whole articles. However, folks may want to check out an arrival in Eater.

The premise is hunters have been declining since the 80s, but millennials are upticking the numbers. Sadly, no hard numbers are given. If you do not want to look it up, I have told you everything. The focus of these new hunters is localvoire stuff.

The big deal is not the short article, but that it is found in Eater. This should be in the American Sub Forum, but I posted it here for more eyes. If it is moved, I am not upset.

Been happening for a little bit. It’s become a little puritanical though...and it seems more about food than hunting itself. They will praise the guy killing a deer while still hammer the NRA, SCi, DSC, etc. it’s the leftification of hunting.

I see Missouri Department of Conservation promoting this as well. Healthy alternative to "grocery". I have also seen it with friends and family who want to hunt for meat not sport. They may move into sport hunting or not however we should embrace, support and encourage this as hunters.

Anything that grows support for hunting is good.

As we discussed in another thread. Look at DSC and SCI shows. Lot more old people like me. When we go what will be left? I trophy hunt but I also hunt for meat.

The numbers have declined because the accessibility of land to hunt is about 1/10 what it was 40 years ago.

There are multiple reasons for decline of hunting participants. The largest in my mind is urbanization. Adults and young live urban and have no outlet, by this I mean postivie exspoure, to hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:
Been happening for a little bit. It’s become a little puritanical though...and it seems more about food than hunting itself. They will praise the guy killing a deer while still hammer the NRA, SCi, DSC, etc. it’s the leftification of hunting.

Baby steps. I've been saying this for years, but the free range, organic, take charge of your own food line is the clearest path we have to young, urban, non-hunters. They buy the message, but they just need people to connect it to hunting and show them how to start. We need to get someone like Joe Rogan who is well known, well spoken, has religion on hunting, and doesn't care about the anti-hunter flack to take up the cause in mainstream publication.

Brett

I understand Mr. Baxter position. I take no negative stance on it. I would ask that we keep focused that hunting first and foremost should underscore food. It is the basic, first human need for hunting food. Even our sport hunting providers food.

Kelemens sells game to restaurants and markets. Africa if not local populations the staff in camp are feed. When I go hunting buffalo, I will be in there with both elbows trying to get a sirloin cut from anyone in my way.

The own use Elephants providing sustainable food was a major contributor to the makers of Trophy change in view point from their original premise for the documentary.

We cannot loose, ignore, or let go that food is a guiding principle for killing which hunting requires.

quote:

Originally posted by BrettAKSCI:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:
Been happening for a little bit. It’s become a little puritanical though...and it seems more about food than hunting itself. They will praise the guy killing a deer while still hammer the NRA, SCi, DSC, etc. it’s the leftification of hunting.

Baby steps. I've been saying this for years, but the free range, organic, take charge of your own food line is the clearest path we have to young, urban, non-hunters. They buy the message, but they just need people to connect it to hunting and show them how to start. We need to get someone like Joe Rogan who is well known, well spoken, has religion on hunting, and doesn't care about the anti-hunter flack to take up the cause in mainstream publication.

Brett

Well, Joes podcast reaches millions of folks over time. More than any hunting mag/television show by far. He does a good job of pointing out the hypocrisy of many critics, but in a way it’s kind of frustrating it takes someone like Joe to reach the masses about hunting. Rinella has done a good job by getting on Netflix. That will also boost the reach. He has just under 500k Instagram followers, and though I detest social media it’s where it “at.”

Another perspective:
I am 66 years old. I have had back fusion and multiple joint surgeries. My wife and I did go to SA last May for some plains game that were on my "list".
I grew up shooting doves and whitetail deer in Texas. While I still absolutely love shooting doves I kill deer for one reason only now-I like to eat them. Last year I shot enough to make sausage for two years-this year was our "ground meat" year. I hunt, gut, skin, quarter, chill the meat for several days then grind (mixed with some beef for fat) then vacuum pack. This year took more out of me than usual physically. I could have bought my meat but I like knowing what I am eating, plus I guess there is something "primeval" in me about hunting and processing my game. Just my $.02.

Steve Rinella brought Joe Rogan into the hunting culture, or at least, Joe Rogan reached out to Steve Rinella when he wanted introduced to Hunting.

I see both as a great asset to hunting. Steve Rinella has spoken out against African sport hunting after the lion incident. I would love to have a discussion with him as he hunts brown bear and has done brown bear hunting shows.

We need these kind of guys on a board national campaign. Joe Rogan does UFC broadcasting. Fox broadcast UFC. There is a natural point of entry for more board based ad campaign space.

Steve has been pretty careful regarding condemning outright any type of hunting, mostly saying it's not his bag, etc. Although he has at times made reductive comments on Africa hunters who go to Africa, see a certain type of animal for the first time, then BLAM! Also that the animals are kind of 'out of context' for him. To that, I'd have to ask him how many tahr, Chamois, and muskox he ever saw, or had a connection with before he BLAM-ed them...

But he's an overall good guy - I've seen every show, read every book and article, and listened to every podcast - not many other shows can I say the same about. Some of the people that are part of his group now (Ben OBrien for one), have had little positive to say about African hunting.

I too watch his shows and have his cook books on game.

I find him very articulate of hunting. Specifically, I am referring to his comments that Americans in Africa are causing harm to hunting. This is not an exact quote, but is extremely close to a quote he gave immediately after the lion incident.

I would like to have a discussion with him on Africa, international sport hunting. I have sent his group a few emails in the past and always got good, personalized responses.

I should send him a detailed email on the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I too watch his shows and have his cook books on game.

I find him very articulate of hunting. Specifically, I am referring to his comments that Americans in Africa are causing harm to hunting. This is not an exact quote, but is extremely close to a quote he gave immediately after the lion incident.

I would like to have a discussion with him on Africa, international sport hunting. I have sent his group a few emails in the past and always got good, personalized responses.

I should send him a detailed email on the issue.

I’ll go find his statement, that’s not how I remember his response.

Google "R3 Industry - Hunt Rising". Interesting perspectives on recruiting new hunters and where those hunters are coming from.

Better yet... here is the link: http://r3industry.com/

Be nice if they got some education about why there are animals to hunt, and who pushed for and paid for the efforts that make their hobby possible.

Here's Rinella's response to the Cecil thing. Oddly enough, they have taken it off the website - had to pull some maneuvers to get it:


Thoughts on African Lions, Big Game Trophies, and Hunting in America

Steven Rinella
August 5, 2015


I was at my fishing shack in Alaska on an 8-day trip, mostly (and blissfully) off the grid, when the Cecil the lion controversy exploded. When I finally got a connection to my email I was greeted with many requests for interviews and a lot of fretting from friends who were wondering how this might derail some of the positive gains that have been made for hunting and wildlife conservation here in the U.S. over the past few years. Admittedly, I was almost glad to have missed it. But once I got home, I realized that missing this incident was not an option. The misguided and perhaps criminal activity of an American hunter on foreign lands will likely continue to have huge ramifications for hunters everywhere.

I’ve been struggling with this for days, trying to organize my thoughts and opinions. Here are just a few:

1) Yesterday I was talking to a producer from a TV show on a major network and we were kicking around some ideas of interesting things for him to film in Montana. I suggested a buffalo hunt with the Crow tribe. He dismissed the idea due to the social “climate” that surrounds hunting at this particular moment. I wanted to point out that we’re talking about an indigenous people hunting for an animal that would not exist on their reservation if it weren’t for their keen interest in hunting and eating it, but it was clear that he’d already made up his mind. That goes to show just how far we’ve fallen in the past week.

2) People tend to express outrage over the amounts of money that American and European hunters will pay for African big game. Somehow, in their minds, it makes the crime even worse. This puzzles me, especially considering the colonial history of Africa. For a couple hundred years, European cultures looted Africa without paying a cent for anything that they took. Now it’s frowned upon if you pay handsomely for the resources. If the dentist had paid fifty bucks instead of fifty thousand to kill that lion, would it be worse or better?

3) When you kill an animal and leave the meat lying wasted in the dirt, you’re not just walking away from your responsibilities to the animal. In a not-so-roundabout way, you’re also walking away from your future hunting rights.

4) It doesn’t matter if you’re a traveling hunter or you only hunt the family farm, you have an obligation to learn the historical, ecological, and social context of the animals that you’re hunting. I know from personal experience that you can’t leave this sort of thing up to your guide, because a guide’s understanding of the situation on the ground might be clouded by financial concerns or just plain stupidity. Make careful decisions about what and how you hunt. Don’t justify questionable actions by telling yourself that you’re doing things how the locals do it. Believe me, a lot of locals are assholes.

5) I’m starting to fear that many Americans, and much of our media, are intellectually unwilling to grapple with the complexities of wildlife management and conservation, especially in Africa. Particularly vexing for them is the role that money plays in incentivizing land managers to preserve wildlife habitat and species as a commodity. I thought of this last night, when a neighbor mentioned the African lion situation to me. Taking for granted that I was as shocked by it all as she was, she mentioned the power of social media to change things for the better—in this case, getting rid of trophy hunting in Africa. I recalled all the times that people praised social media as a catalyst for the events commonly known as the Arab Spring. There you had millions of well-meaning Americans applauding the downfall of dictators that, a few months earlier, they wouldn’t have been able to name. From the ashes of those regimes rose a world of chaos, power vacuums, bloodshed, and an unstoppable slide toward militant theocracies. If you get rid of hunting in Africa, you’re gonna see an equally bleak future for wildlife on that continent. By then, though, we’ll all be tweeting about something else.

6) The problem with all this talk about “trophies” is that the word is very difficult to define. Somehow, in the popular lexicon, it’s come to imply that an animal’s been wantonly killed for nothing more than its hide or head. But what about the other kinds of trophies, such as the skull of a bear that belonged to an animal that fed your family? I have many such trophies in my home, and I look upon them with pride. They are totems, full of symbolism, and displaying them is a way of paying tribute to wildlife and wild places. Historically, hunters have always honored their prey with such displays. The oldest pieces of representational art in the world are depictions of prey drawn on the walls of caves by hunters. Eskimo hunters in the high Canadian Arctic would bring home the heads of polar bears and keep them in their lodges so that the bear could see what a good man it was that killed him. They figured that the bear would spread the word, telling his kin that the hunter was a worthy man and that they could feel comfortable giving their lives to him. This is something that modern hunters should keep in mind. If the animal heads on your wall could look at you, would they see an honorable hunter or a slob?

7) If the recent airline trend of banning the shipment of “trophies” expands to include other species and continents, and it very well could, that’ll hurt rather than help well-meaning hunters in their quest to properly utilize their kills. If government agencies allow the harvest of wild animals as renewable resources, which is their right and duty, it doesn’t make sense to ban the transport of those same animal parts. Is a set of antlers in a dumpster somehow preferable to a set of antlers hanging above a fireplace?

8) For years I’ve been talking about the strategic rift that lies between me and a handful of other outspoken hunters. It has to do with the idea of dividing our ranks. They say that hunters need to all stick together, regardless of our individual ethics and creeds, because divisions will only serve to weaken us. They say that we need to embrace all hunters regardless of their actions, “because we’re all in the same boat.” I disagree with much of what these guys say, though they are clearly right about us all being in the same boat. Unfortunately, though, some hunters insist on shooting holes through the hull. With them on board, we won’t stay afloat for long.

9) Finally, read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08...-for-lions.html?_r=1

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
Better yet... here is the link: http://r3industry.com/

As I say - the new crowd has little room for Africa hunting. Traveling across the world to hunt is too carbon-y, rich-y, not filson-y enough - and you can't bring the meat home. In a phrase, it's all trophy hunting - and they dislike trophy hunting. They are rejoicing in he USFW restrictions on african animals...



"That shift is having a domino effect. Trophy hunting, “method” obsession, and all the other things the industry have created have given way to how can I put the most meat in a freezer in the fastest and most ethical way. Plenty of millennials fall in love with the process, if not all, but this is a major shift in thinking.

Add in all the culture changes of a new generation and we are actually left with a lot more conservation-minded culture. There is an impending need to make sure the system is not only sustainable now but stays sustainable. I would fall on the floor if any big buck craze-cultured hunter ever spoke to me in that tone."

I agree with you on the benefits and adventure of international hunting Baxter. Hell you could almost say I hunt Africa, Asia etc more for the adventure than the trophy. I have never entered anything in the book.

BUT, things evolve, including hunting, and we are the older, boomer generation. I hope the North American model of conservation continues, even in a form that will evolve from my experience...

And I can't say I totally disagree with Mr. Rinella's logic. Chasing animals around the globe to check boxes and win awards isn't what hunting is about IMO. Neither the ridiculous hunting shows that glorify hunters above the hunt itself. I think outdoor television in it's current form has done us more damage than good.

The only one I can find still on line is the Star Tribune Q and A from 2018 where he says, “As for African Safaris, I might be interested in seeing that part of the world, but in all honesty, it is pretty low on my list. I prefer to hunt where I understand the conservation history and the complexities on the ground.”

The questioner categories Dr. Palmer as a negative stereotype. He does not address that in his answer.

The quote I gave above was reported on this site back when this was fresh. I do know there were quotes on the issue given in 2015.

Again, I like him a lot. I am a money given fan. I would tell him the conservation in any given African state is the same as conservation of brown bear in Alaska and British Columbia, the Selous, Elephant numbers in Botswana, the poaching of elephant in Kenya after the ban, Safari hunting paid for a guerrilla reserve in Centeral Africa only to be run out by the revolutions. This is reported in Boddington on Elphant.

Some one better than I, could break down the dollar to acre African animals are paying to keep what Wild Africa there is wild Africa. That the elphant pays for the Mann Pools in Zimbabwe, and the lion in the Zambia pays for Kafue.

Again, I am not anti Steve Renellia. I am a fan. I would like to see him engaged in an open debate on Africa and by extension sport hunting. Comments like above make me feel he is not doing a lot of thinking on the issue. It is easier to tell his audience that is not my thing, I do not understand it. See 2018 Star Tribune quote than to have the discussion or nuance thought on Africa.

It is his right to give Africa and by extension sport hunting the sort shaft or back of his hand. It is my right to ask can we have a conversation about it. Especially, given the fact he hunts grizzly bears. That is all. At the end of that discussion, I would not condemn him as anything if his position did not change. The conversation on his media platform is what I want the most. Currently, 2018 quote, he side steps Africa as not understanding it.

I think it will continue, but I think the new crop of hunters are narrowing what is acceptable See folks like Charles Post and the dude Shaul from Jackson Hole: https://trib.com/lifestyles/ne...af-15cd833f04f0.html

LHeym500:

i think part of the challenge with him (and others) with Africa, is that it's not really 'Africa." It's Botswana, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia, Burkina Faso, Liberia, Cameroon, etc etc. It's a hell of alot to chew on all in one bite. There is no established African Model of Wildlife Conservation like here, and it takes so much effort to understand even a single country...

I must admit I've never hunted Africa, but I read and think about it far more than I do north america - been that way for a long time. Have hundreds of books on it, and have no idea why it has captured my attention more than N.A....

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I too watch his shows and have his cook books on game.

I find him very articulate of hunting. Specifically, I am referring to his comments that Americans in Africa are causing harm to hunting. This is not an exact quote, but is extremely close to a quote he gave immediately after the lion incident.

I would like to have a discussion with him on Africa, international sport hunting. I have sent his group a few emails in the past and always got good, personalized responses.

I should send him a detailed email on the issue.

I am not sure if it is the same show I watched 2 minutes of.

All I saw is some idiot trying to eat some raw meat, enough for me to turn it off.

Reminded me of the very first show I saw of another fake, that British fake who had an episode with Obama.

In the one I remember, he came down on a rope from a helicopter somewhere - probably Siberia.

First sign of a fake, as the helicopter could have landed in many places.

But, no, he had to show you he comes down on a rope.

Then he went on how he will starve to death if he does not find something to keep him a live.

He tried tree bark, and suddenly he sees a wolf's kill!

Some sort of deer.

As he gets to it, talking non stop, he turns the deer around, and one can clearly sees how well it has been gutted!

By wolves!

Now I remember his name Bear Grylls.

He added to my deslike of him when he took a small knife maker to court, to stop him selling his knives, which he has been doing for years, as he called the Bear Knives.

I can gasp that. You and I know in 1900 at the International Wildlife Confernce Lord Delamer first suggested game reserve funded by hunting later he tied funded game reserves to Massi communal lands.

Yes, there is nuance across Africa. It is huge for lack of a better phrase. However, there is nuance across North America. However, the basic model is universal. Setting aside habitat for game. This setting aside is paid for through hunting directly through licensing and game fees. In the US we have indirect funding through the Pickman Act(taxes). These fees pay for non hunted sanctuary zones of national parks (Mann Pools or Kruger compared to Yellowstone). This fee structure pays for professional anti poach staff (game wardens in the USA anti poaching and snare clean up in Catana 12 Mozambique). I know you know this. I am trying to demonstrate the universal points that if he is going to comment on Africa he needs to at least discuss if not read up on.

I do wish African outfitters would show a break down of how a hunt cost goes to habitat, poaching, and local communities. The simple rebuttal to my desire is the good Outfitters who are taking care of the community and game have game and demonstrate sustainability year after year. The bad ones will not.

Again, I do not care after such a discussion that he maintains his position. What I want is to have (what is more important) is the discussion on his media platform.

Hope this has been a constructive conversation between you and I. I hope I have come across with the open hand and not the the closed fist. Like you, I have not seen Africa, but it takes up most of my gun cabinet and bookshelves.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I too watch his shows and have his cook books on game.

I find him very articulate of hunting. Specifically, I am referring to his comments that Americans in Africa are causing harm to hunting. This is not an exact quote, but is extremely close to a quote he gave immediately after the lion incident.

I would like to have a discussion with him on Africa, international sport hunting. I have sent his group a few emails in the past and always got good, personalized responses.

I should send him a detailed email on the issue.

I am not sure if it is the same show I watched 2 minutes of.

All I saw is some idiot trying to eat some raw meat, enough for me to turn it off.

Reminded me of the very first show I saw of another fake, that British fake who had an episode with Obama.

In the one I remember, he came down on a rope from a helicopter somewhere - probably Siberia.

First sign of a fake, as the helicopter could have landed in many places.

But, no, he had to show you he comes down on a rope.

Then he went on how he will starve to death if he does not find something to keep him a live.

He tried tree bark, and suddenly he sees a wolf's kill!

Some sort of deer.

As he gets to it, talking non stop, he turns the deer around, and one can clearly sees how well it has been gutted!

By wolves!

Now I remember his name Bear Grylls.

He added to my deslike of him when he took a small knife maker to court, to stop him selling his knives, which he has been doing for years, as he called the Bear Knives.

Not sure about all that, but he did get a parasite (I know the name of it, but can’t spell it) from eating too rare black bear. I also like my venison on the red side. Or as we say with beef p, just brown the moo of it. Bear Grylls has a line of labeled knifes from Gerber.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I can gasp that. You and I know in 1900 at the International Wildlife Confernce Lord Delamer first suggested game reserve funded by hunting later he tied funded game reserves to Massi communal lands.

Yes, there is nuance across Africa. It is huge for lack of a better phrase. However, there is nuance across North America. However, the basic model is universal. Setting aside habitat for game. This setting aside is paid for through hunting directly through licensing and game fees. In the US we have indirect funding through the Pickman Act(taxes). These fees pay for non hunted sanctuary zones of national parks (Mann Pools or Kruger compared to Yellowstone). This fee structure pays for professional anti poach staff (game wardens in the USA anti poaching and snare clean up in Catana 12 Mozambique). I know you know this. I am trying to demonstrate the universal points that if he is going to comment on Africa he needs to at least discuss if not read up on.

I do wish African outfitters would show a break down of how a hunt cost goes to habitat, poaching, and local communities. The simple rebuttal to my desire is the good Outfitters who are taking care of the community and game have game and demonstrate sustainability year after year. The bad ones will not.

Again, I do not care after such a discussion that he maintains his position. What I want is to have (what is more important) is the discussion on his media platform.

Hope this has been a constructive conversation between you and I. I hope I have come across with the open hand and not the the closed fist. Like you, I have not seen Africa, but it takes up most of my gun cabinet and bookshelves.

We are on the same side, my friend ;-). Understand completely what you are saying.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I too watch his shows and have his cook books on game.

I find him very articulate of hunting. Specifically, I am referring to his comments that Americans in Africa are causing harm to hunting. This is not an exact quote, but is extremely close to a quote he gave immediately after the lion incident.

I would like to have a discussion with him on Africa, international sport hunting. I have sent his group a few emails in the past and always got good, personalized responses.

I should send him a detailed email on the issue.

I am not sure if it is the same show I watched 2 minutes of.

All I saw is some idiot trying to eat some raw meat, enough for me to turn it off.

Reminded me of the very first show I saw of another fake, that British fake who had an episode with Obama.

In the one I remember, he came down on a rope from a helicopter somewhere - probably Siberia.

First sign of a fake, as the helicopter could have landed in many places.

But, no, he had to show you he comes down on a rope.

Then he went on how he will starve to death if he does not find something to keep him a live.

He tried tree bark, and suddenly he sees a wolf's kill!

Some sort of deer.

As he gets to it, talking non stop, he turns the deer around, and one can clearly sees how well it has been gutted!

By wolves!

Now I remember his name Bear Grylls.

He added to my deslike of him when he took a small knife maker to court, to stop him selling his knives, which he has been doing for years, as he called the Bear Knives.

Not sure about all that, but he did get a parasite (I know the name of it, but can’t spell it) from eating too rare black bear. I also like my venison on the red side. Or as we say with beef p, just brown the moo of it. Bear Grylls has a line of labeled knifes from Gerber.

He has some items on Amazon too, and I refuse to buy them.

I have no idea why these nuts never stop dramatizing everything.

I like watching outdoor shows, some are quite interesting, but most are nothing but sentimental train wrecks!

I remember when on shows a man and a woman stranded on an island in the Maldives.

They made some sort of rock trap and caught a fish.

The woman started crying, because they have to kill the fish to eat it!

Have not seen anyone crying over eating their Big Macs!

I don’t have any use for these so called hunting celebrities who put down hunts they haven’t done
Pompous pricks

Our family has always hunted for meat. So I find this new organic hunting for meat idea a new twist on something very old.

This year we put 4 turkeys, 1 elk, 1 bighorn and 8 deer in the freezer. Were some trophies? Absolutely! Maybe not all them the tape measure kind. But when my 80 year old dad shot his first bull elk ever. Do inches really matter?


I also spent a couple weeks in the Kafue area of Zambia. Certainly trophy hunting. But I was acutely aware of the meat being distributed, and how it was very important part of the hunt to the locals.


Add in the fact that where I hunted with Andrew in the
Kafue. This area would not have the trophies or organic meat if not for the trophy hunting dollars. Gives me pause to think what the heck are those anti's thinking.


Granted, I am probably not your typical African trophy hunter. Enjoying the fresh organic meat from my trophies was as much a highlight of the trip as hunting and killing them. I so wish I could have brought some of the meat back with me to the states to enjoy and share.

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by BrettAKSCI:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:
Been happening for a little bit. It’s become a little puritanical though...and it seems more about food than hunting itself. They will praise the guy killing a deer while still hammer the NRA, SCi, DSC, etc. it’s the leftification of hunting.

Baby steps. I've been saying this for years, but the free range, organic, take charge of your own food line is the clearest path we have to young, urban, non-hunters. They buy the message, but they just need people to connect it to hunting and show them how to start. We need to get someone like Joe Rogan who is well known, well spoken, has religion on hunting, and doesn't care about the anti-hunter flack to take up the cause in mainstream publication.

Brett

Well, Joes podcast reaches millions of folks over time. More than any hunting mag/television show by far. He does a good job of pointing out the hypocrisy of many critics, but in a way it’s kind of frustrating it takes someone like Joe to reach the masses about hunting. Rinella has done a good job by getting on Netflix. That will also boost the reach. He has just under 500k Instagram followers, and though I detest social media it’s where it “at.”

Be flexible and do what works.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
Better yet... here is the link: http://r3industry.com/

As I say - the new crowd has little room for Africa hunting. Traveling across the world to hunt is too carbon-y, rich-y, not filson-y enough - and you can't bring the meat home. In a phrase, it's all trophy hunting - and they dislike trophy hunting. They are rejoicing in he USFW restrictions on african animals...



"That shift is having a domino effect. Trophy hunting, “method” obsession, and all the other things the industry have created have given way to how can I put the most meat in a freezer in the fastest and most ethical way. Plenty of millennials fall in love with the process, if not all, but this is a major shift in thinking.

Add in all the culture changes of a new generation and we are actually left with a lot more conservation-minded culture. There is an impending need to make sure the system is not only sustainable now but stays sustainable. I would fall on the floor if any big buck craze-cultured hunter ever spoke to me in that tone."

Rogan is a smart guy. You show him the facts and he will come around. He is not an carmudgeon.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by BrettAKSCI:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
Better yet... here is the link: http://r3industry.com/

As I say - the new crowd has little room for Africa hunting. Traveling across the world to hunt is too carbon-y, rich-y, not filson-y enough - and you can't bring the meat home. In a phrase, it's all trophy hunting - and they dislike trophy hunting. They are rejoicing in he USFW restrictions on african animals...



"That shift is having a domino effect. Trophy hunting, “method” obsession, and all the other things the industry have created have given way to how can I put the most meat in a freezer in the fastest and most ethical way. Plenty of millennials fall in love with the process, if not all, but this is a major shift in thinking.

Add in all the culture changes of a new generation and we are actually left with a lot more conservation-minded culture. There is an impending need to make sure the system is not only sustainable now but stays sustainable. I would fall on the floor if any big buck craze-cultured hunter ever spoke to me in that tone."

Rogan is a smart guy. You show him the facts and he will come around. He is not an carmudgeon.

Brett

Then he needs to understand in Africa that there is a 100% utilisation of the carcass - intestines, hooves and all. The flesh of cats is often sought after for traditional medicines or by witch Doctors.

We feed wanting communities and not ourselves.

In addition we are responsible for our attached concessions and obliged to protect vast swathes of habitat. The new breed of meat hunters have few responsibilities within the lands they hunt.

If he has been saying ANYTHING NEGATIVE about hunting in Africa, then he proves his total ignorance of the facts!

Nowhere else in the world where as much utilization benefits as many people as in Africa!

We have our camp staff - 18-22 individuals.

Each has a family.

And they told me the meat they dry from our safari feeds them until April the next year.

They have no access to meat at all.

They catch fish in their villages sometimes.

I just tried watching that show on NETFLIX.

I watched a few minutes, and gave up.

Too much talking.

I saw more of their faces than I saw animals.

That basically kills it, and makes the whole is about THEM! Rather than the hunt.

May be it gets better as the show goes on, I have no idea.

Went and watched THE SHIELD as I was having my lunch

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If he has been saying ANYTHING NEGATIVE about hunting in Africa, then he proves his total ignorance of the facts!

Nowhere else in the world where as much utilization benefits as many people as in Africa!

We have our camp staff - 18-22 individuals.

Each has a family.

And they told me the meat they dry from our safari feeds them until April the next year.

They have no access to meat at all.

They catch fish in their villages sometimes.

It is calculated that each employee in the safari industry has 20 - 25 dependants.

Zambia announce that in 2016 I think that communities received $6,500,000 worth of game meat.

quote:

Originally posted by BrettAKSCI:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
Better yet... here is the link: http://r3industry.com/

As I say - the new crowd has little room for Africa hunting. Traveling across the world to hunt is too carbon-y, rich-y, not filson-y enough - and you can't bring the meat home. In a phrase, it's all trophy hunting - and they dislike trophy hunting. They are rejoicing in he USFW restrictions on african animals...



"That shift is having a domino effect. Trophy hunting, “method” obsession, and all the other things the industry have created have given way to how can I put the most meat in a freezer in the fastest and most ethical way. Plenty of millennials fall in love with the process, if not all, but this is a major shift in thinking.

Add in all the culture changes of a new generation and we are actually left with a lot more conservation-minded culture. There is an impending need to make sure the system is not only sustainable now but stays sustainable. I would fall on the floor if any big buck craze-cultured hunter ever spoke to me in that tone."

Rogan is a smart guy. You show him the facts and he will come around. He is not an carmudgeon.

Brett

Did you listen to his podcast with Corey Knowlton, who hunted the black Rhino? Pretty good. Actually, RadioLab has a good show on the black rhino deal.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by BrettAKSCI:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
Better yet... here is the link: http://r3industry.com/

As I say - the new crowd has little room for Africa hunting. Traveling across the world to hunt is too carbon-y, rich-y, not filson-y enough - and you can't bring the meat home. In a phrase, it's all trophy hunting - and they dislike trophy hunting. They are rejoicing in he USFW restrictions on african animals...



"That shift is having a domino effect. Trophy hunting, “method” obsession, and all the other things the industry have created have given way to how can I put the most meat in a freezer in the fastest and most ethical way. Plenty of millennials fall in love with the process, if not all, but this is a major shift in thinking.

Add in all the culture changes of a new generation and we are actually left with a lot more conservation-minded culture. There is an impending need to make sure the system is not only sustainable now but stays sustainable. I would fall on the floor if any big buck craze-cultured hunter ever spoke to me in that tone."

Rogan is a smart guy. You show him the facts and he will come around. He is not an carmudgeon.

Brett

Then he needs to understand in Africa that there is a 100% utilisation of the carcass - intestines, hooves and all. The flesh of cats is often sought after for traditional medicines or by witch Doctors.

We feed wanting communities and not ourselves.

In addition we are responsible for our attached concessions and obliged to protect vast swathes of habitat. The new breed of meat hunters have few responsibilities within the lands they hunt.

Through our Pittman Robertson act and Dingle Johnson Act hunters financially support our model of wildlife management. But it is largely “someone else” doing the managing, via local fish and game departments.


Andrew, if I had the resources, and the ability to convince my wife and kid they could do without me for a year, I’d volunteer to pitch up and document a year in the life of a PH/ operation such as that in Kafue. All the nuance that never makes it out of the country, the connections and tensions with local and tribal governments, poaching, status of th ecosystem, it’s life/health over time, Flora/fauna and of course how hunting plays a part. I’ve never seen that story told, and it would be interesting to read it.

A timely article from the New York Times. I hope the link doesn’t expire:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/0...epage®ister=email

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
https://www.nrahlf.org/article...ica-s-hunting-ranks/

Very interesting, and good luck to them.