FYI while putting together thoughts on the USF&W moratorium on ivory importation.

Zim vs. TZ
First thing one has to do seperate these 2 countries when you think about the USF&W decision and elephant populations. I agree with all Zig had to say on the subject about Zim.

Zim needs to get the illicit inside-the-parks and ration hunting thing under control and they are back on track.

TZ on the other hand is a different story. Poaching has taken a serious toll on the ele in that country. By all information I can put together...since the the 90's...ele populations in areas like the Selous have been reduced by close to 90%.

When you think about a species that lives to 60 plus years and has a gestation period of 645 days...this is serious. Some operators in TZ have noted this trend for some time and have self-limited there off-take in their blocks.

Basically in many places in TZ...what is left is a bare minimum breeding population. Realistically...nothing should be removed from these herds but 40+ year old bulls...which are few and far between.

While we have debated lion many times...lion and and ele are totally different. Lion in the wild live max to early teens...with most males not living to see 10. Ele live to 60+. Lion have a gestation perion of ~110 days and give berth to litters. Ele, 645 for a single calf. Lion are breeding by 2-3 years of age...ele mid to late teens.

Until poaching is brought under control...ele hunting in TZ needs to be strictly managed and no bulls less than 40 need be harvested.

While I vehemently oppose the USF&W banning ivory import of sport hunted ele as it punishes the wrong people and does nothing to stop "the problem" of poaching (may actually promote more poaching indirectly)...hunters hunting ele in TZ should be keenly aware of the scientific facts stated above.

If we are going to promote hunting as a conservation tool...we, hunters, have to stay conservation minded...and not hide from the facts.

Again...FWIW...FYI.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
FYI while putting together thoughts on the USF&W moratorium on ivory importation.

Zim vs. TZ
First thing one has to do seperate these 2 countries when you think about the USF&W decision and elephant populations. I agree with all Zig had to say on the subject about Zim.

Zim needs to get the illicit inside-the-parks and ration hunting thing under control and they are back on track.

TZ on the other hand is a different story. Poaching has taken a serious toll on the ele in that country. By all information I can put together...since the the 90's...ele populations in areas like the Selous have been reduced by close to 90%.

When you think about a species that lives to 60 plus years and has a gestation period of 645 days...this is serious. Some operators in TZ have noted this trend for some time and have self-limited there off-take in their blocks.

Basically in many places in TZ...what is left is a bare minimum breeding population. Realistically...nothing should be removed from these herds but 40+ year old bulls...which are few and far between.

While we have debated lion many times...lion and and ele are totally different. Lion in the wild live max to early teens...with most males not living to see 10. Ele live to 60+. Lion have a gestation perion of ~110 days and give berth to litters. Ele, 645 for a single calf. Lion are breeding by 2-3 years of age...ele mid to late teens.

Until poaching is brought under control...ele hunting in TZ needs to be strictly managed and no bulls less than 40 need be harvested.

While I vehemently oppose the USF&W banning ivory import of sport hunted ele as it punishes the wrong people and does nothing to stop "the problem" of poaching (may actually promote more poaching indirectly)...hunters hunting ele in TZ should be keenly aware of the scientific facts stated above.

If we are going to promote hunting as a conservation tool...we, hunters, have to stay conservation minded...and not hide from the facts.

Again...FWIW...FYI.

+1

Agreed Lane. I am not so much against the moratorium in TZ as I am against the methodology they used to roll it out with the season underway and no comment period...

Zim I can't quite figure out unless it is political.

I have been hunting in Tanzania for many years, and have not, repeat NOT, come across a single shootable bull during these hunts.

I have hunted many different concessions in the Selous, as well as north in Masailand.

Poaching is so rampant in Tanzania, we have come across dozens of elephant carcasses in varying degrees of decay.

It does not take a genius to know that not much is being done against poaching.

Good points Lane.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I have been hunting in Tanzania for many years, and have not, repeat NOT, come across a single shootable bull during these hunts.

I have hunted many different concessions in the Selous, as well as north in Masailand.

Poaching is so rampant in Tanzania, we have come across dozens of elephant carcasses in varying degrees of decay.

It does not take a genius to know that not much is being done against poaching.

I think Saeed is spot on. When I was hunting Masailand Jan 2013, we did not see an elephant or any elephant sign outside a national park - NONE!

MY PH blamed uncontrolled poaching as the cause, and he said that the government was doing very little to nothing to stop it. In fact, one got the impression that the government was corrupt and benefiting from the poaching - likely taking bribes and the like.

This makes the USFWS decision so devastating, because the PH's and outfitters are now much less motivated to conserve elephants - they being the only ones I saw as actively pushing for elephant and lion conservation.

The future is bleak.

AIU

This whole mess makes it clear to me that without effective government you can't protect wildlife. Look at the utter failure of safari companies in the Selous to protect elephants in their areas. I was wrong about hunting being the best protection. Protection requires an effective governmental component. The Selous is a failed "hunting as conservation" experiment. We need to reevaluate and modify our position and tactics before their are no elephant left to hunt.

Lane,

I was thinking the same thing: the term to maturity is huge.

When I hunted the Selous in 2009 I saw elephants every day, including three shooter bulls. I hear today, just 4 1/2 years later, it is totally different.

I did see some eles in Masailand in 2013, but they were far away. Saw some fresh tracks as well.

Very sad situation.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
FYI while putting together thoughts on the USF&W moratorium on ivory importation.

Zim vs. TZ
First thing one has to do seperate these 2 countries when you think about the USF&W decision and elephant populations. I agree with all Zig had to say on the subject about Zim.

Zim needs to get the illicit inside-the-parks and ration hunting thing under control and they are back on track.

TZ on the other hand is a different story. Poaching has taken a serious toll on the ele in that country. By all information I can put together...since the the 90's...ele populations in areas like the Selous have been reduced by close to 90%.

When you think about a species that lives to 60 plus years and has a gestation period of 645 days...this is serious. Some operators in TZ have noted this trend for some time and have self-limited there off-take in their blocks.

Basically in many places in TZ...what is left is a bare minimum breeding population. Realistically...nothing should be removed from these herds but 40+ year old bulls...which are few and far between.

While we have debated lion many times...lion and and ele are totally different. Lion in the wild live max to early teens...with most males not living to see 10. Ele live to 60+. Lion have a gestation perion of ~110 days and give berth to litters. Ele, 645 for a single calf. Lion are breeding by 2-3 years of age...ele mid to late teens.

Until poaching is brought under control...ele hunting in TZ needs to be strictly managed and no bulls less than 40 need be harvested.

While I vehemently oppose the USF&W banning ivory import of sport hunted ele as it punishes the wrong people and does nothing to stop "the problem" of poaching (may actually promote more poaching indirectly)...hunters hunting ele in TZ should be keenly aware of the scientific facts stated above.

If we are going to promote hunting as a conservation tool...we, hunters, have to stay conservation minded...and not hide from the facts.

Again...FWIW...FYI.

Excellent points, Lane. Thanks for the well stated comments you've contributed.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I have been hunting in Tanzania for many years, and have not, repeat NOT, come across a single shootable bull during these hunts.

I have hunted many different concessions in the Selous, as well as north in Masailand.

Poaching is so rampant in Tanzania, we have come across dozens of elephant carcasses in varying degrees of decay.

It does not take a genius to know that not much is being done against poaching.

Curious, we are aware of efforts like the DAPU, the effort the Duckworth's have in place in Mozambique, Rifa Camp in Zim and the like. What are the Tanzania outfitters, like the Vincents, Clements and others, doing to get control of situation?

lane , great points ,

i agree vehemently that the situations are very different between the two countries and it is contrary to all sensibilities to put both in the same basket -

elephant populations in tanzania have plummetted and in the western areas and selous as cited a very high percentage have simply been wiped out ,

zimbabwe is a very different scenario , yes indeed there has been poaching and probably a lot more of late than in previous years however the elephant population is still very healthy and elephant numbers are arguably still way above sustainable carrying capacity in many areas.

What if they put a very minimal trophy fee on poachers, with no quota and no import restrictions?

(OK, I realize I'm being awful).

i disagree. there should be no trophy fee- just a bounty paid for each one dealt with, as is done on some farms in Namibia with baboons and jackals.... bottom line is USFWS has it's collective head so far up it's collective ass, the idiots will never see daylight, other than through a brown haze. science has nothing to do with the decision making process and everything to do with a feel good bandaid approach.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I have been hunting in Tanzania for many years, and have not, repeat NOT, come across a single shootable bull during these hunts.

I have hunted many different concessions in the Selous, as well as north in Masailand.

Poaching is so rampant in Tanzania, we have come across dozens of elephant carcasses in varying degrees of decay.

It does not take a genius to know that not much is being done against poaching.

Curious, we are aware of efforts like the DAPU, the effort the Duckworth's have in place in Mozambique, Rifa Camp in Zim and the like. What are the Tanzania outfitters, like the Vincents, Clements and others, doing to get control of situation?

All the out5fits I have hunted with have their own anti-poaching operations, and costs them a lot of money they sure do not need to spend on it.

But, it has very little effect on this situation, because on whole they have absolutely no help from the authorities.

Last year while we were there, the game department, together with the police and the army, made a big fuss about mounting an anti-poaching operation.

I suspect it came to no more than a big PR operation.

It is actually getting worse for other animals too.

As the bush meat business is booming.

They are killing any animal they kind find.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I have been hunting in Tanzania for many years, and have not, repeat NOT, come across a single shootable bull during these hunts.

I have hunted many different concessions in the Selous, as well as north in Masailand.

Poaching is so rampant in Tanzania, we have come across dozens of elephant carcasses in varying degrees of decay.

It does not take a genius to know that not much is being done against poaching.

Curious, we are aware of efforts like the DAPU, the effort the Duckworth's have in place in Mozambique, Rifa Camp in Zim and the like. What are the Tanzania outfitters, like the Vincents, Clements and others, doing to get control of situation?

All the out5fits I have hunted with have their own anti-poaching operations, and costs them a lot of money they sure do not need to spend on it.

But, it has very little effect on this situation, because on whole they have absolutely no help from the authorities.

Last year while we were there, the game department, together with the police and the army, made a big fuss about mounting an anti-poaching operation.

I suspect it came to no more than a big PR operation.

It is actually getting worse for other animals too.

As the bush meat business is booming.

They are killing any animal they kind find.

They did start a crackdown that was supposedly going quite well, but was called off very early in the process. http://www.news24.com/Africa/N...ching-drive-20131102

The sad thing is that you could put Paddy Curtis in charge of anti-poaching in the Selous...give him the use of one Blackhawk helicopter and pilot and resources to mount a ground team...voila...no more poachers. In the big scheme of things...would not be that expensive.

But the real culprits reside in offices in Dar Es Salaam.

So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
The sad thing is that you could put Paddy Curtis in charge of anti-poaching in the Selous...give him the use of one Blackhawk helicopter and pilot and resources to mount a ground team...voila...no more poachers. In the big scheme of things...would not be that expensive.

Dr. Easter makes very sound objective observations and statements. USFWS makes politically based decisions rather than scientific based decisions. I believe the anti-poaching patrols I had observed in Masailand this past December were quite effective.
Our PH and trackers captured a poacher. The game scouts beat him (out of my sight but not sound) severely. When the anti-poaching patrol showed up late at night. He was again beaten severely. Then he was taken to jail. As I was told jail time and sentence is not all that severe depending upon bribes, etc. Thus, the rationale for the pre-jail behavior modification treatment. The vehicle that was also taken had about 17 animals (small plains game) that would be sold for bush meat. I also understood the anti-poaching patrol was funded by area outfitters.
IMO they best way to curb the poaching is ramp up the anti-poaching patrols. Perhaps we as hunters need to set up a fund in addition to what we provide as part of our hunting fees. I personally have no problem seeing poachers centerpunched. Saves a lot of time and hassle with the African judiciary.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

Mr. MJines,

From my perspective, you just hit a home run my friend!!!!! Cheers

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

Great post Lane.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

Regarding poaching, while I agree that "only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it" and that "no operator can stop poaching", are you suggesting that the "operators" discontinue their ongoing efforts to deter poaching?

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

Regarding poaching, while I agree that "only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it" and that "no operator can stop poaching", are you suggesting that the "operators" discontinue their ongoing efforts to deter poaching?

Not at all.

But to suggest that operators should be taking this full time is not right either.

As I have mentioned, all the operators that I have hunted with, including TGT, had anti-poaching operations.

The funny part is I saw more dead elephants on concessions run by TGT.

Go figure!

Excellent food for thought here, thanks for posting the biology, Dr. Lane.
Sadly, politics trumps all science, truth, and beauty.
The boot of politics is on the neck of the world, always has been, always will be ...

Government getting it right is the only way, as Saeed said.

See, politics must be involved, ultimately, and hopefully get the governments of these countries on the right tracks before it is too late.

Politicians are like women, can't live with them, can't live without them.



THE PROPER LIMITED GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION ON POACHING, IN CONJUNCTION WITH LEGAL SPORT HUNTING OF POACHERS AND OTHER GAME SPECIES BY GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED CONSERVATION PROGRAMS:


We can dream, of Paddy getting more than a single Blackhawk. He needs a single Apache too.
The Blackhawk can scout ahead and haul out the poachers, dead or alive, after the Apache cleans up:




Government Aerial Specialist Game Scout (ASGS) directing Apache pilot by tapping a stick on the windshield of the Apache-bakkie,
and pointing out poachers below with same stick,
so that 30mm chaingun may be more effectively brought to bear with minimization of collateral damage.
Surplus Hellfire missiles too.
Ivory stockpiles in government warehouses will be replaced by rocket stockpiles:



Photo above might be from a training program for ASGS Technical Advisors (TA) near Fort Campbell, KY.
The ASGS-TA program is aimed at getting "African boots in the air" in Africa.
No American "boots on the ground" will be required.

Those are older models; newer ones can track 128 targets simultaneously and engage 16 at once.

A friend of mine flew one the first night of the first Gulf War (not the D model).

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Those are older models; newer ones can track 128 targets simultaneously and engage 16 at once.

A friend of mine flew one the first night of the first Gulf War (not the D model).

Great!
Nothing but the best for Government Anti-Poaching Programs (GAP).
Get them the best, leave no gap in GAP.
Politics will be required, however ...

Certainly, the governement has to take an active role.

But with that said, I have been told that some of the biggest operators in the Selous who own the rights multiple concessions run NO antipoaching at all. In fact, they pick up their tents and equipment at the end of the season and vacate only to return at the beginning of the following season.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

Regarding poaching, while I agree that "only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it" and that "no operator can stop poaching", are you suggesting that the "operators" discontinue their ongoing efforts to deter poaching?

Not at all.

But to suggest that operators should be taking this full time is not right either.

As I have mentioned, all the operators that I have hunted with, including TGT, had anti-poaching operations.

The funny part is I saw more dead elephants on concessions run by TGT.

Go figure!

Of course, it is wrong to suggest that the operators need to take this on alone, but it is also wrong to suggest that the outfitters have no obligation to provide anti-poaching support for the areas they hunt too. And it is wrong to suggest that as hunters we should not choose to support those operators that support and contribute to sustainable hunting through anti-poaching efforts and avoid those that do not. I have heard the same rumors reported above, that the biggest operators in Tanzania (those that control the blocks) do very little in the way of anti-poaching work.

I rather suspect this isn't going to be too popular but I think everyone is putting the cart before the horse in all this.

The following is simply my opinion and not worth any more than anyone else's opinion......... However, as I see it:

Everyone is trying to convince USF&WS to reverse their decision and telling them that it's the elephants that'll suffer (and they're quite right in that) whereas people should be looking at WHY USF&WS have introduced the ban.

In the case of Zim, if you do a bit of research, you'll find one of their major concerns is the land seizures and the uncontrolled poaching that happens immediately after those seizures happen.......... and they're not wrong in that. Therefore, more would be achieved if pressure were put on the Zim Govt to understand that if the land seizures continue, the hunting dollars will stop.

Now let's look at Tanzania where uncontrolled poaching has been going on for a significant period and virtually nothing has been done to stop it. Last year, they sent forces in to catch poachers and all they did was raid nearby villages and steal from them. Things got so bad, the forces were recalled and not much else has happened since....... Therefore, the solution is the same. The Tz Govt need to be made to understand that if they don't do something about the poaching, the hunting dollars will stop.

Both Govts also need to nail the guys within their own numbers (no matter who they are) who must be involved for all this shite to happen.

I'm also sure the sudden announcement of an immediate ban was also done very deliberately because if they'd given warning, there would have been a flood of elephant hunters trying to get in and out before the ban was introduced which would of course have defeated the object of the exercise.

Therefore, (IMO) the answer is for the Govts of those African countries involved to be made to do something about what is their problem (largely) of their own making. So you might as well forget about pressuring USF&WS because they won't give way all the time they have a hole in their collective arses and instead, pressure the African Govts to do something about the problem.

I'd also like to see the western Govts immediately suspend ALL foreign aid to those countries until they put their houses in order.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

Regarding poaching, while I agree that "only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it" and that "no operator can stop poaching", are you suggesting that the "operators" discontinue their ongoing efforts to deter poaching?

Not at all.

But to suggest that operators should be taking this full time is not right either.

As I have mentioned, all the operators that I have hunted with, including TGT, had anti-poaching operations.

The funny part is I saw more dead elephants on concessions run by TGT.

Go figure!

Of course, it is wrong to suggest that the operators need to take this on alone, but it is also wrong to suggest that the outfitters have no obligation to provide anti-poaching support for the areas they hunt too. And it is wrong to suggest that as hunters we should not choose to support those operators that support and contribute to sustainable hunting through anti-poaching efforts and avoid those that do not. I have heard the same rumors reported above, that the biggest operators in Tanzania (those that control the blocks) do very little in the way of anti-poaching work.

While I understand where you are coming from, if that is your metric on who to hunt with it will be a short list. I don't know one way or the other, but I heard from former TGT employees that they (as a company) don't make any money. Anti-poaching isn't cheap, and no one is getting rich from a hunting company.

Outfitters should put more money into anti-poaching, but don't expect this to happen when they only control concessions for 5 years and there is no transparency in the allocation process.

quote:

Originally posted by StormsGSP:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

Regarding poaching, while I agree that "only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it" and that "no operator can stop poaching", are you suggesting that the "operators" discontinue their ongoing efforts to deter poaching?

Not at all.

But to suggest that operators should be taking this full time is not right either.

As I have mentioned, all the operators that I have hunted with, including TGT, had anti-poaching operations.

The funny part is I saw more dead elephants on concessions run by TGT.

Go figure!

Of course, it is wrong to suggest that the operators need to take this on alone, but it is also wrong to suggest that the outfitters have no obligation to provide anti-poaching support for the areas they hunt too. And it is wrong to suggest that as hunters we should not choose to support those operators that support and contribute to sustainable hunting through anti-poaching efforts and avoid those that do not. I have heard the same rumors reported above, that the biggest operators in Tanzania (those that control the blocks) do very little in the way of anti-poaching work.

While I understand where you are coming from, if that is your metric on who to hunt with it will be a short list.

No one said anyone is getting rich as an outfitter. But it seems like there are two groups, those that make excuses for whatever reason and those that find a way forward. If the Duckworths, CMS and others can figure out a way forward, why can't others? Are the Duckworths, CMS and those like them just smarter than the rest? Maybe they have a different set of priorities? My only point is I think hunters should be making informed choices on who to hunt with and part of the criteria they should be considering is whether the group they are hunting with is making a meaningful effort to attempt to deal with poaching.

TGTS/Wengert Winrose are good stewards to the wildlife and the wild land of TZ...that is the bottom line and I doubt anyone will dispute that fact. They are leaders in lion conservation and have had a self-imposed moratorium ele hunting for sometime due to the country wide ele poaching problem.

Nobody is twisting the arm of anybody to buy the rights to a concession. If ALL companies budgeted for anti-poaching before bidding...they would have money to protect the concession or not have a concession. Supply and demand would bring the price down if no one bought one.

The odd thing is that TZ took blocks away from TGTS in the last few years...which made no sense if the government really cared about the wildlife.

Interesting views above.Some operators have just started doing anti poaching and i am sure many will follow if there areas are to survive.

I look at the SVC in zimbabwe and here we spend a minimum of 600 k per anum on anti poaching.We also have a full time Rhino anti poaching unit.

From our experience our success has come with an excellent informer net work with the local communities.The more sell outs you have in your neighbouring communities the more success you will have in stopping the poachers b4 they enter the concession.This is costly as it does not come for free.

Roger Whittall has dedicated his life to anti poaching and protecting wildlife.It is all about the WILL to protect and putting the hand in the pocket to go that extra mile with your anti poaching units.

Building up statistics for your own data base will help with the lobbying of Government officials at provincial and national level.This they do not like as the stats do not lie and are forced to do something about it.

The sad reality is that when you think of who is responsible for where we are and where does the blame properly rest:

* The governments in the affected countries are responsible since they (i) do not adequately fund anti-poaching efforts and National Parks, (ii) do not give the concession holders long term leases that encourage them to invest without fear that their investment will be snatched away from them arbitrarily, and (iii) turn a blind eye to countries like China that fuel the illegal trade in ivory, rhino horn and other animal products.

* The outfitters are responsible because many are content to simply do their hunting, take their quota and go home for the season without making any meaningful investment or effort to raise funds for anti-poaching, to plow profits into anti-poaching efforts or control poaching in their hunting concessions.

* The hunters are responsible because too often we just look for a "deal" and could care less if the outfitter is acting responsibly or as a sound steward of the resources entrusted to him. Most of us probably have no clue what commitment the outfitter we hunt with has made to anti-poaching in their concessions.

* USFWS is responsible since they have imposed an ill conceived policy that will actually have consequences exactly opposite of what was intended. A policy based in emotion and not in fact.

We all own the blame, there is blame enough to go around and we need to look in the mirror before pointing fingers at everyone else.

I have heard more than one PH say that they would love to spend some time doing anti poaching, but that unfortunately, political reality dictates that this will not work.

Economic reality also dictates that the more hands in the pocket, the less money is there to do anything with it.

I thought that Tanzania said that the hunting companies HAD to vacate the concession in the off season? Remove the camp, etc.?

The fact that concessions are relatively short term contracts and that "TIA" politics are played with it indicates this will continue to be an issue.

Tanzania seems to have a shuffling of concessions periodically, which hurts the folks who do their job with antipoaching, and even though they claim that a good record with regards to protecting the resource gives you an advantage to renew your contract, they also have other agenda items (like local empowerment) that tend to get in the way of this.

We hunters seem to be talking out of both sides of our mouths on this issue as well. How often do we hear "that I would pay more for the antipoaching" and how much do we hear "Pricing the man of average means out of the market" around here?

quote:

Originally posted by StormsGSP:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So why are we as hunters supporting, directly or indirectly, the outfitters that are not doing their part to address the poaching problem? Surely the blocks in the Selous and elsewhere are controlled by someone. That someone either is or is not taking steps to help control poaching in the blocks they control. If they are not, whether they are booking the hunts directly or are selling the quota to other outfitters that book the hunts in those areas, as hunters why would we not simply boycott those that are not proactively, transparently and materially trying to deal with the problem? Part of the answer is knowledge obviously: how would we know. But perhaps one area we should each have on our due diligence checklist for outfitters is what are you doing in the areas you book hunts to address the poaching problem or if you do not control the area what is the person that does control the area doing, how much money are you or them spending, what resources are dedicated to the problem, etc. If we are booking hunts in areas controlled by groups that do nothing to address poaching or with outfitters that are not doing anything material to address poaching, then to some extent feels like we are part of the problem too.

How much are you willing to pay extra to the outfitters to support their anti-poaching operations?

Compared to not being able to hunt at all? Another way to ask the question is, how are some operators able to do it (or why are they willing to do it) and others either cannot or choose not to? If TGT can do it, why not others?

NO OPERATOR can stop poaching!

TGT is probably the most active in anti-poaching.

They even had their own airplanes to help in this.

But, we still saw several dead elephants on their concessions.

Only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it.

Regarding poaching, while I agree that "only the government, if they put their minds to it, can stop it" and that "no operator can stop poaching", are you suggesting that the "operators" discontinue their ongoing efforts to deter poaching?

Not at all.

But to suggest that operators should be taking this full time is not right either.

As I have mentioned, all the operators that I have hunted with, including TGT, had anti-poaching operations.

The funny part is I saw more dead elephants on concessions run by TGT.

Go figure!

Of course, it is wrong to suggest that the operators need to take this on alone, but it is also wrong to suggest that the outfitters have no obligation to provide anti-poaching support for the areas they hunt too. And it is wrong to suggest that as hunters we should not choose to support those operators that support and contribute to sustainable hunting through anti-poaching efforts and avoid those that do not. I have heard the same rumors reported above, that the biggest operators in Tanzania (those that control the blocks) do very little in the way of anti-poaching work.

While I understand where you are coming from, if that is your metric on who to hunt with it will be a short list.

So be it! At least in terms of my dollars!