THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM AFRICAN HUNTING FORUM

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Hunting  Hop To Forums  African Big Game Hunting    Is it time for a new organisation???!!!
Page 1 2 

Moderators: Saeed
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Is it time for a new organisation???!!!
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
Picture of fairgame
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by KPete:
Mike:

I admire your fidelity to the NRA and understand your concern that no apparent alternative exists. However, the fundamental dilemma you face is that tens of millions of Americans who view hunting negatively will never be swayed by an organization that they mistrust. And the fact is that the NRA would only appeal to the converted while alienating the very voters our cause desperately needs: Democrats and independents who are undecided on the legitimacy of hunting.

The NRA's success in staving off gun control legislation is predicated by and large on fear, intimidation, and coercion at the political level. Apart from polite asides and in-house editorials, the NRA doesn't try to change public opinion on guns, but instead threatens legislators with unrelenting retribution should they fail to tow the party line. This works with guns and gun rights, but can you imagine using the same tactics to effect changes in policy regarding safari hunting when those changes were compelled by voter sentiment? It wouldn't work, and in fact would likely backfire – which is why the NRA will never give more than tepid support for hunters issues, and then only as a palliative to the 'old guard hunters' who were thrown off the board during the 'Revolt in Cincinnati'.

To provide long-term protection of our hunting heritage we need to change minds not twist arms, which rules out the NRA as our agent for change.


Russ:

Your's is a praiseworthy gesture; however, the organization I envision would be staffed by professionals with solid scientific and conservationist credentials – not hunters who would be seen as biased and self-serving. Such organization could succeed without enormous staffing or gilded offices: instead it could operate on a $2m annual budget and serve, not as a lobbying group, but as a pro-hunting think tank. Its mission would be to challenge LionAid and similar organizations by undertaking peer reviewed studies that demonstrate the efficacy of hunting as an essential conservation tool. That product would provide impartial third-party ammunition to the NRA, SCI, DSC, and others for use in their lobbying efforts (and hopefully encourage their financial support).

It's one thing for hunters to advocate hunting, and altogether different for scientists and researchers to make the same case. The latter is what will turn the tide in changing public opinion in a post-Cecil world.


Kim,

I wish you would post more often. If all this is feasible then what would you suggest and who would you approach to help out?

The only US based scientist/researcher that I could suggest from Zambia would be Dr. Paula White.

We would need enthusiastic chaps like Russ Gould.


ROYAL KAFUE LTD
Email - kafueroyal@gmail.com
Tel/Whatsapp (00260) 975315144
Instagram - kafueroyal
 
Posts: 9996 | Location: Zambia | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Could that organisation KPete suggested not be built around Conservation Force?


A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life
Hunt Australia - Website
Hunt Australia - Facebook
Hunt Australia - TV


 
Posts: 4456 | Location: Australia | Registered: 23 January 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ledvm
posted Hide Post
quote:
It's one thing for hunters to advocate hunting, and altogether different for scientists and researchers to make the same case. The latter is what will turn the tide in changing public opinion in a post-Cecil world.


Again...an absolutely correct statement!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.
 
Posts: 38258 | Location: Gainesville, TX | Registered: 24 December 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of MJines
posted Hide Post
In my experience Washington responds to two things, money and numbers, in that order. The NRA has both. Is the success of groups like PETA, HSUS and others like them a function of their scientific and conservationist credentials or the fact that they are well bank rolled and are able to enlist the support of an active and vocal group of constituents when necessary? I suspect it is the latter. Sorry but in my view a group of scientists and researchers with a $2 million budget is a fart in whirlwind in this fight. It comes down to a question of where best to invest your time, effort and resources, someone that can twist arms and get results sounds pretty good to me at the moment.


Mike
 
Posts: 21810 | Registered: 03 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ledvm
posted Hide Post
Mike,
With all due respect as much of all you say above is 100% correct, scientist could have swayed the USF&WS in our direction with the lion.

Organizations like Panthera, who fund many African wildlife documentaries on TV, control "the numbers" you correctly speak of.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.
 
Posts: 38258 | Location: Gainesville, TX | Registered: 24 December 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of MJines
posted Hide Post
. . . so where are we at the moment with lion? Strikes me as a bit Pollyannaish to suggest that a $2 million pro-hunting think tank is going to turn this fight around.

. . . PETA, $42 million in revenue (2014), HSUS, $135 million in revenue (2014), ASPCA, $171 million in revenue (2014) . . .


Mike
 
Posts: 21810 | Registered: 03 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ledvm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by MJines:
. . . so where are we at the moment with lion? Strikes me as a bit Pollyannaish to suggest that a $2 million pro-hunting think tank is going to turn this fight around.


Don't get me wrong...I think you are correct about DC...money and numbers speak.

But...solely playing that game has kind of got us where we are today.

Money and numbers may very well be the key to the shortgame but for the long game Kim is correct! We need the unbiased pure scientist and statistics to VALIDATE our message...or we will find ourselves right back in this dilemma again...even if we won the shortgame.

As to where we are today with lion...it is not good BECAUSE we did NOT work with science. The real scientists see that hunting definitely plays a role in the preservation of species.

They are ready to say it too...as long as we as a group are ready to change as the science suggests...something we have NOT done in the past.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.
 
Posts: 38258 | Location: Gainesville, TX | Registered: 24 December 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I think there is room for both: plain old lobbying, and funding research. The scientists don't have to be full-time. In fact if they are independent they cannot be accused of employer bias. The studies could be funded on an ad-hoc basis. I mean, how many times do you have to do the study? Once is enough. Managed sport hunting = highest and best use of marginal land = reduced poaching and preservation of habitat. I am sure this has been studied many times already.


Russ Gould - Whitworth Arms LLC
BigfiveHQ.com, Large Calibers and African Safaris
Doublegunhq.com, Fine English, American and German Double Rifles and Shotguns
VH2Q.com, Varmint Rifles and Gear
 
Posts: 2934 | Location: Texas | Registered: 07 June 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of twoseventy
posted Hide Post
KPete, thank you for emerging from exile. And for your thoughtful posts.


...I say that hunters go into Paradise when they die, and live in this world more joyfully than any other men.
-Edward, duke of York

". . . when a man has shot an elephant his life is full." ~John Alfred Jordan

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." Cicero - 55 BC

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand

Cogito ergo venor- KPete

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.”
― Adam Smith - “Wealth of Nations”
 
Posts: 989 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 12 June 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
OK it came to me last night, here is the essence of the message that needs to go out one way or the other:

1. All African wildlife is going to die, most within a decade.
2. The continued existence of each species depends solely on each living female raising two or more offspring to maturity during her lifetime.
3. Trophy hunters pursue mature males almost exclusively with zero impact on survival of the species. Predators, poaching, and human encroachment are the main threats to female survival and breeding success. Hunters, along with ecotourists, provide a major monetary incentive to improve the odds through control of poaching, slowing human encroachment, improvement of habitat, and control of predators. Recreational hunting is not the problem, it is a key part of the solution.
4. Cecil the lion was a predator who would have died naturally by the time you are reading this.


Russ Gould - Whitworth Arms LLC
BigfiveHQ.com, Large Calibers and African Safaris
Doublegunhq.com, Fine English, American and German Double Rifles and Shotguns
VH2Q.com, Varmint Rifles and Gear
 
Posts: 2934 | Location: Texas | Registered: 07 June 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
There are some really delusional people here that think the NRA is going to protect the hunting segment...won't ever happen. The NRA has a specific agenda and they have their hands full with that one. They have nothing in the tank to spare for a different type of agenda. There may be a solution, however it most certainly cannot be tied to any type of hunting organization if it is a science based one, otherwise it would be "tainted". That was already discussed here. There is perhaps one other solution, and that is to reach out to the young people and impact their view..or at least challenge the view the anti-hunting community is portraying to them. You will not change the minds of people who are already an anti-hunting supporter or activist. The young community must be the targets of opportunity so ways to get the "conservation through hunting" movement going is to use various media and go where the children are. THEY need to hear and comprehend the message..not the anti-hunting community.
 
Posts: 4115 | Location: Pa. | Registered: 21 April 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Woodrow, it might surprise you to find out that many if the things that you mention are on the NRA's agenda.
 
Posts: 12122 | Location: Orlando, FL | Registered: 26 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
If we want to save the wildlife in Africa and our hunting traditions, it seems that we need to punish the consumer countries (China, etc.) who are consuming most of the poached ivory, tiger parts, etc. with effective economic sanctions (maybe a 5% tariff on all goods imported from those countries that goes to wildlife preservation?). Politically unpopular and also unpopular with the the many businesses that export to these countries but is there any reasonable alternative? Haven't they heard about Viagra?


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4797 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Trump is the only one with the macendes (cojones) to do that.


Russ Gould - Whitworth Arms LLC
BigfiveHQ.com, Large Calibers and African Safaris
Doublegunhq.com, Fine English, American and German Double Rifles and Shotguns
VH2Q.com, Varmint Rifles and Gear
 
Posts: 2934 | Location: Texas | Registered: 07 June 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by KPete:
This is a topic of sufficient importance that I feel compelled to emerge from exile to comment.

First, the collective notion reflected in this thread that the NRA serve as an advocate for American hunters in general and safari hunting in particular is impractical, and to shed any sugar-coating, plain stupid.

I am mindful that some of AR's best and brightest are subscribers to this proposal, and I mean no disrespect – but really guys, have any of you looked at this absent heartfelt sentimentality? Yeah, I know the NRA is the 'guardian of the Second Amendment' and all that stands between the barbarians and our 'cold, dead hands', but gentlemen that has nothing to do with effectively turning back the tide of anti-hunting sentiment in this country. For that you need an organization that can logically, politically, and diplomatically bridge disparate constituencies: an organization that appears objective and scientific in its approach to advocating for hunting. Tell me, how are you going to do that with the NRA?

In pursuit of such goal let's look at the facts regarding the NRA as a candidate to represent hunters. While enjoying tremendous popularity from its members, the NRA is also one of the most disliked organizations in America. Take a look at these numbers (Wall Street Journal/NBC polling-July 2015):



The data reflects that the NRA is viewed negatively by 33% of all Americans with 20% undecided - that's approaching 100 million people. Now, before you write them off as anti-hunters, consider the following (NSSF/Responsive Management-2012):



In 2012, almost 80% of Americans supported hunting and hunter's rights; that's a delta of almost 60 million Americans who have either a negative or no opinion on the NRA who nevertheless support a hunting agenda. How can that be?

It's somewhat immaterial to this issue, but in short there are millions of gun owners and hunters who do not support what they see as the NRA's extreme and intransigent position on reasonable firearms restrictions (e.g., sales to persons on terrorism watch lists, background checks at gun shows), and perhaps more importantly, the NRA’s public persona. The latter includes folks who cannot fathom the likes of Ted Nugent – a man with a profound economy of reason – on the board of an otherwise serious organization. And then there are the tens of thousands of law enforcement officers who left the NRA when they were smeared with Wayne LaPierre's description of them as "jack-booted government thugs" who wear "Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms". (I know because I was a 'jack-booted thug' serving as a federal agent who, along with President George H.W. Bush, resigned my life membership and vowed never to return so long as LaPierre was at the helm.) Basically, so long as it appears to many Americans that the NRA foments policies from its in-house think tank, Duck Dynasty, they will avoid affiliation - even if they are otherwise sympathetic to its basic principles, and in this case, hunting.

What's equally striking is that the popularity of the NRA, bolstered as it is by a fervently loyal and predominantly Republican base, is only exceeded in popularity by Planned Parenthood, which is supported by an equally fervent and loyal base that is instead predominantly Democrat.

The two offer an interesting glimpse into the politically polarized condition of the American electorate. One mistake that many on AR make is to presume that only Republicans like to hunt. Yet, an NSSF study found that "56% of Democrats indicated that gun rights and conservation are equally important". The lunacy displayed by the NRA - and some on this board - is to write-off Democrats as potential allies and instead behave in the same fashion as LaPierre, painting them all with the same brush. The idea of political advocacy is not to constrain your constituency but to build it to its maximum potential irrespective of party affiliation. Do any of you really think the NRA is going to build that bridge and lure hunters from the political left into a coalition that could exceed 70% of the nations voters? Of course not.

As I wrote, it's immaterial why hunters and gun owners won't join the NRA (although I'm sure that my examples above will constitute the lions-share of follow-on posts), it is simply and irrefutably the case that they won’t. If the NRA leads the charge for hunter’s rights, it will be preaching exclusively to its fired up base – and that base is already on its side.

Further, despite the great work of organizations like DSC and the mediocre work of SCI, the fact also remains that neither organization can serve as an apparently impartial, independent, and trusted spokesperson to our cause. Those who are undecided or soft in their anti-hunting sentiment are not going to be wooed by an organization that appears a sop to hunters, lacking in any scientific objectivity – and the latter is how we have to fight this battle.

Gentlemen, I’m on your side, but on this issue I take issue. We need to redefine the debate and inextricably tie hunting to conservation and science, and that can only be done on the scale necessary by allying ourselves to a new, non-partisan, non-political, non-profit research organization advocating for the imperative of preserving hunting as an essential conservation tool. If, on the other hand, we throw our support and money at the NRA or a safari club to lobby and protect our hunting heritage, I’m afraid we will have lost the war before the next big battle is fought.

Oh, and Happy New Year to all of you!


I guess you didn't see the following Gallup poll:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/186...ajority-support.aspx

You might not have the same opinions if you sat in the HLF meetings as I did.
 
Posts: 12122 | Location: Orlando, FL | Registered: 26 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ledvm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Russ Gould:
Trump is the only one with the macendes (cojones) to do that.


I am going to post a copy of a PM I got on AR the other day. I am not posting the Username as he may wish to remain anonymous.

But to just re-enforce all my previous posts and Russ's above...here it is.

quote:
Ledvm,

I wanted to take a moment to thank you for the incredibly nice post you wrote about me. My brother Don and I are both big hunters and 2A guys. We have both been reading this forum for years albeit I have always kept some anonymity. Anyway I came across your post and just wanted to shoot you a PM to say thank you for the nice words. We are going to win this thing and it will be a great for all of us in the shooting/hunting community.

I truly hope our paths cross at some point! Thanks again!

Eric Trump


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.
 
Posts: 38258 | Location: Gainesville, TX | Registered: 24 December 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of MJines
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by larryshores:
quote:
Originally posted by KPete:
This is a topic of sufficient importance that I feel compelled to emerge from exile to comment.

First, the collective notion reflected in this thread that the NRA serve as an advocate for American hunters in general and safari hunting in particular is impractical, and to shed any sugar-coating, plain stupid.

I am mindful that some of AR's best and brightest are subscribers to this proposal, and I mean no disrespect – but really guys, have any of you looked at this absent heartfelt sentimentality? Yeah, I know the NRA is the 'guardian of the Second Amendment' and all that stands between the barbarians and our 'cold, dead hands', but gentlemen that has nothing to do with effectively turning back the tide of anti-hunting sentiment in this country. For that you need an organization that can logically, politically, and diplomatically bridge disparate constituencies: an organization that appears objective and scientific in its approach to advocating for hunting. Tell me, how are you going to do that with the NRA?

In pursuit of such goal let's look at the facts regarding the NRA as a candidate to represent hunters. While enjoying tremendous popularity from its members, the NRA is also one of the most disliked organizations in America. Take a look at these numbers (Wall Street Journal/NBC polling-July 2015):



The data reflects that the NRA is viewed negatively by 33% of all Americans with 20% undecided - that's approaching 100 million people. Now, before you write them off as anti-hunters, consider the following (NSSF/Responsive Management-2012):



In 2012, almost 80% of Americans supported hunting and hunter's rights; that's a delta of almost 60 million Americans who have either a negative or no opinion on the NRA who nevertheless support a hunting agenda. How can that be?

It's somewhat immaterial to this issue, but in short there are millions of gun owners and hunters who do not support what they see as the NRA's extreme and intransigent position on reasonable firearms restrictions (e.g., sales to persons on terrorism watch lists, background checks at gun shows), and perhaps more importantly, the NRA’s public persona. The latter includes folks who cannot fathom the likes of Ted Nugent – a man with a profound economy of reason – on the board of an otherwise serious organization. And then there are the tens of thousands of law enforcement officers who left the NRA when they were smeared with Wayne LaPierre's description of them as "jack-booted government thugs" who wear "Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms". (I know because I was a 'jack-booted thug' serving as a federal agent who, along with President George H.W. Bush, resigned my life membership and vowed never to return so long as LaPierre was at the helm.) Basically, so long as it appears to many Americans that the NRA foments policies from its in-house think tank, Duck Dynasty, they will avoid affiliation - even if they are otherwise sympathetic to its basic principles, and in this case, hunting.

What's equally striking is that the popularity of the NRA, bolstered as it is by a fervently loyal and predominantly Republican base, is only exceeded in popularity by Planned Parenthood, which is supported by an equally fervent and loyal base that is instead predominantly Democrat.

The two offer an interesting glimpse into the politically polarized condition of the American electorate. One mistake that many on AR make is to presume that only Republicans like to hunt. Yet, an NSSF study found that "56% of Democrats indicated that gun rights and conservation are equally important". The lunacy displayed by the NRA - and some on this board - is to write-off Democrats as potential allies and instead behave in the same fashion as LaPierre, painting them all with the same brush. The idea of political advocacy is not to constrain your constituency but to build it to its maximum potential irrespective of party affiliation. Do any of you really think the NRA is going to build that bridge and lure hunters from the political left into a coalition that could exceed 70% of the nations voters? Of course not.

As I wrote, it's immaterial why hunters and gun owners won't join the NRA (although I'm sure that my examples above will constitute the lions-share of follow-on posts), it is simply and irrefutably the case that they won’t. If the NRA leads the charge for hunter’s rights, it will be preaching exclusively to its fired up base – and that base is already on its side.

Further, despite the great work of organizations like DSC and the mediocre work of SCI, the fact also remains that neither organization can serve as an apparently impartial, independent, and trusted spokesperson to our cause. Those who are undecided or soft in their anti-hunting sentiment are not going to be wooed by an organization that appears a sop to hunters, lacking in any scientific objectivity – and the latter is how we have to fight this battle.

Gentlemen, I’m on your side, but on this issue I take issue. We need to redefine the debate and inextricably tie hunting to conservation and science, and that can only be done on the scale necessary by allying ourselves to a new, non-partisan, non-political, non-profit research organization advocating for the imperative of preserving hunting as an essential conservation tool. If, on the other hand, we throw our support and money at the NRA or a safari club to lobby and protect our hunting heritage, I’m afraid we will have lost the war before the next big battle is fought.

Oh, and Happy New Year to all of you!


I guess you didn't see the following Gallup poll:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/186...ajority-support.aspx

You might not have the same opinions if you sat in the HLF meetings as I did.


I also suspect that as Obama begins his effort to push the gun control noodle uphill, attitudes regarding the NRA may well further shift to the positive. The fact that it is Obama doing it and that he is doing it without Congress, and doing it in the face of the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, could easily cause more folks to gravitate to a position in sympathy with the NRA.


Mike
 
Posts: 21810 | Registered: 03 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Oh I rather enjoy being called stupid...

Jeff
 
Posts: 2857 | Location: FL | Registered: 18 September 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of fairgame
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by chuck375:
If we want to save the wildlife in Africa and our hunting traditions, it seems that we need to punish the consumer countries (China, etc.) who are consuming most of the poached ivory, tiger parts, etc. with effective economic sanctions (maybe a 5% tariff on all goods imported from those countries that goes to wildlife preservation?). Politically unpopular and also unpopular with the the many businesses that export to these countries but is there any reasonable alternative? Haven't they heard about Viagra?


How about this for a scenario:

You hunt a Lion and then legally sell the trophy to the Chinese to offset the cost of the safari?


ROYAL KAFUE LTD
Email - kafueroyal@gmail.com
Tel/Whatsapp (00260) 975315144
Instagram - kafueroyal
 
Posts: 9996 | Location: Zambia | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by fairgame:
quote:
Originally posted by chuck375:
If we want to save the wildlife in Africa and our hunting traditions, it seems that we need to punish the consumer countries (China, etc.) who are consuming most of the poached ivory, tiger parts, etc. with effective economic sanctions (maybe a 5% tariff on all goods imported from those countries that goes to wildlife preservation?). Politically unpopular and also unpopular with the the many businesses that export to these countries but is there any reasonable alternative? Haven't they heard about Viagra?


How about this for a scenario:

You hunt a Lion and then legally sell the trophy to the Chinese to offset the cost of the safari?


Cost of a lion hunt $50,000+

Value of lion bones, claws and teeth in SA market < $2,000
 
Posts: 820 | Location: Oklahoma | Registered: 05 March 2013Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of fairgame
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by AilsaWheels:
quote:
Originally posted by fairgame:
quote:
Originally posted by chuck375:
If we want to save the wildlife in Africa and our hunting traditions, it seems that we need to punish the consumer countries (China, etc.) who are consuming most of the poached ivory, tiger parts, etc. with effective economic sanctions (maybe a 5% tariff on all goods imported from those countries that goes to wildlife preservation?). Politically unpopular and also unpopular with the the many businesses that export to these countries but is there any reasonable alternative? Haven't they heard about Viagra?


How about this for a scenario:

You hunt a Lion and then legally sell the trophy to the Chinese to offset the cost of the safari?


Cost of a lion hunt $50,000+

Value of lion bones, claws and teeth in SA market < $2,000


$70,000 for Tiger remains in China. Black market.


ROYAL KAFUE LTD
Email - kafueroyal@gmail.com
Tel/Whatsapp (00260) 975315144
Instagram - kafueroyal
 
Posts: 9996 | Location: Zambia | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Safaris Botswana Bound
posted Hide Post
Where ever you go you hear this similar discussion , hunting is under real threat due to our lack of publicity ability - good publicity.

If we don't recreate ourselves I predict hunting in Africa will be a thing of the past in 10 years time.

Everything everybody is stating above is relevant and urgent.

Hunting under the name of "trophy hunting" is not acceptable to billions of people - yes people billions , so to fail to take this into our planning would be a bad idea.

Gun ownership is under just as much attack as Trophy hunting - all due to lack of informative information.

There are so many organizations and clubs - our effort and money is diluted.

Shane Mulhoney in a DSC magazine spoke about a need for a COALITION for CONSERVATION as far back as 2012 = I suggest this is the way forward

What we need is a Conference of Parties - a Coalition formed between all hunting and gun associations who can appoint a member to the BOARD - the goal to finance a global education program which can spread the good stories and good word in a language acceptable by the masses.

As a sideline we need to do something fast and this in mind includes the following
* Do away with the word TROPHY hunting - call it hunting full stop . Hunting has a positive conatation = trophy has a negative conatation.
* Do away with trophy awards - change it to awards for best conservator and educator awards these are the real hero's of hunting.
* Do away with practices that harm hunting such as canned lion hunting ( organizations must ban advertising in publicly available magazines ).

The Board of the Coalition should have experts on retainers paid to react immedaitly to any negative or contraversial media - rebuttal with facts and good stories. We have all seen how if you respond to blogs and facebook pages with the facts and information - the story dies and disappears.

The Coalition for Conservation
Conserving Wildlife and the Outdoors

Just a thought .
 
Posts: 473 | Location: Botswana | Registered: 29 October 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of fairgame
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:
Where ever you go you hear this similar discussion , hunting is under real threat due to our lack of publicity ability - good publicity.

If we don't recreate ourselves I predict hunting in Africa will be a thing of the past in 10 years time.

Everything everybody is stating above is relevant and urgent.

Hunting under the name of "trophy hunting" is not acceptable to billions of people - yes people billions , so to fail to take this into our planning would be a bad idea.

Gun ownership is under just as much attack as Trophy hunting - all due to lack of informative information.

There are so many organizations and clubs - our effort and money is diluted.

Shane Mulhoney in a DSC magazine spoke about a need for a COALITION for CONSERVATION as far back as 2012 = I suggest this is the way forward

What we need is a Conference of Parties - a Coalition formed between all hunting and gun associations who can appoint a member to the BOARD - the goal to finance a global education program which can spread the good stories and good word in a language acceptable by the masses.

As a sideline we need to do something fast and this in mind includes the following
* Do away with the word TROPHY hunting - call it hunting full stop . Hunting has a positive conatation = trophy has a negative conatation.
* Do away with trophy awards - change it to awards for best conservator and educator awards these are the real hero's of hunting.
* Do away with practices that harm hunting such as canned lion hunting ( organizations must ban advertising in publicly available magazines ).

The Board of the Coalition should have experts on retainers paid to react immedaitly to any negative or contraversial media - rebuttal with facts and good stories. We have all seen how if you respond to blogs and facebook pages with the facts and information - the story dies and disappears.

The Coalition for Conservation
Conserving Wildlife and the Outdoors

Just a thought .


Sounds good and just how do we do that? Trouble is that once this thread is bumped to the second page much of we have discussed will be forgotten.


ROYAL KAFUE LTD
Email - kafueroyal@gmail.com
Tel/Whatsapp (00260) 975315144
Instagram - kafueroyal
 
Posts: 9996 | Location: Zambia | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:

Hunting under the name of "trophy hunting" is not acceptable to billions of people - yes people billions , so to fail to take this into our planning would be a bad idea.

Billions??? Slight exaggeration there... billions of people in the world don't give a crap - they are too busy putting food on the table.


A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life
Hunt Australia - Website
Hunt Australia - Facebook
Hunt Australia - TV


 
Posts: 4456 | Location: Australia | Registered: 23 January 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
After reading this I don't think a new organization is needed. Support is what is needed. Is sci perfect? No, but at 50k they are still a voice heard in Washington. They are for hunting. If you don't like some of the things that they do join the fight and fix them. Getting the younger generations to join anything is hard they donnot see it as a bennifit to them immediately. How do you get them more involved. You need to appeal to their level. Our chapter has started to focus on hunts that the younger crowds appeal to at our fund raiser. We also support some youth functions and events. Could you imagine the voice of sci or DSC if they were 2,3,4,5 million strong. Organizations have to understand that the younger generations won't spend 65 bucks a year to join much of anything with all the technology we have save the paper send magizines by email. Hopefully we can figure out how we can converge and fight as a team instead of the rogue warrior. I could care less about awards for who shot what. But some guys do and I will travel to Vegas to watch my friend receive his award next month at sci because he earned it and at 82 years old this is a highlight in his life. Its about support. Start somewhere thanks hoytshooter.
 
Posts: 39 | Registered: 12 March 2015Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hoytshooter:
After reading this I don't think a new organization is needed. Support is what is needed. Is sci perfect? No, but at 50k they are still a voice heard in Washington. They are for hunting. If you don't like some of the things that they do join the fight and fix them. Getting the younger generations to join anything is hard they donnot see it as a bennifit to them immediately. How do you get them more involved. You need to appeal to their level. Our chapter has started to focus on hunts that the younger crowds appeal to at our fund raiser. We also support some youth functions and events. Could you imagine the voice of sci or DSC if they were 2,3,4,5 million strong. Organizations have to understand that the younger generations won't spend 65 bucks a year to join much of anything with all the technology we have save the paper send magizines by email. Hopefully we can figure out how we can converge and fight as a team instead of the rogue warrior. I could care less about awards for who shot what. But some guys do and I will travel to Vegas to watch my friend receive his award next month at sci because he earned it and at 82 years old this is a highlight in his life. Its about support. Start somewhere thanks hoytshooter.


Sorry but SCI is the Poster Child that anti-hunters use as a whipping toy for all that is wrong with Big Game hunting. On some of their points it is hard to disagree.

Jeff
 
Posts: 2857 | Location: FL | Registered: 18 September 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
You are so right. Those awards are problematic.
 
Posts: 12122 | Location: Orlando, FL | Registered: 26 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of boarkiller
posted Hide Post
So true with the awards
Just have point system with bronze silver and gold and be done with it
For personal satisfaction/use
Have a score book for comparison and that should be enough


" Until the day breaks and the nights shadows flee away " Big ivory for my pillow and 2.5% of Neanderthal DNA flowing thru my veins.
When I'm ready to go, pack a bag of gunpowder up my ass and strike a fire to my pecker, until I squeal like a boar.
Yours truly , Milan The Boarkiller - World according to Milan
PS I have big boar on my floor...but it ain't dead, just scared to move...

Man should be happy and in good humor until the day he dies...
Only fools hope to live forever
“ Hávamál”
 
Posts: 13376 | Location: In mountains behind my house hunting or drinking beer in Blacksmith Brewery in Stevensville MT or holed up in Lochsa | Registered: 27 December 2012Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by larryshores:
You are so right. Those awards are problematic.
What about the DSC - HSC awards?

As for Trophy Hunting' .... IMO non-hunters need to be educated what 'trophy hunting' is actually about - that it is just a part of 'Conservation Hunting', that it comes with sound scientific backing. It will be far easier to influence the masses than to completely reconstruct a massive worldwide industry - that the participants will NEVER find agreement on!!!

We cant even propose serious alternatives to the terminology - there isnt any!!

Wikipedia seems to be the current source of all knowledge Roll Eyes - there it is though right there - you can edit it yourselves and influence the masses!! Millions of school children and Internet commentators will thank you!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_hunting


A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life
Hunt Australia - Website
Hunt Australia - Facebook
Hunt Australia - TV


 
Posts: 4456 | Location: Australia | Registered: 23 January 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Matt:

Do either of those organizations publish a huge magazine with all the awards they are selling ? Do either of those spend multiple evenings handing out the awards?
 
Posts: 12122 | Location: Orlando, FL | Registered: 26 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by larryshores:
Matt:

Do either of those organizations publish a huge magazine with all the awards they are selling ? Do either of those spend multiple evenings handing out the awards?
Yep that's right Larry - they all hand out lots of awards. SCI is a much larger international organisation of course and yes they (SCI) do take their awards a little too seriously...


A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life
Hunt Australia - Website
Hunt Australia - Facebook
Hunt Australia - TV


 
Posts: 4456 | Location: Australia | Registered: 23 January 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Hi folks,

I am not an american so I might get this wrong. But looking at internationl hunting as a hobby and a sport from outside the US, I must say that I often wonder about the way things are discussed. That might be because the international hunting society consist of a large number of US Hunters. However I do not want to offend anyone, but I cannot help asking why the future of internatonal trophy hunting is dicussed almost entirely out of SCI, NRA and the US Constitution ( 2nd Amendment ) ?

I think that Arjun has a point that NRA is connected to the US Constitution and the right for US Citizens to carry a gun. Does this have anything to do with hunting in itself ? The SCI is based on bagging the biggest trophy possible ! Is this good for hunting as a hobby and sport ?

I think a new organization would be great, but should be based on other incentives. The AR thread showing the article from Autralia saying something about Trophy Hunting is maybe a signal. International Hunters should join a New organization that emphasize more the hunt itself, paying a fixed amount to specific organizations to concerve, to the operation of Parks & Scouts, Camp Fire or any other approved Programs. Meat should be taken care of etc etc..

Maybe the whole discussion is about how to organize it. I see understand that issue... but making one organization in the US for just US Hunters would not be any good idea in my opinion. And I think it is about time we get rid of the word Trophy...


In good meaning,
Morten


The more I know, the less I wonder !
 
Posts: 1144 | Location: Oslo area, Norway | Registered: 26 June 2013Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Hunting  Hop To Forums  African Big Game Hunting    Is it time for a new organisation???!!!

Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia

Since January 8 1998 you are visitor #: