Full Story
08.11.2010
Hobatere’s ‘Old Boy’ killed
By: JANA-MARI SMITH

THE death of a second collared lion within the last five months has shocked the Namibian tourism and conservation community. The killing of the black-maned lion, logged as XPL-20, but affectionately nicknamed ‘Old Boy’, comes five months after the collared lion Leonardo was illegally shot by professional hunter Keith Wright.
Dr Flip Stander, renowned lion researcher, states on his website (www.desertlion.info) that “in the wake of the shooting of Leonardo, this is a big blow to the lion population and to tourism in Namibia”.
Stander stresses that Old Boy was “not a problem lion”. Stander says his death is a tremendous loss to Namibia’s lion research archives and tourism. “He was massively important, not only to conservation, but to tourism too,” Stander said.
Old Boy is estimated by many to have been the most frequently seen lion in Namibia and attracted thousands of visitors to Hobatere Lodge during the past five years.
The 10-year-old lion was killed last month during a trophy hunt in the Ehirovipuka Conservancy, on the western border of the Etosha National Park.
Steve Braine, owner of the Hobatere concession and lodge, who has worked closely with Stander in collecting data on Old Boy, said last week that “the whole conservancy was 100 per cent aware that the lion was collared”.
Louise Braine, co-owner of the concession and lodge, added that eventually, when he was old, they would have called in a hunter.
“But not now, in his prime,” she said.
Speaking to a conservancy member, The Namibian was told that the conservancy has a strict no-shoot policy when it comes to collared animals.
However, the hunters did conduct a legal hunt insofar as they were in possession of the necessary permits, he said. He added that the concession is N$75 000 richer from the trophy hunt.
The Ministry of Environment and Tourism confirmed last week that the lion was shot legally, though questions have been raised regarding the shooting of the particularly well-known Hobatere collared lion.
“Our hands are tied because they had a permit. But we want to know why they shot that particular animal,” a ministry official said yesterday on condition of anonymity.
The trophy hunt was led by South Africans Peter Thormalen and Phillip Fourie, who owns the hunting rights in the concession. Both Thormalen and Fourie refused to speak to The Namibian. Thormalen advised the newspaper to “contact my lawyer”.
The local professional hunter hired by Thormalen and Fourie to act as the hunting guide, as they themselves do not have permission to shoot professionally in the country, was Jan du Plessis of Sebra Hunting Safaris located near Kamanjab.
Du Plessis claimed that the hunting party did not notice the collar until the lion was dead.
The chairperson of the conservancy, Asser Ujah, charged that the lion was lured to the hunters while they were waiting to shoot a leopard. He claimed that the hunters “put out meat for the leopard” but instead lured the collared lion.
Ujah alleged that “the lion came quickly, tried to attack them” and was shot as a result.
Du Plessis did not mention an attempted lion attack when he spoke to The Namibian, emphasising that “there was nothing illegal about the hunt. I had a permit”.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What's wrong with shooting a collared lion anyway? As long as it is a mature animal, in a hunting area by its own wanderings and properly permitted then IMO it is perfectly ethical to do so. Any legitimate scientific study should include data on how many free ranging lions wander into hunting areas and then legally killed. I know the bunny huggers don't like it, but they hate us anyway.

I wonder what they think this kind of publicity is going to do for their business?


The trophy hunt was led by South Africans Peter Thormalen and Phillip Fourie, who owns the hunting rights in the concession. Both Thormalen and Fourie refused to speak to The Namibian. Thormalen advised the newspaper to “contact my lawyer”.

The local professional hunter hired by Thormalen and Fourie to act as the hunting guide, as they themselves do not have permission to shoot professionally in the country, was Jan du Plessis of Sebra Hunting Safaris located near Kamanjab.



Cheers,

~ Alan

I totally agree with BigBoreCore. How does slapping a collar on an animal elevate it to sacred cow status?

Conservation is about preserving habitat and ensuring sustainable populations. Unfortunately, the world has come to believe that a conservationist is a treehugging vegetarian antihunter, who will never be satisfied until every "wild" animal on the planet has a radio collar, an ear tag, a cute name and a tranquilizer dart stuck in its ass.

John

BigBoreCore & jwm,

I agree with what you are saying in normal lion habitat, but these lions were prime breeding stock in an area where the lion population is very weak. If they were past their breeding prime, it would have been the right thing to do, from a game management point of view.

It may have been legal, but the ethics of killing these lions are extremely doubtful in my opinion.

Namibian wildlife authorities should take action to protect fragile lion populations and set some guidelines about what lions can be shot or not, with a eye towards increasing their numbers.

Cheers,

~ Alan

It is a PH's nightmare I would think. Since we do not know the details of what this PH and/or group knew it is impossible to comment one way or another about this specific instance. I can relate to almost shooting a collard ele in Bots which is a ticket to big problems. It was near dark and we were looking at ivory in thick mopane and not to see if it had a collar. Luckily we saw it but I just can't imagine a nice maned lion and how a collar could be visible at all. In Bots a PH is finished if he takes a collard anything. I don't think I would shoot something collard but have no problem if someone else does provided it is legal.

quote:

What's wrong with shooting a collared lion anyway? As long as it is a mature animal, in a hunting area by its own wanderings and properly permitted then IMO it is perfectly ethical to do so. Any legitimate scientific study should include data on how many free ranging lions wander into hunting areas and then then legally killed. I know the bunny huggers don't like it, but they hate us anyway.

+1

Could not agree more.

Alan,

I don't think you can ask any more of a PH or hunter other than having a legal permit in a legal hunting area and taking a mature lion. This lion was apparently 10 years old and by itself. It sounds to me like it was past it's breeding age, but nobody can know for sure. Presumably, the Namibian game department would not issue permits if they thought it was endangering the sustainability of lions in a particular area in the first place. If any game department doesn't want any collared animal to be shot then they should have a clear policy making it illegal. I don't think the Safari Company or the hunter did anything the least bit unethical.

If this is a fragile population then I totally agree that the hunt was inappropriate. However, if I were looking for a lion hunt, and saw one advertised by a reputable outfitter and conducted by a reputable PH, I would naturally assume that the population in question was healthy and could support a limited quota. I would probably check into it a bit further, but didn't before posting my comments simply because I am not in a position to do a hunt like this.

No offence intended, but I would also do some research before taking your word (or anyone else's) for it that there is a problem in this area. Again, not being in a position to spend this kind of money relieves me of that responsibility.

Finally, if an area cannot support a quota on lions, then shooting any lions is unsupportable. If a quota is reasonable, then fire away...but in either case, I don't see how the issue of a collar (apparently difficult to see) enters into it.

Again, I'm not trying to offend or start another infamous AR pissing match...just thinking out loud...

John

Edited to add: Sorry, BigBoreCore, you had already beat me to the punch by the time I pecked out my reply.

At least they didn't shoot it from a truck!


Besides, a radio collar is also known as a transmitter of a signal to pinpoint the location of a particular (mature/trophy) Lion. Here's to technology at its' best. Next thing, we collar them all and promote the 24 hour DG Hunt.


Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
At least they didn't shoot it from a truck!


Besides, a radio collar is also known as a transmitter of a signal to pinpoint the location of a particular (mature/trophy) Lion. Here's to technology at its' best. Next thing, we collar them all and promote the 24 hour DG Hunt.


Rich

Or every country makes shooting a collared animal illegal with the result of Bunny Huggers putting collars on every animal they possibly can.

I hear what you all are saying and I agree with your points. A collar doesn't automatically give a lion some special status, but these aren't run of the mill lions. If you have $75K to drop on a lion hunt, why not go where there are plenty of them?

These folks at Desert Lion Conservation aren't tree huggers, and the desert lions need better protection that the Namibian government is giving them.

The impact of male-biased mortality on the population structure of desert-adapted lions in Namibia

"The major cause of mortality in the lion population between 1999 and 2010 was the killing (by local people during HLC) and trophy hunting of adult and sub-adult lions. Male lions were particularly vulnerable and contribute to >80% of the recorded mortalities.

The regularity, especially since 2004, at which male lions were shot or hunted, and the selection of adult males for trophy hunting, have resulted in a significant reduction of males in the population. It also contributed to vastly different age-specific mortality rates between males and females, that serves to illustrated the negative impact on the population.

Increasingly skewed sex ratios, favouring females, have reached critical levels (2010 - 1F : 0.18 M). Six of the nine major prides are currently without a pride male.

The long-term viability of the Desert lion population has been compromised by the excessive killing of adult and sub-adult males. There is an urgent need to adapt the management and utilisation strategies relating to lions, if the long-term conservation of the species in the Kunene were to be secured.

Cheers,

~ Alan

From a personal point of view, I would not knowingly shoot any animal that is collared.

I think we are doing ourselves a great disservice by shooting an animal that is being part of a research project.

Not according to a very large percentage of the AR Sportsmen. They are okay with killing anything you can from a truck.

Rich

Alan,

You have made some good points with the findings of the relevant research you cited. However, a visiting hunter would not know this and must rely on the Game department to make policy based on sound wildlife management principles. If we don't have faith in their abilities then we could never hunt anywhere.

Saeed,

Wouldn't having an official policy of not shooting collared animals cause skewed research findings with the number of lions being shot by hunters to be underreported? This might actually lead to too many lion permits being issued.

I hunted leopard (unsuccessfully)in this concession (Ehirovipuka Conservancy) in 2004 when Vaughan Fulton had it. I was told that there was a chance of problems lions coming in that could be legally shot, but was never presented with the opportunity. The Herero there have cattle, goats, donkeys and horses that occassionally get taken by lions coming out of Etosha. According to Vaughan the locals prefer just to kill the lions and have no sympathy for their sustainability. I doubt if they report their kills to the game department.

I know it's complicated, but so much of science is politicized and tainted by the quest for grants and contributions that results can also be tainted. Being ruthlessly unemotional is the way to find out what really happens and that would include shooting a collared lion.

Cheers,

Mike

I would wager that this was a problem lion hunt.

The collar is no protection for a problem lion. It is rather a badge of his dubious status.

Problem lions in this area of Namibia kill cattle outside Etosha National Park. Repeatedly and often. They will sometimes attack cattle herders.

The MET are sometimes able to tranquilize the offender, by spot lighting him over a kill in the middle of the night, and approaching and darting him at close range.

Not work for the faint of heart.

After the lion has been tranked, a collar is sometimes placed around his neck to track him.

This is done as a preliminary matter, prior to relocating him deep inside the national park.

Then, if the lion returns to cattle killing outside the park, his infraction can be scientifically verified.

When that happens, the lion is declared a problem lion, a permit is issued, and he may be hunted.

The funds from the hunt go to the government, and the locals.

The lion's collar is very nearly invisible.

I have first hand knowledge of all of this, as I killed a collared lion north of Etosha a few years ago. It was not easy. These animals are wary and difficult to hunt.

We are not talking about "research" animals here - not by the time they are declared problem lions. We are talking about elusive yet effective predators of domestic animals.

And ten years old is quite old for a lion. If they get to be that age, or much older, they are generally run out of the pride.

This case in question involves a well known Lion and probably a dominant pride male. At his age he has not many years left in the wild. However considering the circumstances and the history of the Lion it is my opinion that he should not have been hunted.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Not according to a very large percentage of the AR Sportsmen. They are okay with killing anything you can from a truck.

Rich

Rich,

It would really be nice if you would stop this "hollier than thou" attitude.

You seem to have a problem with lots of things other hunters do.

It is OK if you don't agree with them, and tio let them know your own opinion, but to persist in trying to ram your own version of what hunting should be is wrong.

There should be one proviso to the shooting of collared animals and that is that the collar be fixed to the mount!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Not according to a very large percentage of the AR Sportsmen. They are okay with killing anything you can from a truck.

Rich

Rich,

It would really be nice if you would stop this "hollier than thou" attitude.

You seem to have a problem with lots of things other hunters do.

It is OK if you don't agree with them, and tio let them know your own opinion, but to persist in trying to ram your own version of what hunting should be is wrong.

I nominate Saeed's post for post of the year

quote:

Originally posted by Grafton:

quote:

What's wrong with shooting a collared lion anyway? As long as it is a mature animal, in a hunting area by its own wanderings and properly permitted then IMO it is perfectly ethical to do so. Any legitimate scientific study should include data on how many free ranging lions wander into hunting areas and then then legally killed. I know the bunny huggers don't like it, but they hate us anyway.

+1

Could not agree more.

So its ok to shoot a Sable with a green or red tag in the ear?

Collared animals should not be hunted and in general there is an unwritten understanding amongst ph's and scientists in Namibia.

One of the points of contention from some ph's is, that there are individual animals being collared to "prevent" the animal from being hunted. This raises the question that if the individual animal does not wander far out of its territory or a limited range what scientific value does it offer?

MET (ministry of environment and tourism) are the only authority who declare problem animals and the animal may be collared.

In this particular area I (opinion) do question the trophy quota that is approved as there is not even' a resident pride/population of lion.
This quota is based on lion movements only, be it from Etosha, the desert in the west and or the lions from Hobatere.
Allan Bunn makes a good point, it just doesn't do hunters and or the hunting industry any favours with the negative publicity.

quote:

So its ok to shoot a Sable with a green or red tag in the ear?

There are tagged buffalo in a part of the east Caprivi, they are free ranging between Botswana and Namibia..................

It may be legally correct.But, how does exercising that right helps hunting community in this instance?All the bad publicity,government's hostile perspective,park officials' protest etc.It might have been prevented by making shooting collared animals illegal.That is a shortcoming of the officials.Making a decision to shoot the animal was a mistake by the PH,IMHO.Unless they could not see the collar.

Best-
Locksley,R.

The hunting of collared animals is not illegal in most countries but it certainly is not the right thing to do, as mentioned by other members - it fuels the anti hunting brigade and it does not win favour with research folks. In Botswana there is strong likelyhood that the shooting of collared animals has helped the authorities to close down hunting. I personaly think that this incident is going to have repercussions on Lion hunting. It is not impossible to shoot a collared animal but when one is shot the right thing to do is to make good with those bodies/organisations that were involved with the collaring - it happened in Botswana with a Leopard which was shot by mistake and even though it was legal the outfitter reported it quickly and worked with the research people to make good of the accident. All this points to the fact that although it is not illegal it certainly is not the right thing to do for our sport.

I reckon Graeme has it about right but I'll add that I can understand how infuriating it must be for the researchers who have more or less seen at least several years work go up in smoke.

Don't know if anyone else remembers the elephant that was GPS collared in Botswana a few years ago and slowly wandered all the way up to Congo and then got dropped in Mozambique by a South African PH when he was coming back.

All that data and research is now virtually no use at all.

If nothing else, it just ain't good manners!

Collar a nice looking old lion so that you can find it whenever you want and drive a lorry of tourist over to photograph it. The lodge was using the tracking collar to locate the lion for revenue generating purposes. Note the reference to "the most frequently seen lion in Namibia". The tourists get to claim a big five sighting and the lodge gets credit for taking them to it.

The "researchers" get to save a lion from being shot, or so they thought.

As a hunter I agree with shooting the lion legally. The collar does not, in this case, convey ownership to the researcher or the lodge.

Why should this lion only generate revenue for the tourism industry and not the hunting industry.

I suspect that many of the posters would enjoy hunting in a zoo. After all, just because an animal is in a zoo doesn't give it "sacred status"!
Why is it always South Africans" that one reads about in these incidents? Is it just that more South Africans own concession rights and also hunt more (as a percentage) than other nationalities?
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
I suspect that many of the posters would enjoy hunting in a zoo. After all, just because an animal is in a zoo doesn't give it "sacred status"!
Why is it always South Africans" that one reads about in these incidents? Is it just that more South Africans own concession rights and also hunt more (as a percentage) than other nationalities?
Peter.

One of the most idiotic statments I have ever read on the Accuratereloading.com forums.

shakari,


Can you post any links regarding the study you mentioned of the elephant that traveled from Botswana to Congo and the Mozambique?



Are there any other articles related to elephants traveling great distances?

thanks,


dale

I've got pictures of said lion, PH and hunter. Its a heavy maned lion and I could see in certain circumstances due to the long, thick hair how it may not have been seen depending where the collar rode on the lion. Who knows.

quote:

Originally posted by daleW:
shakari,


Can you post any links regarding the study you mentioned of the elephant that traveled from Botswana to Congo and the Mozambique?



Are there any other articles related to elephants traveling great distances?

thanks,


dale

Dale,

I don't know a helluva lot about it other than I think the researcher was (if I remember correctly) an American.

I was sent a pre-broadcast DVD called 'Elephants Without Borders' that told the story....... 'Fraid I can't remember who it was made for but my guess would be Nat Geo, Discovery or BBC and I'm sure you'd be able to find it on the net with a bit of searching.

It was a very interesting story the programme is well worth watching.

I am of the ideal that a collared animal should be left to whatever fate it meets. If the collar is put on for research purpose (the only logical reason to do so) then that animal being shot legally by a hunter should be valid information for that research. The animal being shot by a poacher is also valid information, albeit unfortunate.

The problem is, like all hunting, not everyone likes the idea of animals being killed. I can think of a few videos I've seen where a pride of lions is attacking a giraffe and (another video) a baby cape buffalo. You can hear the people filming comment about the poor buffalo, poor giraffe, and their elation when the animal escapes. I'm rooting for the lions since they are way more threatened than a giraffe or cape buffalo. Their failed hunt means some poor cub goes hungry. The general public doesn't think about the whole picture, they just focus on some poor animal is being attacked. The collared animal seems to affect more people and cause bigger waves because people feel an attachment to that specific animal. They took photos of him, or helped collar him, or he was the first X they saw in the wild, etc. When he gets shot it's like their dog was shot, they take it a bit more personally.

We as hunters don't need the publicity, because we all know how the media will spin the story. It's probably quite easy to pass up a collared impala, but it would be quite hard after lots of baiting, waiting, tracking, and money to pass on a big black maned lion because he has a collar (where it is legal shoot a collared animal, BTW).

Rather than turning the collar in, seems like it would be easier to just dart a hyena or something and make him the new owner of a tracking collar. (I'm not suggesting, just thinking out loud.)

From the original post, this lion had lost his fear of humans. He was used to seeing people and not being shot at. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't even supplement his diet from time to time with the ocasional buffalo, or zebra.

Tell me how shooting this particular lion differs from shooting a captive reared lion on a 250 thousand acre ranch in South Africa.

If I ever find myself looking through my scope at a collared animal that is a good mature trophy in a legal hunting area with proper permits and I have my PH's permission then I am pulling the trigger. I will cut off the collar and return it to it's owner with a note explaining the circumstances and the GPS coordinates. Whatever data has been collected to date on this animal is still good data and scientifically relevant. I believe returning the collar to it's owner should be mandatory.

If you read Mark & Delia Owen's book Cry of the Kalahari you will find that this regularly happened to the lions they tagged and was used by them in their research. Mark Owens was not against trophy hunting and thought of it as a good management tool as long as it was scientifically based.

quote:

I believe returning the collar to it's owner should be mandatory.

Isn't it? I thought the requirement was to return the collar to the Wildlife Commission so they can return it to the person who originally set the collar.

quote:

If I ever find myself looking through my scope at a collared animal that is a good mature trophy in a legal hunting area with proper permits and I have my PH's permission then I am pulling the trigger.

Here is where I differ. As in reference to the above statement...I would NOT.

That said however...I don't falt you for doing it or the guy who did.

And...It is gonna happen.

But...If saw it had a collar...I would let it walk. When I hunt...it is not about aquiring a trophy...but...all about the hunt. I would shoot it with my 35 mm however!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
From a personal point of view, I would not knowingly shoot any animal that is collared.

I think we are doing ourselves a great disservice by shooting an animal that is being part of a research project.

I completely agree.

quote:

All that data and research is now virtually no use at all.

why? how does the way he died ruin the data?

In the case of the elephant, they were probably (long term) GPS tracking him to find out how far he went and if it was a regular migratory cycle or just a one off etc and having studied that movement for a relatively long time, he was shot.

Therefore the end result of the study will never be known.

Although I've played small parts in a variety of research projects over the years, I'm still just a layman but to me, that's largely wasted research.

I know a farmer that shot a lioness with a collar after sunset when i asked him what if the owner of the lion comes mouning. he replied then i know who to charge for all the dead cattle