quote:

Originally posted by Dave Fulson:
Lane, no FU coming from me brother. Far from. I know you and I, and Larry, and the rest of the AR family want the same thing. We are ALL Disappointed with Trump's reversal of the science based decision of his own USF&W policies findings. Look, I'm not going to vote DEM for GOD sake, but I am praying for another choice in the GOP ticket that is more in line with my values, wishes, conservation ideas, and has the feel of a true leader of this nation, not the rich kid on the playground. I was there at his NRA speech last year, and he put the defense of hunting right up there with protection of 2nd ammendment issues. He miserably failed, if not outright lied to us in this, his first test on the issue. Like it or not, that is the fact. And that is why Trump, not the GOP, has my ire at the moment. Not giving up, or in by a long shot, but do not like being lied to.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
No one seems to want to touch the underlying cause for Trump's decision... government corruption.

Should trophy hunters care that their trophy fees are going to purchase Mercedes and estates and not to conservation? And if they do care, how is continuing the madness helping to stop the madness?

Are we conservationist first or just trophy collectors?

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
No one seems to want to touch the underlying cause for Trump's decision... government corruption.

Should trophy hunters care that their trophy fees are going to purchase Mercedes and estates and not to conservation? And if they do care, how is continuing the madness helping to stop the madness?

Are we conservationist first or just trophy collectors?

quote:

Originally posted by Kaboku68:
Trump and Trump enterprises owns Hunting Legends a very high end safari company. He can not in the present climate do anything that will increase the profit of one of his businesses. The Democrats would impeach him for imposing executive actions that would personally increase profits for his business.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Why did Trump agree to be interviewed by Morgan, a mouth foaming ARA, in the first place?? And he basically lambasted Zincke, “ very highly placed individual “ in the administration for the decision to resume importation.....

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Why did Trump agree to be interviewed by Morgan, a mouth foaming ARA, in the first place?? And he basically lambasted Zincke, “ very highly placed individual “ in the administration for the decision to resume importation.....

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Hit them in the wallet to get their attention.

Trump's decision MUST include direct talks with African nations for them to reform and put the money back into conservation. There is little secret that more than a few government officials are up to their necks in the illegal trade of ivory, lion bones, and rhino. Others are simply pocketing fees. This needs to stop now.

The pressure must come from the hunting community to push the Administration to correct the problem rather than simply banning imports. Banning imports isn't going to correct corrupt behaviour in Africa. It's going to take spotlighting the corrupt individuals, and then going on a full-scale political and social media campaign to either force them from office or stop pilfering conservation dollars.

We as a community need to demand transparency in the countries we support. Granted places like Zim will continue to be black holes where no information or cooperation will come, however, there are other countries that would comply if they were exposed and pressure applied.

At the end of the day, NGOs are doing the heavy lifting when it comes to conservation in most areas of Africa and hunting operators pick up the rest. So the ban is not having a negative impact at the ground level - yet. But both operators and government officials need to be A LOT more forthcoming on their commitment to conservation. Unfortunately, I see a lot of talk and very little action.

Maybe this will be the watershed moment to turn anger and frustration into action. Trump has two son who could be doing a lot to pressure some much needed political might into the discussion. Something good can come from this, but it's going to take the hunting community to see it through.

quote:

One massive problem is that your local guy who hunts deer for meat does not see this as a threat to them. They are so wrong. This is just a first step. It is easier to go after the elephants than deer. Trust me the ARA people know this.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

One massive problem is that your local guy who hunts deer for meat does not see this as a threat to them. They are so wrong. This is just a first step. It is easier to go after the elephants than deer. Trust me the ARA people know this.

Well, you are partially correct, but the point people on here especially the Americans have trouble in comprehending is that they really do not represent the mind set or beliefs of the average American Hunter.

Lots of "your Local guy who hunts deer for meat" really do not understand why some folks want to hunt elephant/lion/rhino/leopard/giraffe or hippo for that matter!

They can understand hunting Cape Buffalo and most of the Plains Game, but as far as caring about a segment of the American population that is able to spend as much or more on one safari than the majority of Americans annual income, you are going to be hard pressed to get any support.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
No one seems to want to touch the underlying cause for Trump's decision... government corruption.

Should trophy hunters care that their trophy fees are going to purchase Mercedes and estates and not to conservation? And if they do care, how is continuing the madness helping to stop the madness?

Are we conservationist first or just trophy collectors?

quote:

How much meat does an elephant or buffalo provide. Ever gardener and farmer knows how a deer herd can decimate the crop. Now imagine if that deer weighed 6 1/2 tons, and all you hand to sustain yourself was that corn patch.

That is the plight of rural Africans. It is a observation most open minded meat hunters understand.

Africa and big game hunting is meat hunting.

If average meat hunters cannot understand that it is because we as big game hunters are not messaging correctly or practicing ethical and sustainable hunting to stand upon.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

How much meat does an elephant or buffalo provide. Ever gardener and farmer knows how a deer herd can decimate the crop. Now imagine if that deer weighed 6 1/2 tons, and all you hand to sustain yourself was that corn patch.

That is the plight of rural Africans. It is a observation most open minded meat hunters understand.

Africa and big game hunting is meat hunting.

If average meat hunters cannot understand that it is because we as big game hunters are not messaging correctly or practicing ethical and sustainable hunting to stand upon.

What you and others on here are not understanding is that few Americans are "Meat Hunters" any more, the vast majority are Trophy Hunters, why do you think "Canned/High Fence" trophy deer hunting operations are thriving in America or had you noticed that?

Things have changed in America as far as hunting is concerned. The majority of American Hunters have became Trophy Hunters that spend a lot of money leasing land with any consideration about meat being far down on their list of priorities.

quote:

I know you do not want to hunt international because you cannot bring meat home. This is a selfish and narrow view point

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
No one seems to want to touch the underlying cause for Trump's decision... government corruption.

Should trophy hunters care that their trophy fees are going to purchase Mercedes and estates and not to conservation? And if they do care, how is continuing the madness helping to stop the madness?

Are we conservationist first or just trophy collectors?

O1,
While all of us that spend time there know what you say above is 100% correct...what Opus1 posted is 100% correct. Boy that is a turn around
...I am not sure how we combat corruption in African government as hunters...except by abstaining...which is also bad for wildlife.

But I am all ears.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Here is the real problem:

The Democrats are almost 100% unified against hunting...especially iconic species of Africa hunting.

When you go to GOP fundraisers even in municipalities in Texas like Dallas...GOP leadership is just about 50/50 split on hunting iconic Africa species...elephant for sure. I see it regularly.

Lane

I think you might see that 50/50 split at Ducks Unlimited, Billfish foundation, and other hunting and fishing organizations too. The death of an elephant or lion is tough to sell in the public opinion marketing sense regardless of the scientific evidence.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Crazyhorse: I am not trying to be disrespectful, but you do realize your last two statements/post are opposed to one another. Either the majority are meat deer hunters or they are trophy hunters. Not just trophy hunters, but high fence shooters according to you.

Most hunters would identify as meat hunters surveys from hunting organizations have identified that. But no deer meat hunter will pass up on a 12 point. My father hunted all his life and never killed a deer. He was so proud when I brought in my first deer a broken 2 year old ten point buck.

He and I grew up eating groundhogs and squirrels. He bought me my first magizibe about hunting Cape buffalo.

He was not professionally or traditionally educated. He envyed no man material wealth, and could understood a 6 1/2 ton pig as nothing more than a nuisance. He would not support their extermination, but was fine with their management.

I know the message of ethical fair chase hunting and big game hunting is meat hunting can reach the average deer hunter and non hunter. I made this argument to a new paralegal. She was ranting about elephants when I pointed out the deer analogy. She understood because she dislikes deer in her corn patch.

That is my second issue with President Trump. He does not have the knowledge or political responsibility to make the argument. I believe he lied to us and presented to us that he would make the argument.

Corruption or not, the ban will kill more elephants than regulated hunting.

I know you do not want to hunt international because you cannot bring meat home. This is a selfish and narrow view point. The game exits on the hill because of hunting without hunting the hill would be a open pit rock quarry, housing, or grazing.

I agree with the posts that if President Trump was truly concerned about corruption than bring Zimbabwe to the table. Send Fish and Wildlife professionals to Zimbabwe to verify and identify areas of concern. Incentivize by placing data driven goals.

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Opus1:
No one seems to want to touch the underlying cause for Trump's decision... government corruption.

Should trophy hunters care that their trophy fees are going to purchase Mercedes and estates and not to conservation? And if they do care, how is continuing the madness helping to stop the madness?

Are we conservationist first or just trophy collectors?

O1,
While all of us that spend time there know what you say above is 100% correct...what Opus1 posted is 100% correct. Boy that is a turn around
...I am not sure how we combat corruption in African government as hunters...except by abstaining...which is also bad for wildlife.

But I am all ears.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

Eagle 27,
The bottom line is this: I would bet my bottom dollar that Lacy has done more for conservation of threatened species than you could likely do in 3 lifetimes.

He does not need a lecture on “how to do it right” from you...and...is a salt of the earth human being.

I will leave it at that.

Wow you haven't bitten Opus1's head off but you sure got the pip and took mine off when I was asking the same question in the discussion on the endangered white rhino trophy. Some of you guys just don't get it. You'll be still claiming your democratic right to do as you want and hunt as you want when hunting is shut down for good. So Lacy spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for the privilege of shooting a white rhino and trying to import it back for his museum and as a result kicked up a very public shit fight and played right into the hands of the antis. Now you admit that what Opus1 says is 100% correct and all you guys who spend time in Africa know that most of the so called hunters conservation money goes in corruption, didn't I say that?
So are you conservationists first or just trophy hunters?

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Opus1:
No one seems to want to touch the underlying cause for Trump's decision... government corruption.

Should trophy hunters care that their trophy fees are going to purchase Mercedes and estates and not to conservation? And if they do care, how is continuing the madness helping to stop the madness?

Are we conservationist first or just trophy collectors?

O1,
While all of us that spend time there know what you say above is 100% correct...what Opus1 posted is 100% correct. Boy that is a turn around
...I am not sure how we combat corruption in African government as hunters...except by abstaining...which is also bad for wildlife.

But I am all ears.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

Eagle 27,
The bottom line is this: I would bet my bottom dollar that Lacy has done more for conservation of threatened species than you could likely do in 3 lifetimes.

He does not need a lecture on “how to do it right” from you...and...is a salt of the earth human being.

I will leave it at that.

Wow you haven't bitten Opus1's head off but you sure got the pip and took mine off when I was asking the same question in the discussion on the endangered white rhino trophy. Some of you guys just don't get it. You'll be still claiming your democratic right to do as you want and hunt as you want when hunting is shut down for good. So Lacy spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for the privilege of shooting a white rhino and trying to import it back for his museum and as a result kicked up a very public shit fight and played right into the hands of the antis. Now you admit that what Opus1 says is 100% correct and all you guys who spend time in Africa know that most of the so called hunters conservation money goes in corruption, didn't I say that?
So are you conservationists first or just trophy hunters?

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Parks charge for access and that makes up most of their budget. Most still operate at somewhat of a deficit, however, NGOs and government funds help balance the books. But when there is not enough fuel to operate generators and vehicles, I would suggest that much more is needed.

However, the fees in question are trophy fees and hunting revnies that flow through the hands of government folks. There seems to be a serious leak somewhere as funds evaporate before reaching ground level conservation work in most countries.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
No matter what Zimbabwe does, Trump has decided he does not like hunting.

As someone already mentioned, even Obama was not as obnoxious in his announcement as this idiot has!

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
How about President Trump's administration trying to enact a compact that 80 percent ( pick whatever number North of 50 you want)of all funds from a single elephant remain in the community the elephant was hunted.

Of the Governments 20 percent, 5 goes directly to Parks of that 5 three and a half most pay for anti poaching officers including training.

The 80 percent that stays with the outfitter a number say 10 percent after cost must be spent on habitat improvement. This could include remove snares, and 10 percent is either divided among rurals in/or adjacent to the hunting block (provided the hunt is on a concession/not private land), or must be used for community infrastructure.

I would like to see a reg that for every elephant in a concession X number of anti poaching officers are employed in that area.

You could be expand these numbers to other species to make the numbers work. The records from these activities are the hard data we need to argue/prove up hunting.

Yes, Fish and Wildlife would have to be on the ground/in country to verify/ audit the Government's numbers. If Zimbabwe falls below certain goals, it would lose the US market.

Somehow you would need to be able to record/ document herd growth in a concession as well. DSC, SCI (with all their big money), NRA should then fund a peer reviewed/University study of hunting its benefits or lack there of.

Such a scheme is not popular. I think most on here would decry it has eco-imperialism. However, assuming President Trump is right about corruption, it is the only way I can think of to address the issue. The US is the largest market, Zimbabwe as provider of the good should have to satisfy its biggest customer to obtain its business.

I said when this started, I did not trust Zimbabwe's numbers concerning elephants.

Corruption and the latest post about the Tanzanian Outfit supporting a poaching syndicate would explain how the hunting/conservation model was overwhelmed as it relates to Elephants in TZ.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
No matter what Zimbabwe does, Trump has decided he does not like hunting.

As someone already mentioned, even Obama was not as obnoxious in his announcement as this idiot has!

quote:

Their attitude is "if I don't do it, others should not either".