Imagine how bad life would be if everyone of us took violent actions to stop others doing things we don’t like!

What a sad situation the world is in now!

I think it is a shame that hunters feel the need to protect their identities while pursuing legal activities.
However, I wont criticize any hunter that does hide his identity, lots of the actions of the antis can be classified as terrorism and nobody needs to be persecuted by terrorists.

Many of them are also decent but ignorant folk.

One of my senior colleagues would every 3 months or so resuscitate the Mike Jines/Buzz Charlton tuskless photo on his Facebook. One day sitting in the doctor’s lounge I asked him for his e-mail address. He is basically a decent bloke, very interested in philosophy, nature and conservation but obviously clueless about trophy hunting.

Once I got a DAPU update I wrote him a short e-mail mentioning that I know both guys personally and that the Facebook persecution has caused both of them a lot of grief. On top of that both of them are as good men as you will find on this planet. I attached the DAPU quarterly report from CMS for him to read and explained that this was what was happening behind the scenes driven by this same person he was vilifying on social media.

He has never since resuscitated that photo and walks circles around the anti-hunting topic in the tearoom

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Imagine how bad life would be if everyone of us took violent actions to stop others doing things we don’t like!

What a sad situation the world is in now!

Indeed. And us hunters would do well to stop blaspheming each other over trivial matters.

quote:

Originally posted by Balule:
I think it is a shame that hunters feel the need to protect their identities while pursuing legal activities.
However, I wont criticize any hunter that does hide his identity, lots of the actions of the antis can be classified as terrorism and nobody needs to be persecuted by terrorists.

Many of them are also decent but ignorant folk.

One of my senior colleagues would every 3 months or so resuscitate the Mike Jines/Buzz Charlton tuskless photo on his Facebook. One day sitting in the doctor’s lounge I asked him for his e-mail address. He is basically a decent bloke, very interested in philosophy, nature and conservation but obviously clueless about trophy hunting.

Once I got a DAPU update I wrote him a short e-mail mentioning that I know both guys personally and that the Facebook persecution has caused both of them a lot of grief. On top of that both of them are as good men as you will find on this planet. I attached the DAPU quarterly report from CMS for him to read and explained that this was what was happening behind the scenes driven by this same person he was vilifying on social media.

He has never since resuscitated that photo and walks circles around the anti-hunting topic in the tearoom

Thanks for the kind remarks Martinus.

I can certainly appreciate more than most why someone would want their face blurred on a trophy picture posted on the Internet . . . or why they would insist that no picture be posted or that their name not be identified as connected to the picture. When the uproar resulted from the pictures Martinus mentioned, fortunately I was retired. I can virtually assure you that had I not been, as a C-suite executive at a Fortune 500 company, the odds of me being let go or having to resign would have been extremely high. For those that have professional positions that might put them at risk as a result of public pressure (from within the organization by fellow employees as well as outside the organization, including pressure put on clients or suppliers/customers of your business to stop doing business with you) I can certainly understand not posting or allowing pictures to be posted showing your face, giving your name or anything else that would possibly lead to someone identifying you. Whether that is right or wrong or whether it offends someone, etc., it is a reality of the world we live in. As someone said, it is not cowardice, it is prudence.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Balule:
I think it is a shame that hunters feel the need to protect their identities while pursuing legal activities.
However, I wont criticize any hunter that does hide his identity, lots of the actions of the antis can be classified as terrorism and nobody needs to be persecuted by terrorists.

Many of them are also decent but ignorant folk.

One of my senior colleagues would every 3 months or so resuscitate the Mike Jines/Buzz Charlton tuskless photo on his Facebook. One day sitting in the doctor’s lounge I asked him for his e-mail address. He is basically a decent bloke, very interested in philosophy, nature and conservation but obviously clueless about trophy hunting.

Once I got a DAPU update I wrote him a short e-mail mentioning that I know both guys personally and that the Facebook persecution has caused both of them a lot of grief. On top of that both of them are as good men as you will find on this planet. I attached the DAPU quarterly report from CMS for him to read and explained that this was what was happening behind the scenes driven by this same person he was vilifying on social media.

He has never since resuscitated that photo and walks circles around the anti-hunting topic in the tearoom

Thanks for the kind remarks Martinus.

I can certainly appreciate more than most why someone would want their face blurred on a trophy picture posted on the Internet . . . or why they would insist that no picture be posted or that their name not be identified as connected to the picture. When the uproar resulted from the pictures Martinus mentioned, fortunately I was retired. I can virtually assure you that had I not been, as a C-suite executive at a Fortune 500 company, the odds of me being let go or having to resign would have been extremely high. For those that have professional positions that might put them at risk as a result of public pressure (from within the organization by fellow employees as well as outside the organization, including pressure put on clients or suppliers/customers of your business to stop doing business with you) I can certainly understand not posting or allowing pictures to be posted showing your face, giving your name or anything else that would possibly lead to someone identifying you. Whether that is right or wrong or whether it offends someone, etc., it is a reality of the world we live in. As someone said, it is not cowardice, it is prudence.

Mike- -

Absolutely excellent post. I have never agreed with you more.

Right or wrong doesn't really matter anymore. It's all about crusaders and their current cause.

We live in a time where the left is pushing for a drag queens in every elementary school??? WTF?

Having an adult discussion as to the merits of Conservation thru Sport Hunting is a fools errand with these people.

How is right or wrong even part of these discussions anymore. SMH...

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:

Arjun -

"Stand up and be a man"?

You have got to be kidding. What ever happened to - to each his own? Now if we don't post or blurred faces, we don't meet your measure of being a man? Great tactics from a booking agent.

Go ahead and stand up to the anti-hunting crowd. They are well funded and a cohesive group. We, proof of which is this thread, can't even agree what is damaging to our demographic. They have 100% of the media, print and digital. Go ahead and "pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel". Good luck.

I personally don't feel the need to post stuff. I did 10 or so years ago before this became a thing. My face will never be blurred either.

And to Lavaca: Email me a picture of a Lion and I'll post it for you? of course not. We've all read accounts of executives losing jobs and even businesses from the backlash of posting stuff.

I could see a legal practice losing high profile clients because they see their lawyer on Facebook posing with a dead Lion. It's just common sense anymore. If I were a lawyer, I'd advise my clients to just not do it.

Yet, it seems that we argue the point if those of us who don't are somehow hiding in the shadows? Thats complete bullshit.

100% Spot on.

I know of an outfitter who was dragged through the mud by hunters because he hunted with Arabs. His social media was bombarded with comments calling him a terrorist lover.

Also, a lot of booking agents just post pictures sent to them by outfitters and just blur faces out because it was not their client. Happened to me on this website! Agent never thought to check if okay to post the pic he just went ahead and did it.

MJines is spot on with his commentary on this matter.

I too have been targeted savagely by these groups, and they were led by left wing journalists.
I was dragged through the coals,and they targeted my business interests first and foremost.

They delayed a real estate project of mine for 2 years, cost me many $100’s of thousands in lawyers and appeals.

In the end I won and got the project completed but will always carry the baggage of a “murderer of innocent animals forever.”

They targeted my architects and other professionals whom worked on the project.
The pressure they put on was huge, to stop these guys doing business with me.

They have set up a bogus Facebook site on me and Facebook refuse to take it down.
Numerous death threats get posted,and are removed eventually after complaints by my lawyers but the site remains with photos that I posted on AR........

So prudence has prevailed and I no longer post trip reports/photos to AR.

I’m still hunting Africa and will do as many safaris as I can squeeze in as long as I’m alive and kicking.

I am thankful that I am 80 years old, financially independent, and have no fear of anything anyone thinks or says about me and my hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by WR500:
MJines is spot on with his commentary on this matter.

I too have been targeted savagely by these groups, and they were led by left wing journalists.
I was dragged through the coals,and they targeted my business interests first and foremost.

They delayed a real estate project of mine for 2 years, cost me many $100’s of thousands in lawyers and appeals.

In the end I won and got the project completed but will always carry the baggage of a “murderer of innocent animals forever.”

They targeted my architects and other professionals whom worked on the project.
The pressure they put on was huge, to stop these guys doing business with me.

They have set up a bogus Facebook site on me and Facebook refuse to take it down.
Numerous death threats get posted,and are removed eventually after complaints by my lawyers but the site remains with photos that I posted on AR........

So prudence has prevailed and I no longer post trip reports/photos to AR.

I’m still hunting Africa and will do as many safaris as I can squeeze in as long as I’m alive and kicking.

Bloody hell that is disgusting.

I never hide anything but It has it ups and downs.

I had a police raid at my house with about all agencies we got in Sweden outside my door. I was away abroad but got a call from them and asked if they could search the house. I said NO - one minute later the DA called and had a warrant to search my house without me being present. Well it backfired big time for them after having being accused of being a king pin smuggler of animals I Had papers on everything.

The biggest newspaper we have here where I live are read by 120 000 people daily, they did a front cover "People who kill endangered animals" or something like that, the newspaper tried baiting me to comment because I was described as the polar bear hunter. I declined that offer. This was made when everyone could make a phone call and see what every people in Sweden had imported.

With that said im 40 years old now and I have always been on my own with 5-10 employees and never hidden anything I do actually I do the opposite and try to inform instead of hide, it work here at least. A news paper here did a 10 page story about my Pakistan trip a few years back, really good article and photos and displayed hunting in a good manner.

The good thing with taking the time and informing and talking about your trips or hunting moose or whatever and showing off good photos is that I have had several people emailing me and said they have taking up hunting because it. At least I have changed a few heads to a better life

I can see why people like Jines and other do the opposite as well, we all live different lives.

Just saw a statistic that said that 54% of American adults read below the 6th grade level and 21% are illiterate. And we let them vote. That explains a lot. I'm sure it's not as bad in Europe but I really don't think any of us should care what those people think. Unfortunately, it appears that not only the news media but the police do.

Hi Anton,

Thats pretty horrible. I see why people dont want to post stuff on Social media. MY issue is IF you post then dont blur your face. What is the point of posting then!! Surely you have pics of just the animals or with others!

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
I never hide anything but It has it ups and downs.

I had a police raid at my house with about all agencies we got in Sweden outside my door. I was away abroad but got a call from them and asked if they could search the house. I said NO - one minute later the DA called and had a warrant to search my house without me being present. Well it backfired big time for them after having being accused of being a king pin smuggler of animals I Had papers on everything.

The biggest newspaper we have here where I live are read by 120 000 people daily, they did a front cover "People who kill endangered animals" or something like that, the newspaper tried baiting me to comment because I was described as the polar bear hunter. I declined that offer. This was made when everyone could make a phone call and see what every people in Sweden had imported.

With that said im 40 years old now and I have always been on my own with 5-10 employees and never hidden anything I do actually I do the opposite and try to inform instead of hide, it work here at least. A news paper here did a 10 page story about my Pakistan trip a few years back, really good article and photos and displayed hunting in a good manner.

The good thing with taking the time and informing and talking about your trips or hunting moose or whatever and showing off good photos is that I have had several people emailing me and said they have taking up hunting because it. At least I have changed a few heads to a better life

I can see why people like Jines and other do the opposite as well, we all live different lives.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
It’s a sad place society has come.

Like I said: “ It’s a sad place society has come.”

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
. . . I really don't think any of us should care what those people think.

Maybe in a perfect world. As I recall you do insurance defense work. Assuming there was ever a social media uproar over something you did, how long do you think it would take the insurance companies that retain you and your partners to dump the firm when they come under significant public pressure for using the firm. And faced with that prospect, how long do you think your partners are going to stand by your side in support of you and your avocation when facing their own personal financial loss? Those are just examples. My point is simply that if you are with a public company or have public companies that do business with you, you are naive if you believe that those companies are not highly susceptible to public pressure and outage. Again, many folks that elect to not post or post with blurred pictures and no name attribution are simply being prudent not cowards.

I always thought people doing legal things deserved some sort of protection against harassment that resulted in material loss. Maybe just me though.

We seem to have moved into mob mentality/rule - welcome (back) to the dark ages.

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:
I always thought people doing legal things deserved some sort of protection against harassment that resulted in material loss. Maybe just me though.

We seem to have moved into mob mentality/rule - welcome (back) to the dark ages.

This is exactly what I cannot understand.

Either the law protects you, or you are free to protect yourself!

The problem is that there is NO PROTECTING YOU with the internet. When the anti-anything crowd gets ahold of something they respond like a shark feeding frenzy and people and their businesses or jobs are killed off overnight. They will not stop at anything and harass anyone or any entity until they get their way.

Sadly hunters and shooters really are no better. I always think back to the fiasco that happened when Jim Zumbo opened his mouth before thinking what he was saying when he stated that semi-auto AR-15 type rifles were not really hunting rifles. An absolute shitstorm happened that attacked him personally, any magazine he wrote for and all of his sponsors. Most of the sponsors and media companies dropped him like a hot potato. No rational discussion where they could have just called him out and he could of apologized...no everyone went for the throat and destroyed him. Even though he did apologize and tried to smooth things over, he really never recovered from it...and that was from fellow hunters and shooters.

There is no civility left, just attack and ruin people, their family and companies is the goal, and aside from serious death threats, no one is going to come to your rescue. And there is no recourse beyond going after people civilly...good luck with that and you better have really deep pockets, which most of us do not have.

If hunters feel criminals, hunting outfitters feel like crime bosses! To be honest, it is a bit disappointing when a client asks you to blur their face out. But I don’t have to live in their world and have to face their everyday reality. I’d rather have clients hunt and hide their identity than not hunt out of fear of the consequences.

I believe public sentiment goes in cycles - way left or way right. Eventually it gets too much and settles somewhere in the middle where common sense resides. I believe we’re in a way left cycle but I’m optimistic that it will improve.

We need to keep educating whoever it is who will listen. It gets tiring but if you’re having a conversation with 10 anti hunters, they’re anti hunters to begin with and you just need to convince one with a rational argument to improve the future outlook of hunting. We need to keep believing that logic will prevail - and there’s nothing more logical than the link between hunting and conservation. We have all the facts on our side.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
. . . I really don't think any of us should care what those people think.

Maybe in a perfect world. As I recall you do insurance defense work. Assuming there was ever a social media uproar over something you did, how long do you think it would take the insurance companies that retain you and your partners to dump the firm when they come under significant public pressure for using the firm. And faced with that prospect, how long do you think your partners are going to stand by your side in support of you and your avocation when facing their own personal financial loss? Those are just examples. My point is simply that if you are with a public company or have public companies that do business with you, you are naive if you believe that those companies are not highly susceptible to public pressure and outage. Again, many folks that elect to not post or post with blurred pictures and no name attribution are simply being prudent not cowards.

What Mike said is spot on. I pity the insurance defense lawyer that posts something about African hunting and then GEICO or Progressive or some other liberal insurance company finds out.

My best friend/former fraternity brother is at big SC-based insurance defense Firm, as conservative as they come, but nonetheless, the Firm made him remove our fraternity (KA) from the education/college part of his bio because of a 150 yr old tie to a historical figure now considered controversial.

You have to be on my side of the courtroom to get away it...everybody hates us anyway.

quote:

What Mike said is spot on. I pity the insurance defense lawyer that posts something about African hunting and then GEICO or Progressive or some other liberal insurance company finds out.

How sad is this?

Let us go a bit further.

An airline employee would not check in a meat eater.

A gay restaurant server would not serve married couples.

A Hispanic taxi driver would not pick a black passenger.

Isn't this what is doing so much harm to our society nowadays?

Where is the law?

What does the law have to do with it? People should be free to associate and do business with whom they please. If you engage in something the public finds repugnant and the public takes out their condemnation (short of libel, slander or threats) on your employer or those that do business with you . . . what is there for the law to protect? I am not suggesting it is right but it is reality in this day and age. We can wring our hands until they bleed and that is not going to change anything.

The married couple bring served and the black man being picked up in a cab are all federally protected classes based on Fed Law.

One may not discriminate in public services or in employment based on sexual orientation or race.

Being a international hunter or local neck shooter is not protected by the Feds anti discrimination laws. Maybe a very limited anti hunter harassment law at the state level.

I am not saying I like it. I am just explaining the distinction.

As for serving meat eaters not protected. You can open vegan restaurant and not serve meat eaters. Just as long as you do not refuse your vegan restaurant wares because the patron is gay, trans, person of color, (conversely white, straight, married) rock out and see how long and how much money you make.

One of the hyoid posed by AG Garland when on the DC bench during Obama Care litigation, can congress ban meat and make us all eat broccoli. The Govt. lawyer answered yes.

Now, I think your choice of food is a fundamental right, but no Court has had to decide that for obvious reasons. Logic only goes so far.

This is way the political debate and expanding hunting through positive outreach is so important. You and I can be legislated away without it. That being said I respect the lessons of prudence posted here.

I find the best I can do is teach hunter safety courses. And give game cooking diners to young and old professionals.

I just did a wild quail, stuffed in creole dressing (homemade), wrapped on my neighbors killed hog bacon, and served over creamy risotto made with home made quail stock with shredded quail folded in for a group of new PHDs from University of Ohio and Virginia. Three were women who grew up in California.

That is the best I can do.

I have had an outfitter ask me not to post a hunt report. I have had another attacked after posting a hunt report. I hate it

If my memory is right, correct if wrong, Mjines last report being the elephant that charged him got a lot of heat with the some of the fraternity here in AR.

I never understand the love affair with elephants. To me, they are 6 to 7 ton pigs. Big noses, highly intelligent, eat everything, and destroy everything.

I do not want them killed out of existence, but nobody (serious people anyway) complain about hog culling. I want them scientifically managed to balance with the area they are concentrated upon with a consumption model that finances that habitat and protection for all species in that environment.

So the world is.

Mike and SC lawyer raise good points. I'll just keep my mouth shut. I'm toward the end of my career, but still would like another 20 years if I'm lucky. Sad though, as it's not in the interest of the hunting community.

It has been said before and will say it again:

If you feel uncomfortable posing and exposing your identity, blurring the face dishonors the photo and the animal and rather than doing so, it would be more appropriate IMO to take some additional snapshots of the animal on its own or with the rifle, trackers etc. for posting on public forums.

Times have indeed changed and negative publicity is not what everyone desires in this day and age.

The argument that the hunt was legal, that many starving mouths and waifs in the villages were fed, that the trophy fees assisted in building schools and dispensaries, provided wells for clean water, etc. etc., are all irrelevant points of discussion with the anti-hunting crowd.

I blur out the faces of the people that I hunt with if I post the photos anywhere because I don't want them or their companies to get any grief for it.

I'm in the same business as MJines and have seen the hit piece on him in social media. I've had discussions/training within a previous company about the exposure to the company's image using Mike's situation as an example.

I do think that most companies have some code of conduct for their employees.

And one of them is that an employee can be dismissed if something the employee does causes the company loss of good will.

Example, would be if you were caught selling cocaine and upon your arrest, the local news paper and television station ran the arrest along with who you worked for. Whether you were found guilty or not, the fact that you your arrest was covered by the news papers and televisions stations, could/would be grounds for dismissal.

While the blurred out photos are less appealing, it is being short sighted for not taking a few photos of the animal by it self and or with the trackers & PH.

While I like reading the hunting stories of fellow hunters, pictures are always nice. A photo of the animal is really all I need to look at.

States that are at Will can fire for any reason or no reason. As long as it is not a Federally Protected reason.

Unless your contact rejects the At Will statute.

Which hunter had ever posted blurred photos of themselves.

It always bookings agents or outfitters marketing or selling a hunt.

Why should everyone be telling hunters to man up and publicly display their private photos. They have a right to share it with whom they want.

Maybe we should ask the people posting blurred photos publicly to require in their services contract to stipulate that photos belong to them and they can post it as they wish without blurring faces.


Mike

Maybe just hunt quietly, or else, write a book. This nutcases don’t seem willing to shell out dough for books. If it’s not worthy of that, maybe the hunt is not worth sharing publicly anyway. There are easy means to share privately.

quote:

It has been said before and will say it again:

If you feel uncomfortable posing and exposing your identity, blurring the face dishonors the photo and the animal and rather than doing so, it would be more appropriate IMO to take some additional snapshots of the animal on its own or with the rifle, trackers etc. for posting on public forums.

Times have indeed changed and negative publicity is not what everyone desires in this day and age.

The argument that the hunt was legal, that many starving mouths and waifs in the villages were fed, that the trophy fees assisted in building schools and dispensaries, provided wells for clean water, etc. etc., are all irrelevant points of discussion with the anti-hunting crowd.

This.

Since we've been doing Zoom meetings and hearings, it's apparent to everyone that I'm a hunter. There's not an angle in my office that doesn't show that and I'm certainly not ashamed of it.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Since we've been doing Zoom meetings and hearings, it's apparent to everyone that I'm a hunter. There's not an angle in my office that doesn't show that and I'm certainly not ashamed of it.

Don't take false comfort in that. Just because people may agnostically acknowledge or recognize your avocation is a far cry from accepting it. If and when the heat ever gets turned up publicly and there appears to be financial or reputational implications to them for just being associated with you and your avocation, you would be naive to think they will stand by you.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
. . . I really don't think any of us should care what those people think.

Maybe in a perfect world. As I recall you do insurance defense work. Assuming there was ever a social media uproar over something you did, how long do you think it would take the insurance companies that retain you and your partners to dump the firm when they come under significant public pressure for using the firm. And faced with that prospect, how long do you think your partners are going to stand by your side in support of you and your avocation when facing their own personal financial loss? Those are just examples. My point is simply that if you are with a public company or have public companies that do business with you, you are naive if you believe that those companies are not highly susceptible to public pressure and outage. Again, many folks that elect to not post or post with blurred pictures and no name attribution are simply being prudent not cowards.

This subject came up on here a few years ago, I remember posting something along the lines of, “…I work for a public company, but we are a construction company and I live in Wyoming, I don’t think I have much to worry about.”

I have shifted that view 180 degrees after seeing what happened to you. A few pictures are certainly not worth putting my career at risk.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Since we've been doing Zoom meetings and hearings, it's apparent to everyone that I'm a hunter. There's not an angle in my office that doesn't show that and I'm certainly not ashamed of it.

Don't take false comfort in that. Just because people may agnostically acknowledge or recognize your avocation is a far cry from accepting it. If and when the heat ever gets turned up publicly and there appears to be financial or reputational implications to them for just being associated with you and your avocation, you would be naive to think they will stand by you.

Always remember you are dealing with people and when it suits their agenda they will turn on you in a heart beat.

You do you.