OK, so apparently shooting a sleeping lioness is ethical.

So, what about a sub-prime male lion? Is that one OK?

What about an adult lion that frequents a park from time to time but doesn't have a collar, is that one OK?

What about an adult lion that is part of a research project but no collar next to a park, is that one OK?

What about an adult lion that is within 20 miles of a park, is that one OK?

A solution to this would be to get SCI to use the same trophy standards as B&C. Fair Chase. Not to say hunting on fenced in areas, near parks, etc is unethical, but it sure would take some of the steam out of these things. Hunt for it's own sake, if you care about being in "the book" let it be fair chase. And what about a minimum 100% duty on all Chinese goods until they stop the demand for poached ivory and other poached goods, haven't they heard about Viagra?

SCI needs to figure out if it's an award organization or a game conservation and hunting rights organization. They seem really, really conflicted as to which they are. In my opinion, they need to do away with the whole award side of the organization. It conflicts with hunting ethics.

Not sure the dentist being dissected/assassinated here is a big SCI ego record chaser or not. Would be interesting to see, but seems doubtful that was his motivator to collect a large lion.

As to SCI's record book and hunting awards program. In the November/December issue, Deb Cunningham has a piece defending this department and mentality. Personally, I see this as a direct response to AR's overall feeling of the harm created by said program.

And to Mike's statement about hunting the fringes of National Parks. In Zambia, nearly all the prime GMA's border parks, without buffers.

I shot my lion less than 50 yards from the Luangwa River (on bait), which is the border between Nyaminga GMA and South Luangwa National Park (or North?). I'm certain that this Lion had called both sides of the river home.

I see what the dentist did and what I did about the same. (less the use of artificial lights and archery equipment)

Regards,

Steve

quote:

In Zambia, nearly all the prime GMA's border parks, without buffers.

And if there were buffers, some nut like Jines would be squawking that you shot "right on the buffer border". Of course, you probably shot yours while it was awake so, in my book, that puts you a cut above.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
Not sure the dentist being dissected/assassinated here is a big SCI ego record chaser or not. Would be interesting to see, but seems doubtful that was his motivator to collect a large lion.

. . . sure.

Palmer has more than forty SCI record book entries. From the New York Times (September 2009), Walter Palmer Stalks Beast with an Eye on the Record Book. Surely his motivation was not to collect a large lion . . . it was the spirit of the chase . . .

Who gives a shit what his "motivation" was. What are we the thought police as well as the ethics police now?

. . . heel boy, heel.

Well... This is certainly entertaining.

If the antis are reading this...don't worry we will kill each other off long before you get ahold of us

Enjoy the whole clip, I feel no need to hide behind a pseudonym or delete my hunt report photos . . .

I don't have a problem with any hunting that you've done...at least as far as what I've seen on AR. You are the one constantly preaching ethics and standards.

I just want people to hunt within the game laws and stand together.

Nah Mike, you are too busy hiding in your glass house. You belittle a hunter for shooting on a National park border, yet clearly there are those who would find your actions a good bit worse. I think I have made my point here. We are all vulnerable to some degree or another and when we act like we aren't, ultimately we all suffer.

Lord Mr. Jines

You shot the lioness with a blaser and put it on youtube.

That takes real guts. At least Biebs will defend you on choice of firearm.

Everything else aside - impressive.

Mike

He's a blaser shooter? Lemme watch this video.

That changes everything. Deep down I knew he was an alright guy

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:
Hey, don't expect people to tolerate your ragging on another hunter's ethics when you can't even bother to wake up "dangerous" game before you shoot it. Legal? Sure. Admirable? Frankly, I would rather shoot ANYTHING (collared or not) at night and on a park border than a sleeping cat. Further, if I did shoot a sleeping cat, I don't think I would be the one shouting about ethics and throwing stones at other hunters.

Tendrams, from the lions' point of view, being shot while asleep is the most humane death the lion could have. With a proper shot placement the lion never knows what happened!

If humane ethics are your goal Mikes lion was not full of adrenaline to prolong his death process, hence ethical!

Ethics are one thing and legalities are another. Legalities are what this thread is about.

As long as legal, ethics are the property of an individual, while legalities are the rule for ALL people, agree or not. You may rightfully disagree with others ethics, but you must abide by the rule of law, whether you agree or not. That is why kangaroo courts are bad where nobody has to abide by the rules.

Under the law in a democracy a person is assumed innocent till proven guilty in a lawful court.

.............Opinions differ however it seems!
......................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
You shot the lioness with a blaser

The Blaser is the worst of it.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

Ethics are one thing and legalities are another. Legalities are what this thread is about.

Actually, that's not true. Mike is on the dentists back over shooting a collared animal, at night, and on a national park boundary....ALL legal under the circumstances I believe. On this thread and others he has NOT made it about "legalities" but what (in his mind anyway) "makes us all look bad" in SPITE of legality. Well, I have long held the opinion that the anti-hunters don't make such distinctions regarding the way we do things in that regard and will in fact hate us no matter what. That said, if Mike is concerned with "the optics" of a hunt, I suspect his lion hunt is as bad (or perhaps worse) than shooting at night or perhaps even shooting on a national park boundary. Frankly, if he wants to live by the sword, fine...people can make damned sure he dies by it too. Truthfully, we are probably ALL vulnerable in this way so it's just best to hang together rather than hang separately.

I can just as easily justify shooting a sleeping cat (and a sleeping lioness to boot) as I can a pet cat.

What I cannot figure out is why anyone would attempt to draw a distinction between the two as it relates to winning the hearts and minds of the general public. There is a major logic disconnect there.

Good luck selling that a canned lion or a pet cat is the same as a wild lion. Like I said on another thread, making nonsensical arguments generally just makes someone look ridiculous . . . and you do in fact look ridiculous. Drivel on.

Come to think of it, I believe my crocodile was sleeping too when I shot it . . . or at least he was seriously day dreaming.

So shooting a sleeping cat is the epitome of sport? What's worse Mike, in terms of "making us look bad", shooting on the border of a national park or shooting game while it naps? Sure, both might be legal but frankly, you are just lucky that lioness didn't have a name or people would be going through your actions with a fine toothed comb as well.

Each successive effort becomes more and more lame . . . Of course, I guess if I was hiding behind some made up name maybe I would be less concerned about what I had to say too.

Mr. Jines, you have accused Dr. Palmer of having been convicted of two felonies. It is my understanding that both the fishing license and the bear hunt incidents were adjudicated as misdemeanor offenses within state jurisdictions. If you can provide evidence that the two incidents were indeed felonies, that he was convicted of a Federal crime, or evidence that Dr. Palmer was found guilty of other non-hunting related felonies, I will stand corrected. I do not care for, or support the dentist, but absent a felony conviction, I will not pillory him either.

I never said the fishing violation was a felony.

Palmer Article

What about Elephant, Mike? Are you prepared to indict people who shoot them near the border of a national park? Unethical? Is it just lion we are concerned about or if I shoot an elephant or plains game in such an area should I be strung up? Years ago a friend of mine shot buffalo and a few others shot elephant technically IN Kruger park (Makuleke). I myself shot some plains game there. It brought a good bit of money to the tribe for anti-poaching purposes. Despicable activity anyway in your mind?

Professor,
I repeat my position about not giving a whit about the good doctor's road hunting accusations.

However, this lion hunt was sleazy at best. Let us say that a student taking a class before me hacked your computer and accessed your test questions. Later I sign up for the same class. I am given those questions. I have done nothing illegal. I smoke your class. I was just being an opportunistic sleazeball. Just like Palmer.

Those of us that have hunted lion know there was nothing kosher about this hunt. Crooked outfitter. Seized lands. Legal apparently.

Mr. Jines is attempting to get everyone to recognize that all hunters are under the microscope. Somethings while legal, perhaps should not be undertaken. Perception matters. This was a real issue that impacts us all that was supported by hundreds of studies presented at the NRA-HLF. So those that say fuck it, if it's legal I am doing it, I would urge caution.

Park boundaries are not really an issue when we are talking proper gazetted hunting concessions. I think you will find the cat that shall not be named was shot in no such concession. The significance of those arrangement would be to insure that conservation funds made it back into Zim Parks.

Those that have taken a slap at Mr. Jines for shooting a sleeping lionness, have no experience with them. They are horrible creatures. While getting into position for the shot, the cat could have just as easily popped an eye open and been down the river bank in three strides.

Jeff

As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

Cal, with all due respect, I disagree. If we unite behind canned lion hunting, you think that will change the result? I am all for having a united front, but it makes all the difference as to what we are united behind. If we are united behind practices that are repugnant to the public and conduct that the public finds reprehensible, eventually we will lose united or not. This is a political fight and in politics you ignore the public at your peril.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

Cal, with all due respect, I disagree. If we unite behind canned lion hunting, you think that will change the result? I am all for having a united front, but it makes all the difference as to what we are united behind. If we are united behind practices that are repugnant to the public and conduct that the public finds reprehensible, eventually we will lose united or not. This is a political fight and in politics you ignore the public at your peril.

You mean like shooting elephants?

Like shooting cow elephants that are either pregnant or have a calf?

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
Seized lands. Legal apparently.

OK, now that is a different issue. It's NOT what Jines is talking about at all, but if we want to pile on Palmer for dealing with someone on "the list" then that is fine in my book. This is a bit like hunting in Iran or Sudan for example. If someone is SERIOUSLY breaking the law, then by all means pile on. If however someone is just doing something you don't like eg. shooting on the edge of a park or at night (while you yourself do something that others don't like eg. shooting sleeping DG), then the whole exercise is more than a bit silly and counterproductive to all our interests.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

Cal, with all due respect, I disagree. If we unite behind canned lion hunting, you think that will change the result? I am all for having a united front, but it makes all the difference as to what we are united behind. If we are united behind practices that are repugnant to the public and conduct that the public finds reprehensible, eventually we will lose united or not. This is a political fight and in politics you ignore the public at your peril.

You mean like shooting elephants?

Like shooting cow elephants that are either pregnant or have a calf?

This is a VERY important point. I don't often self censor but even I hesitate to post this because it draws attention to the reality that, in everyday African hunting circles, there are necessities of game management that would make the death of "Cecil" the lion look insignificant. Wait until the Anti-hunters start posting pictures of fetal elephants from harvested cows or fetal cubs from the inevitably pregnant lioness that are legally hunted in various places. It is only their relative ignorance of game that has spared us this long and taking hunters like Palmer to task for ticky-tack bullshit only increases the likelihood of common (and legal and ethical) actions coming to light that PETA and their ilk will find truly repulsive . When all that happens, we are done for and I fear we are closer to that edge than ever before. I am not saying it's all Mjines fault....but the reality is that he and others who are pointing fingers likely participate in other actions that, while legal or even biologically necessary, would make PETA lose their collective mind and damage all of us. In short, it's probably best that we hunt, post a lot of photos, congratulate one another, and leave it at that (assuming legality).

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

Cal, with all due respect, I disagree. If we unite behind canned lion hunting, you think that will change the result? I am all for having a united front, but it makes all the difference as to what we are united behind. If we are united behind practices that are repugnant to the public and conduct that the public finds reprehensible, eventually we will lose united or not. This is a political fight and in politics you ignore the public at your peril.

You mean like shooting elephants?

Like shooting cow elephants that are either pregnant or have a calf?

This is a VERY important point. I don't often self censor but even I hesitate to post this because it draws attention to the reality that, in everyday African hunting circles, there are necessities of game management that would make the death of "Cecil" the lion look insignificant. Wait until the Anti-hunters start posting pictures of fetal elephants from harvested cows or fetal cubs from the inevitably pregnant lioness that are legally hunted in various places. It is only their relative ignorance of game that has spared us this long and taking hunters like Palmer to task for ticky-tack bullshit only increases the likelihood of common (and legal and ethical) actions coming to light that PETA and their ilk will find truly repulsive . When all that happens, we are done for and I fear we are closer to that edge than ever before. I am not saying it's all Mjines fault....but the reality is that he and others who are pointing fingers likely participate in other actions that, while legal or even biologically necessary, would make PETA lose their collective mind and damage all of us. In short, it's probably best that we hunt, post a lot of photos, congratulate one another, and leave it at that (assuming legality).

Bingo!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

Cal, with all due respect, I disagree. If we unite behind canned lion hunting, you think that will change the result? I am all for having a united front, but it makes all the difference as to what we are united behind. If we are united behind practices that are repugnant to the public and conduct that the public finds reprehensible, eventually we will lose united or not. This is a political fight and in politics you ignore the public at your peril.

You mean like shooting elephants?

Like shooting cow elephants that are either pregnant or have a calf?

Make a deal with you . . . I will spend my time educating the public on the conservation necessity of elephant hunting and you can spend yours educating the public on the conservation necessity of canned lion hunting . . . we can see who makes the most progress.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
As posted elsewhere, the antis are united and (from the posts here) we are not. That is why we are losing.
Cal

Cal, with all due respect, I disagree. If we unite behind canned lion hunting, you think that will change the result? I am all for having a united front, but it makes all the difference as to what we are united behind. If we are united behind practices that are repugnant to the public and conduct that the public finds reprehensible, eventually we will lose united or not. This is a political fight and in politics you ignore the public at your peril.

You mean like shooting elephants?

Like shooting cow elephants that are either pregnant or have a calf?

Make a deal with you . . . I will spend my time educating the public on the conservation necessity of elephant hunting and you can spend yours educating the public on the conservation necessity of canned lion hunting . . . we can see who makes the most progress.

Another straw man position taken by the ethics "anointed one"!

Weak!

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

Make a deal with you . . . I will spend my time educating the public on the conservation necessity of elephant hunting and you can spend yours educating the public on the conservation necessity of canned lion hunting . . . we can see who makes the most progress.

Be sure to post pics of the fetal elephant in the cow you shot and let me know how much progress YOU make. Out of curiosity, was the sleeping lioness pregnant? Be sure to post pics of that fetus too and see how much more people like you than Palmer. We are ALL vulnerable so we'd better quit taking pot shots at one another over ticky-tack shit like NP boders or other legal realities.

Ever seen an elephant cull?

If you feel a hunter with a prior felony conviction involving hunting law violations, hunting a collared lion at night on a national park boundary is "ticky-tack shit" that is your prerogative. I have a different opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
hunting a collared lion at night on a national park boundary is "ticky-tack shit"

It is ticky tack shit because A) each of these three things is totally legal B) even the scientists who put the collar on apparently had no problem with it (eg. it's data) and C) these things are really nothing in the world of bad PR compared to what is out there for people like PETA to yet discover. In short, stop squawking or more than likely you and I will be next. You first.

. . . what is legal tells you what you have a right to do, it does not tell you what the right thing to do is. That is why hunting ethics matter. That is why ethics are never "ticky tack shit".

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Ever seen an elephant cull?

And with that response friends, the shark has been jumped!!

Hysterical image above!

Seriously, Mike you are really going to lecture us all about how "legal" and "ethical" are "different things" when you yourself undertook "legal activities" that would, to many of the same people roaring about the death of Cecil, seem so much worse? Sleeping cat? Pregnant cat? Pregnant cow elephant? Look Mike, I get why you are socially reluctant (or unable) to back down from this position you have adopted, but it's really indefensible. You, just like any of us (relative to this singular Palmer incident..argue the bear and fishing license things all you want), are no better than him really. You have just been fortunate enough to not shoot a critter with a name or one that had been extensively photographed by others or you are lucky enough that the sleepy kitty video never caught traction. Any pics of the cow elephant with fetus to post? Go for it and see how quickly you are in the same boat as Palmer. I'm done with this particular thread frankly because I think the point has been made and anything more seems like just piling on.