quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
Personally if the nomad is of age, and there are plenty of these, then I feel it is fair to take him. Hence the thinking that the 6 year margin should be reduced to 4-5 years to accommodate this.

Here we go now!! Where the population dynamics allow, target the sexually mature yet socially immature males. The three to five year old nomads. This in all likely-hood would have a knock on effect in that existing pride males would be around a while longer, allowing for another generation of cubs to reach maturity.
Now for a little more petrol on the fire! Get over the canned hunting story. It has a place. It does ease the pressure on wild stocks. When it comes to entries in the trophy books, all that is required would be for the exporting authority [country of origin] to issue a " pink certificate" for a "canned animal" or a "blue certificate" for a wild animal.
In South Africa the antis under the cover of the "canned lion hunting" sorry saga have managed to persuade the authorities to slip in the "TOPS Regulations." Right now , the Bio-Diversity Act is being used to bring in more onerous regulations to throttle the game industry. Refer to Ron Thomson's article in the April edition of the Afican Outfitter.
This whole "lion debacle" has done hunting no favours at all. The side sniping at each other is a crock of sh*t and only plays into the hands of the antis. The old maxim "DIVIDE AND RULE" comes to mind. If a hunter has made an error, help him right. Help him through forums, hunt clubs and hunt associations. To publically dump ten tons of barnyard manure on to a person helps nothing at all. This is made even worse when the "offense" is comparativly trite I would bet my last cent on damn near everyone on AR having done something stupid in his hunting career.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

My partners have endorsed a pricing system to protect Lion and the client. We downgrade the safari if I cannot show you an old male. The tag is then offered at a discount to another. It is out little bit for conservation but few can afford to entertain this policy. For me it removes a lot of pressure and if the hunter does not take a Lion like the ones we advertise in the brochure then he goes home happy having had a memorable and affordable hunt.

I have seen some chaps in Zim offering a fair daily rate with a much inflated trophy fee for Lion and basically you pay on success. Good on them and this is another very fair option.

Imo, this is the ideal way to do it.
The chap I'm on safari with this season is paying for a Buff/Sable&PG hunt but will bait for Lion. Given the chance at a super Lion he will have to pay a high T/F but he is happy with this and only wants a great one anyway. I've explained ether way he WILL get amongst Lion and have a ball. If he lucks out, well there is always next year.

quote:

Originally posted by Scriptus:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
Personally if the nomad is of age, and there are plenty of these, then I feel it is fair to take him. Hence the thinking that the 6 year margin should be reduced to 4-5 years to accommodate this.

Here we go now!! Where the population dynamics allow, target the sexually mature yet socially immature males. The three to five year old nomads. This in all likely-hood would have a knock on effect in that existing pride males would be around a while longer, allowing for another generation of cubs to reach maturity.
Now for a little more petrol on the fire! Get over the canned hunting story. It has a place. It does ease the pressure on wild stocks. When it comes to entries in the trophy books, all that is required would be for the exporting authority [country of origin] to issue a " pink certificate" for a "canned animal" or a "blue certificate" for a wild animal.
In South Africa the antis under the cover of the "canned lion hunting" sorry saga have managed to persuade the authorities to slip in the "TOPS Regulations." Right now , the Bio-Diversity Act is being used to bring in more onerous regulations to throttle the game industry. Refer to Ron Thomson's article in the April edition of the Afican Outfitter.
This whole "lion debacle" has done hunting no favours at all. The side sniping at each other is a crock of sh*t and only plays into the hands of the antis. The old maxim "DIVIDE AND RULE" comes to mind. If a hunter has made an error, help him right. Help him through forums, hunt clubs and hunt associations. To publically dump ten tons of barnyard manure on to a person helps nothing at all. This is made even worse when the "offense" is comparativly trite I would bet my last cent on damn near everyone on AR having done something stupid in his hunting career.

I am not opposed to so called canned Lion and much depends on the size of the property and the hunting conditions. On large fenced properties you could easily entertain hunting of this specie much the same as for other fenced animals on offer. And yes it is another alternative that we need to consider.

Nomads - I am just saying that if he is deemed mature and let us say 4 plus then I would take him. I am no researcher but this could allow a pride male another year to breed? The physical difference between a late 4 and 6 year old is quite difficult to determine in the field.

But what I refrain from doing is shooting immature nomads who are the teenagers and who are at this age dependent on one another.

Seem to remember that some operators in Tanzania will shoot pride males but only if the cubs are over 1 year old (?) and knowing that the replacement male does not bother with them.

If a lion is big enough to kill you in less than a minute, it is not appropriate. IMO. to call it a cub. If it is living away from its mother and the pride, on consort with another male(s), then it may more appropriately be called a young adult.
Fairgame's position on not shooting a young adult when there are only two of them together makes sense.

Depending on individual pride dynamics...some 2 year old males will still blend with the pride and are tolerated by dominate males. Two year olds are not young adults but "sub" adults or old cubs...kind of like calling a 16 - 17 year old boy my "big kid".

My opinion here: Coalitions of 4 & 5 year olds containing 3 or more and certainly ones with 4 could be reduced by one without harmful effects. But ones made of 2 should be left alone.

Remember these strong traveling nomads are the "only means for genetic diversity". We need these guys to roam far from their home prides to spread their genes.

If one is worried about sustainable yield, quit issuing permits for that target game. If a permit is issued for three lions for a given area then it is the responsibility of the government to know how many animals can safely be taken off the land. Irrespective of age. If a hunter is sold a hunt and is satisfied with a 3-4 year old male then so be it. The hunter has paid for the privilege of taking that animal. I would prefer to have a 3-4 year old that I properly hunted than a blank spot on the wall. How many times are we told it is not about the size of the trophy but the quality of the hunt??? Many will take exception to my way of thinking and that is fine. The moral high ground should be one lion in your lifetime regardless of where it is shot. Once I see that philosophy promoted before limiting legally shot lions in younger age ranges, then I will know folks are really serious.

nomads. are those the pesky lions that keep slipping across the Limpopo from Bots. into RSA and killing livestock?

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
If one is worried about sustainable yield, quit issuing permits for that target game.

According to the other thread that was done by cutting the outfitter's lion quota in half.

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
If one is worried about sustainable yield, quit issuing permits for that target game. If a permit is issued for three lions for a given area then it is the responsibility of the government to know how many animals can safely be taken off the land. Irrespective of age. If a hunter is sold a hunt and is satisfied with a 3-4 year old male then so be it. The hunter has paid for the privilege of taking that animal. I would prefer to have a 3-4 year old that I properly hunted than a blank spot on the wall. How many times are we told it is not about the size of the trophy but the quality of the hunt??? Many will take exception to my way of thinking and that is fine. The moral high ground should be one lion in your lifetime regardless of where it is shot. Once I see that philosophy promoted before limiting legally shot lions in younger age ranges, then I will know folks are really serious.

Their are many flaws in your theory here. 1) that the African governments are going to set accurate quotas. Most quality outfits survey the block and shoot what they believe to be sustainable which is usually lower than the government issued quotas. Many many blocks would have been shot out of all game if they took what the government allowed.

2) If one only shoots lions which don't contribute to propagating the species...why does it matter as to how many one shoots? BTW...rarely are all lions sold in a year. Since they are not all sold...one is available for all who want and can afford one.

3) Without lion hunting...the hunting companies cannot support themselves. Without hunting companies...there is no one to pay for and protect the hunting areas. With no one utilizing the hunting areas...they will be colonized by locals and all will be killed. With loss of this habitat...the lions range shrinks to unsutainable area size.

The law has already changed in TZ to 6 and greaters. We (the LCTF) will strive for new similar (probably like Niassa model) rules in other countries.

Morals are NOT an issue here...only ethics. Ethics dictate that in this lion popultaion state...only those whose loss has little or preferably no impact on species propagation should be taken.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by retreever:
Fellas I believe the male kills the male lion cubs and not the female cubs.

Mike

Mike,

Not trying to be argumentative at all sir...but...they (new pride males) do not distinguish between male and female when killing cubs. Cubs are killed to bring females back into heat so they themselves can breed. As said before the birth-to-birth interval is two years for lioness. that means they don't breed again until their cubs are 1 2/3 years old...unless ALL of the cubs die...then they come back into estrus (heat) with-in days to weeks.

The above is correct, and it is not limited to Lion. All cats (read stray house cat toms) when he moves into a new area, he quickly kicks the resident males out, and proceeds to kill every kitten he can find so that the females all will come into season, and he can put his own offspring on the ground. This holds fast for all cats, but the African lion is the only cat that forms family PRIDES, and so the killing of the young is for the same purpose, and most young males are driven out of the pride by the new king, to become satellite males till they get strong enough to take their own pride from an older/ weaker pride male.

Before someone asks I have never shot an African lion, but that doesn’t mean what I have just posted incorrect. One of my life time favorite animals both wild, and domestic, is the cats of the world. Having said that, it is still my opinion the African lion is in trouble. Not from legal hunting, but from the know-it-all tree huggers, and the western news media. As long as quotas are adhered to and the PHs don’t allow clients to shoot lions that are too young, the lion safaris will effectively combat the poachers, and cattlemen poisoning them. The African lion will be around a long time. However, we may as well accept the fact that lion hunting will not be as it used to be, in available targets, or in low prices!

....................

I don't have a dog in this fight, I have no real interest in hunting top of the food chain predators.

I remember however, reading an interview with Tony Sanchez-Ario(spelling) felt that the lion population had been pushed pretty hard all over Africa and maybe they shouldn't be hunted for a while.

505 - No question, JJ is the biggest proponent of the lion and all that is wildlife conservation. His commitment is beyond reproach, and CF should be supported to the fullest extent. The LCTF, has suggested his support as much as anyone.

But, as you would know, if you had spent hours of your time speaking with JJ, answering and communicating with him via dozens of emails, and attended the personal meetings the LCTF has had with him in the past 2 months. You would know his focus, as it should be is on the application of the law, as it pertains to the ESA listing, or the CITES up-listing! He's an attorney, that's his specialty, and no one knows it better than him!

The focus of the LCTF is changing protocal within our own fraternity! We are NOT legal experts, so we leave the legal stuff to JJ and the CF. We are fighting for the same cause, but taking two different approaches, as to who is the target audience, to some degree. JJ has his hands full dealing with all the legality issues of the ESA listing, etc, etc, etc.

He's fully aware of our approach, and is supporting us too, 100%! I get emails from him on a daily basis. As an attorney, its his motive, to only approach an issue from the stance of the law. He rarely, if ever, gives a nod to the opposition, even when recognizing a problem. Does that make sense, are you following me?

He must take a different approach than us, and WE HAVE ALL discussed that in PERSON. So once again, if you really knew all the info/facts, you might better understand exactly what's going on, and WHY!!! I don't mean to be condescending, but there's much that has been done/said, that you simply have NOT been a party to.

The potential listing, will uphold the 90-day review. The fight will begin after that! Our biggest asset/liability will be what side the likes of Dr. Craig Packer, Dr. Luke Hunter, Dr. Colleen Begg, and others, take. Period, end of story, and I can't stress that enough!! So, if they see and recognize the hunting fraternity's willingness and ability to assert change as it pertains to shooting young lions, dependent pride holding males, etc, etc. They will without a doubt, side with the hunters, they have all but said so. However, is they see status quo, the continued shooting of young lions, etc. They will side in favor of the uplisting. And unfortunately the USFWS, CITES and Ken Salazar are gonna listen to the "EXPERTS", regardless of what you think, say, lobby against, or do!

The needed change, has been proven with the best available science to be sound. So, who do you think they're gonna listen to. I don't like it anymore than you do, but unfortunately "POLITICS", plays a part in African Wildlife Conservation, just like it does in most other aspects of life.

Its important to recognize the difference between what we are doing and what JJ/CF is doing. JJ knows, and so do we, and we ALL support eachother!