How many read the article on African lions in the Smithsonian?

In my opinion, this points out why the Safari Industry needs some pro-hunting scientists working on these subjects so hunting doesn't always take an undefeded jab such as this article throws.

As much as Packer says he is pro-hunting in a sustainable manner...everytime something is printed about his research...hunting takes a jab!

Ledvm,
What article are you talking about? myself and my boss are scientists that are pro-hunters, who are starting to work in africa, by mass collecting genetic materials from trophy animals.

Send me a link...

quote:

What article are you talking about?

Get the current Smithsonian and read it for yourself. Then you can be your own judge!

Oryxhunter1983-PM sent.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...uth-About-Lions.html

The Link to the article for those interested.

"Part of the blame for Tanzania’s crashing lion population belongs to the trophy-hunting industry: the government allows the harvest of some 240 wild lions a year from game reserves and other unprotected areas, the highest take in Africa. Safaris charge a trophy fee of as little as $6,000 for a lion; animals are shot while feasting on baits, and many of the coveted “trophy males” have peach fuzz manes and haven’t even left their mother’s pride yet."

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...page=6#ixzz0b0RdRifp

Above is a direct quote from the article.

ledvm - Trust me, Packer is "pro-hunting" as much as I am "pro-Obama". He has however taken tons of money from the hunting community to fund his "Studies", and then turned his back on those that supported him.

quote:

ledvm - Trust me, Packer is "pro-hunting" as much as I am "pro-Obama". He has however taken tons of money from the hunting community to fund his "Studies", and then turned his back on those that supported him.

Aaron,
I am with you there. What Packer has done to the indusrty is why it is hard for me to get hunting industry leaders on board with our project at Texas A&M and get the money we need to fund it.

They are all afraid we will turn and bite them in the ass as did Packer.

The ONLY hope the lion has of surviving is as sustainable hunting species.

As the Smithsonian article also points out...Africans (native tribes) hate lions. They do however like hunting dollars.

If you can read through the Smithsonian Lion Article and by pass the typical nausea anti-hunting theme,

there were some interesting points:

1. Dark mane male lions were the preferred female mating partner over blond mane lions.

2. Female lions form prides not so much for hunting, but protection from other male lions.

3. You can feel perfectly safe around any group of lions provided you carry a black umbrella (it is recommended to paint eyes on your umbrella). If lions are coming, open up the umbrella and you can stop the savage beast in its tracks. Tame as a pussy house cat.

I am uncertain if the umbrella trick works at night.


dale

quote:

If you can read through the Smithsonian Lion Article and by pass the typical nausea anti-hunting theme,

That is correct! The rest of the article was fine.

My point is this: Wouldn't it have been better if it had said: Due to the dollars spent by hunters, African natives have realized the value of preserving the lion and its habitat. Due to the research done by the safari industry, PH's and concession holders have figured out which and how many males can be harvested with out effecting pride dynamics. With the melding of these 2 concepts, the African Lion population is on the increase!

That day is what I am working towards in this post and with the last where we argued the value of melding science and hunting.

I submitted a comment about the article that they accepted and posted. I am not much of a writer, someone else could probably say it better. Submit comments to them and let them know the truth.

I posted a comment, though it hasn't yet appeared.

I also emailed Packer asking if he cared to comment on the article - and Laurence Frank who is quoted in the article and has long been a supporter of re-opening lion hunting in Kenya.

It took them overnight to post my comment. I'd check tomorrow to see if they post it.

We get Smithsonian Mag and I just picked up the mail after our Xmas trip. Wow. What bunk. I am going to submit a letter to the editor. Hopefully someone at SCI will take this up as well.

Craig Packer responds: "Lion hunting is badly managed throughout Africa. Corruption is rampant and offtakes are unsustainable. Perhaps the worst aspect is the collusion between the hunting industry and the range-state governments which disenfranchises local communities.
In theory, trophy hunting could be a benefit -- but only if there is substantial reform. Craig"

Laurence Frank responds: "Steve - I remember meeting and corresponding with you. I knew that Smithsonian article on Craig's work was coming out, but have not see it yet; thanks for the link.

Craig is the first person who has been able to get any hunting offtake data out of the Tanzanian authorities and the results are not encouraging. Everyone has always assumed that hunting was poorly managed there: I have a number of friends who are PH's in Tanzania and have been saying for years that lions are being hammered. So his results are not surprising. Lions can recover from overshooting very quickly, and the hope is that both the wildlife authorities and the hunting industry will be encouraged to improve wildlife management before the situation gets too bad.

On the other hand, I believe that his data (which are not yet published) also show that, like everywhere else, the ever-growing human population and conflict with pastoralists over livestock are the biggest problems for lions in Tanzania.

All the best,

Laurence"

Thanks to Ledvm for posting the link.

Certainly it's a very interesting article, maybe not as interesting as a proper scientific paper but a very interesting read.

I'm only a layman and not a scientist, but I for one think that CP is largely right in what he says about there being poor standard of overall Lion management in Africa.

(IMO) It's not particularly that too many Lions are being sport hunted, it's more that the wrong Lions are often sport hunted. Admittedly, occasionally, one has to shoot one that isn't really appropriate to shoot (I've had to do that myself occasionally) but putting that aside, I reckon that of all the safari companies in Tanzania, there are less than a handful who have a proper Lion management programme and who know what they're doing. Unfortunately, the vast majority couldn't even spell Lion management, let alone conduct it.

Then of course you have the (FAR bigger) problem of human encroachment into the wilderness areas to contend with and there's no easy answer there either. All the while there's a Masai on the planet, he'll want to kill Lions by any and all means possible and at every opportunity and frankly, I reckon anyone who thinks they can be educated out of that attitude is deluding themselves. It's easy to say, the Masai must learn the USD value of a live Lion...... the problem is, he counts his wealth in cattle and the fewer Lions there are, the more cattle he'll have.... and that's the only bottom line he's remotely interested in.

Reducing quotas sounds good at first but all that will do, is slow the decline because although fewer Lions will be shot, some will still be the wrong Lions...... and you'll still have the problem of the Masai killing what seems to be an ever increasing number.

I really hate to say it, but I can see a time when a total ban will be instigated.

All that said, I'll be interested to hear the opinion of BwanaMich on this because he's forgotten more about Lions than I'll ever know.

Here we go again, with a topic that is debated about more than the amount of Lions shot on quota, and yet where are we getting with it, if not all hot under the collar !!

Shakari has is right....Lion hunting will be banned before too long. As much as we argue for the right to hunt lion and come up with our conservative ideas, the fact is that the anti's have a few more $ than we do and have a greater following.

There are a number of conservation groups around all doing their best to preserve Lion hunting (John Jackson comes to mind), but what we need to do is get behind them, both financially and emotionally. WE need to take charge of how Lion hunting should be determined for the future, not "Obama" wannabes !!

quote:

Originally posted by Neil-PH:
the anti's have a greater following.

Not necessarily, we just don't make enough constructive noise.

Dave

Neil,

You're quite right but I reckon we also need to make AND be seen to make much more effort to only take appropriate Lions.

However, that's easier said than done because it'll mean more clients booking expensive hunts but being prepared to go home disappointed, more PHs willing to be prepared to say to the client, yes, I know it's a great Lion but it's holding a pride with cubs, so you can't take it and PHs & outfitters being willing to spend a lot of both money and time monitoring the populations in their area.

The few companies that are willing and able to do that are already doing so and as we both know, the majority of the others, wouldn't or couldn't do it.

We'd also have to beat the Walt Disney attitude of the general public and sadly, that ain't gonna happen either!

Finally...some constructive rhetoric.

IMHO...if the safari industry takes the bull by the horns, we can win the battle and preserve BOTH the lion and lion hunting!

How? 1) By doing contructive research and 2) by strictly implementing it.

Craig Packer has no doubt done some great research with lions. However...he has NOT remained loyal to the safari industry. Maybe this is justly so in his mind because, as Steve has said, many companies have not heeded his advice. To his and now to science as a whole's demise...he has alienated many safari operators from research. This bad as we must all get on the band-wagon to do what is best for the lion as only that will perpetuate lion hunting.

Safari companies MUST prepare clients that ONLY advanced maturity non-pride male lions will be shot and that they are paying for the PRIVILEDGE to HUNT for one.

Then safari companies must educate their PH's in what type of lion is acceptable.

And lastly they must re-invest in the resource by 1) doing research on population dynamics and strategies to improve populations and 2) by showing there research and hopefully positive results in publications.

There are some PRO-hunting researchers at work.

Money is one of the biggest problems.... TGTS for example commissioned an extensive report from a number of experts on their areas that must have cost a bloody fortune...... I haven't seen all of it and would give my eye teeth to, but I have heard a bit about it..... and every company in every area would need to do a similar thing.

Firstly, most of 'em don't have that sort of money and even if they did, some wouldn't spend it on such a project and secondly, there's no-where near enough qualified people to do the job in a timely manner.

Let's assume there are the experts available though and let's extend the logic a bit.....

Hands up all those who can afford to hunt (let's say) Tanzania, and are prepared to pay twice the daily rate to finance the Lion study for the area they're gonna hunt in?

I'd guess not many, could or would do that. The last lot of increases caused hysteria and since then, we've had the biggest financial crash in living memory.

There's nothing I'd love more than to see a proper study and management programme where only the right Lions are taken, but I reckon there's more chance of pigs flying!

I would like to suggest that those who are interested in the subject read up in the African Indaba; www.africanindaba.co.za
or e-mail gerhard@muskwa.co.za
I cannot remember which issue but I am sure Mr Damm would be keen to help. Through his publication one can access a number of scientific publications.
The ban on canned lion hunting [whatever its merits or lack thereof], was just the begining. Neville Chamberlain tried appeasement and everything still went to hell. Hunting has to stand together or there will be "NO" hunting.
I am I suppose preaching to the converted, but we have to do something otherwise we can use our firearms for fence posts.

quote:

There's nothing I'd love more than to see a proper study and management programme where only the right Lions are taken, but I reckon there's more chance of pigs flying!

With all due respect...that attitude equates to closure of lion hunting at some time in the future.

I for 1 refuse to just give in and say so be it. (Please don't take those as fighting words...no offense intended)

You're right, it does equate to closure of lion hunting at some time in the future.

I think we have two choices.

We either have to do as I said in my previous post, and as I mentioned, I can't see that happening because people won't or more likely, can't afford to pay the additional cost and some don't have the self control to accept going home without a trophy........and hunters can't or won't do those things, and if they don't, then sooner or later, we'll have to accept a closure, whether we like it or not.

I obviously don't want that to happen forthe sake of hunting but I reckon it will.

quote:

people won't or more likely, can't afford to pay the additional cost

Craig Packer gets funding. If the industry is seen in the same light as he...money will be available.

That is why it is important for the industry to align itself with science...but with the right folks.

I can't argue with that. The theory is fine but the cost of ongoing studies in every individual area in every individual country would make it completely impossible.

Even if SCI contributed ALL their considerable income, it still wouldn't be anywhere near enough to pay for a project of that magnitude, and even if they did, there are nowhere near enough people with the proper qualifications to do the job in the time span required.

My advice to anyone wanting a Lion would be do it asap and spend as much as you can possibly afford. Don't look for the cheapest, look for the best..... and be prepared to accept failure with a smile and perhaps a memory of Kipling's 'IF'. Esp the first 4 lines of the 3rd verse.

IF

By Rudyard Kipling

IF YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HEAD WHEN ALL ABOUT YOU
ARE LOSING THEIRS AND BLAMING IT ON YOU,
IF YOU CAN TRUST YOURSELF WHEN ALL MEN DOUBT YOU,
BUT MAKE ALLOWANCE FOR THEIR DOUBTING TOO;
IF YOU CAN WAIT AND NOT BE TIRED BY WAITING,
OR BEING LIED ABOUT, - DON’T DEAL IN LIES,
OR BEING HATED, DON’T GIVE WAY TO HATING,
AND YET DON’T LOOK TOO GOOD, NOR WALK TOO WISE;

IF YOU CAN DREAM – AND NOT MAKE DREAMS YOUR MASTER;
IF YOU CAN THINK – AND NOT MAKE THOUGHTS YOUR AIM;
IF YOU CAN MEET WITH TRIUMPH AND DISASTER,
AND TREAT THOSE TWO IMPOSTERS JUST THE SAME;
IF YOU CAN BEAR TO HEAR THE TRUTH YOU’VE SPOKEN
TWISTED BY KNAVES TO MAKE A TRAP FOR FOOLS,
OR WATCH THE THINGS YOU GAVE YOUR LIFE YOUR LIFE TO, BROKEN,
AND STOOP AND BUILD ‘EM UP WITH WORN OUT TOOLS;

IF YOU CAN MAKE ONE HEAP OF ALL YOUR WINNINGS,
AND RISK IT ALL ON ONE TURN OF PITCH AND TOSS,
AND LOSE, AND START AGAIN AT YOUR BEGINNINGS,
AND NEVER BREATHE A WORD ABOUT YOUR LOSS;
IF YOU CAN FORCE YOUR HEART AND NERVE AND SINEW,
TO SERVE THEIR TURN LONG AFTER THEY ARE GONE,
AND SO HOLD ON WHEN THERE IS NOTHING IN YOU,
EXCEPT THE WILL, WHICH SAYS TO THEM, HOLD ON!

IF YOU CAN TALK WITH CROWDS AND KEEP YOUR VIRTUE,
OR WALK WITH KINGS – NOR LOSE THE COMMON TOUCH,
IF NEITHER FOES NOR LOVING FRIENDS CAN HURT YOU,
IF ALL MEN COUNT WITH YOU, BUT NONE TOO MUCH;
IF YOU CAN FILL THE UNFORGIVING MINUTE
WITH SIXTY SECONDS WORTH OF DISTANCE RUN,
YOURS IS THE EARTH AND EVERYTHING THAT’S IN IT,
AND – WHICH IS MORE – YOU’LL BE A MAN, MY SON.

quote:

The theory is fine but the cost of ongoing studies in every individual area in every individual country would make it completely impossible.

I think that the notion that every single area has to have its own specific analysis is flawed. Many areas can use extrapolated data from others similar and make progress.

Also, there is the possibility that DNA harvested from all that are taken now can yield very rewarding data in regards to population dynamics and diversity. Their is a fellow at Texas A&M by the name of Dr. Jim Derr who studied how the American Bison was resurrected from the brink of extinction. He has such a study ongoing at Texas A&M. He would be a very good person for Safari Industry leaders to get on board with. He was just in RSA at the PHA meeting held there I believe at Kruger.

Are you in Dallas Steve?

quote:

would make it completely impossible.

Also...nothing is impossible with the right minds and enough money!

I saw this on one outfitter's website " LION: company policy restricts lion hunting to males of at least 6 years of age and without young cubs in the pride" "

Am sure by taking such measures they ensure that the client comes with the right expectations,some I see also refund apart of the amount if a Lion is not taken".

I am sure if others follow this it might help ,shouldnt it?

Ledvm,

I'm sure there's plenty of room for further research but generally speaking, the principles of the overall management policies have already been established for some considerable time.

Where the work needs to be done now, is on the individual areas where prides and individuals are separately identified and their individual places in the pride dynamics worked out.... that requires every area that takes part in the programme to have it's own individual and ongoing study. In other words, extrapolation won't work because there's nothing to extrapolate.

I haven't met Dr Derr but am aware of his work and have already offered my services and contacts etc to help that project..... and I've no doubt the project will be a great help but it won't be the whole answer.

In fact, I reckon the project will be of great interest to everyone and anyone involved in the African wildlife industry and will benefit all African wildlife..... it'll probably cause a bit of upset between the lumpers and groupers and record books though.

You're right, nothing's impossible with the right minds and money but (IMO) nowhere near the amount of money required is available.... and come to that, unless they canarrange to be in more than one place at a time, not enough people with the right minds and skills.

We don't do the conventions I'm afraid.

AJS,

That could well be one of the companies I said has a proper management plan in place.

The only value that the scientific approach offers is in swaying public opinion.

For decades now scientists have been going to Africa, counting and measuring things, and publishing their data as things have gotten worse and worse – except in those countries which promote trophy hunting – where the demand for hunts has led to the supply of opportunities – which has led to more habitat and more animals. End of story. Science had nothing to do with it.

The American bison was saved by private ranchers who still own 90% of the Bison in the US. Science had nothing to do with it.

The White Rhino is off the IUCN list of threatened species because South African ranchers were allowed to buy them at auction and offer them for viewing until they got past their reproductive age and then offer them for hunts. Science had nothing to do with it. The game ranchers provided the habitat.

Lion and elephant need habitat – and lots of it. Trophy hunting is the only proven methodology that supplies habitat – and does so at no cost to government or citizens. No other approach has ever worked. That is the big picture. That is the message that the scientific community needs to send.

The data are just details.

~ ~ ~

Steve,

My point is that we need to ensure that only mature males who are either not holding a pride OR are holding a pride that has no dependent young AND has other males waiting in the wings be shot...... and that the only way to do that is to do individual and ongoing studies for every area.

I reckon that in this case, what's needed is feet on the ground and the heads attached to those feet need to know their onions. You can't even do a study and walk away, because the study needs to be maintained because of the natural take overs that occur etc.

TGTS have proved you can do that for a limited number of areas but (to say the very least), I doubt there are enough people in the world who know enough to do that properly for all of the areas in all the wilderness hunting areas.

quote:

ledvm - Trust me, Packer is "pro-hunting" as much as I am "pro-Obama". He has however taken tons of money from the hunting community to fund his "Studies", and then turned his back on those that supported him.

Strange


Seloushunter

quote:

I haven't met Dr Derr but am aware of his work and have already offered my services and contacts etc to help that project.....

Hi Steve,

Wish you were at DSC yesterday...it was a good day to banter this subject a bit. I introduced Dr. Derr to Bwanamich...we had a good chat.

We also visited with TGT. TGT has set the bar for lion management and self control.

As you mentioned...many principles have been established for years but there is plenty more to learn. Leon Lamprecht (from TWC) was present with us and he brought up a whole new interesting kink to the "present dogma" on which lions to take which I will bring up after the shows in a new thread.

Much can be studied with population dynamics and genetic diversity with just DNA samples being harvested. (Derr's current project)

As far as each block being studied like you are talking about...I would think that those steps would be common sense "block management". The more I spoke with the folks at TGT, the more I was convinced they (TGT) were on the right track holding the torch for all others to follow.

Yup, TGT are one of the very few who take the time, money and effort to do it right
but sadly most of the others don't have the money, staff or will to even begin to do it properly.

Dallas is a great show, a great place and full of great people. I'd have loved to have been there.

quote:

For decades now scientists have been going to Africa, counting and measuring things, and publishing their data as things have gotten worse and worse – except in those countries which promote trophy hunting – where the demand for hunts has led to the supply of opportunities – which has led to more habitat and more animals. End of story. Science had nothing to do with it.

The American bison was saved by private ranchers who still own 90% of the Bison in the US. Science had nothing to do with it.

SteveGI, (please don't take thes as fighting words)

But you are far from correct. Those private ranchers were applying science.

And the problem with many of the current researchers is that they have a hidden agenda...anti-hunting!

Good pro-hunting research is what is needed along with a good conscience to apply the gained knowledge.

That is why it is important to fund and help out the few Pro-hunting researchers that are out there.

For we all know that with out hunting there is no economic incentive to have lions!

As Bwanamich pointed out yesterday in our discussion at DSC, the photographic sarfari industry does nothing to stop poaching!

I can see both sides of that one.

No doubt there has been an awful lot of research done over the years and no doubt a lot of it has been put to use.

But also no doubt that more of it could be put to even more and better use and that a lot of research is just that and nothing more.... I'd guess this mostly happens when science and leaseholders etc fail to carry things through and communicate properly.

One of the very best examples of how science and conservation can and does work together is my friend and neighbour(ish) Jeremy Anderson of International Conservation Services (http://www.ics-consulting.co.za)

Jeremy is a scientist and an ex (Rhodesia) game dept warden with his roots firmly on the ground.

Fighting words! Yeah. Bring it on. Let’s get ready to rumble. Queensbury rules though.

ledvm, we all mistakes, and calling for “pro-hunting research” is big one. No such thing. I would almost concede that there’s what might be called “anti-hunting research – but any scientific work, whether it has a pro or anti agenda – is simply not research. The work must be unbiased and the data must speak for itself.

Packer, like so many of his colleagues, (including Derr, I’ll bet), suffer from what we used to call in construction, “engineer’s disease”. They get caught up in the details – and can’t see the big picture – the forest for the trees, if you will.

My point (one of them) is that animal husbandry has been around a long time – way longer than the scientific method. And ranchers rely more upon knowledge passed from generation to generation than they do on scientific data. I’ll bet that there are a couple of Bison owners and Rhino ranchers on this site that could back me up on that.

I’m not saying that science doesn’t have a place in efforts to manage wildlife populations, but that place is to publish data – and let people with a broader, more comprehensive understanding of the practical, sociological, economic and even (unfortunately) political issues make the decisions. Unfortunately, there are just not enough people with those qualifications - and that sort of education is just not available at the university. Ron Thomson, comes to mind – and I’m sure that there are many others, just not enough. You and Steve would get my vote too. Laurence Frank is one of very few African field researchers who has the cohones to stand up for what’s right. Peter Lindsey is another (Link). Packer may have the scientific credentials – but he apparently lacks the broad view - or the balls (probably both) – or he’s just being bought off. In any case, he should just publish his data, and otherwise keep his mouth shut.

Already I’m getting caught up in details on a subject that I just don't know enough about.

But just one more thing. Steve, I’d hate to see lion hunting become a staged event where one not only needs a PH and government agent looking over one’s shoulder, but a wildlife biologist, geneticist, sociologist (etc.) crowding the scene. That’s where this call for “the individual areas where prides and individuals are separately identified and their individual places in the pride dynamics worked out” might lead.

Later,
S.

quote:

My point (one of them) is that animal husbandry has been around a long time – way longer than the scientific method. And ranchers rely more upon knowledge passed from generation to generation than they do on scientific data.

First let me say that my family is a very large cattle ranching family. So, I can tell you for sure that your above statement is totally inaccurate.

quote:

The work must be unbiased and the data must speak for itself.

That is true!!! And if it always did...it would help the hunting industry.

The problem with Packer and the article that this thread was based on was NOT unbiased.

It was "laced" with the slur against hunting.

Good research lets folks manage better. Some economic research would also show that the safari inndustry is who foots the bill and who stops the poachers.