quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Cajun,

Please see my previous post regarding article about antis.

As with regards to Mr Hemingway, I'll take your real journalist comment on the chin and with a pinch of salt. The other comment I will say it is possible for me to admire hunters / conservationists. There are two or three hunters here whom I admire. I don't have to like all of someone's actions to think they are a good person or worthy of my admiration.

Heym 450/400,

I've been forming an opinion for several years now and although it is not fully formed and maybe never will be, many aspects of it have changed.
I completely understand your concerns regarding me and can only say I have had ample opportunity to twist or take out of context the words here and have not done so. This works both ways of course and other than a couple of people on here and only on here I have had the same respect.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Fair game,

Thank you for your response. I agree that there is a lot missing from the article but when you are only given 4000 words it is hard to pack the info in.
Thanks for the statistics also. Could you tell me if the area around you is more suited to hunting or photo safari? I note you said 80% of photo safari takes place within hunting areas. Also could you tell me how involved the hunting industry around you is with ZAWA's HWPO initiative?

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Anotherazwriter,

I'm a vegetarian.
I take your opinion of me on board but I will be happy when conservation works. Be that with hunters being able to hunt or not. Whatever works is my goal. If I just wanted hunting banning why did I write the articles I did. I could have quite easily adapted to fit that mould that would say hunting is not good for conservation at all.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Fairgame,

Thank you again for your responses. Zambia is a country that I would very much like to visit. As a non-hunter of course photo safari is always the way I would go on a visit there but I would also like to volunteer and do some conservation work. More and more over the years I have seen how the majority of volunteer schemes available are really nothing to do with conservation at all and this has disheartened me. Luckily I have had offers from several posters here to go and see for myself how hunting concessions work and the contributions they make to conservation and the community. I very much hope in the near future I will be able to take up one of these offers and actually participate in some useful conservation.
Regarding your friends water initiative I would very much like to help but being in the UK makes it difficult to say the least to do anything hands on unless I do get to visit Zambia. However I would be more than happy to make a small monthly donation to this and anything else you feel I could do.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Anotherazwriter,

I'm a vegetarian.
I take your opinion of me on board but I will be happy when conservation works. Be that with hunters being able to hunt or not. Whatever works is my goal. If I just wanted hunting banning why did I write the articles I did. I could have quite easily adapted to fit that mould that would say hunting is not good for conservation at all.

A vegetarian is in some ways a hunter's best friend, because they prove everyday you don't have to eat meat to live. Those that eat meat do so for their own pleasure.

Now that we have established most of the world's population kills animals (directly or indirectly) for their personal pleasure, I guess it would be logical to discuss hypocrisy when it comes to the morality of hunting, eh?

The debate of hunting as a conversation tool is worthy of merit, but conservation is not why most anti-hunters protest what we do - they find it morally reprehensible, even though the VAST majority of them eat meat. Ironically, they somehow justify eating meat because the animal was raised for food...hmmm...but yet these same people protest canned lion hunts??

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Fairgame,

Thank you again for your responses. Zambia is a country that I would very much like to visit. As a non-hunter of course photo safari is always the way I would go on a visit there but I would also like to volunteer and do some conservation work. More and more over the years I have seen how the majority of volunteer schemes available are really nothing to do with conservation at all and this has disheartened me. Luckily I have had offers from several posters here to go and see for myself how hunting concessions work and the contributions they make to conservation and the community. I very much hope in the near future I will be able to take up one of these offers and actually participate in some useful conservation.
Regarding your friends water initiative I would very much like to help but being in the UK makes it difficult to say the least to do anything hands on unless I do get to visit Zambia. However I would be more than happy to make a small monthly donation to this and anything else you feel I could do.

Thank you for the kind offer Jolouburn and maybe you can come as a photographic client? That would be a contribution to the Kaindu community.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Anotherazwriter,

I'm a vegetarian.
I take your opinion of me on board but I will be happy when conservation works. Be that with hunters being able to hunt or not. Whatever works is my goal. If I just wanted hunting banning why did I write the articles I did. I could have quite easily adapted to fit that mould that would say hunting is not good for conservation at all.

A vegetarian is in some ways a hunter's best friend, because they prove everyday you don't have to eat meat to live. Those that eat meat do so for their own pleasure.

Now that we have established most of the world's population kills animals (directly or indirectly) for their personal pleasure, I guess it would be logical to discuss hypocrisy when it comes to the morality of hunting, eh?

The debate of hunting as a conversation tool is worthy of merit, but conservation is not why most anti-hunters protest what we do - they find it morally reprehensible, even though the VAST majority of them eat meat. Ironically, they somehow justify eating meat because the animal was raised for food...hmmm...but yet these same people protest canned lion hunts??

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said here. I cannot and will not defend the anti-hunter who thinks it is perfectly acceptable for an animal to die for meat. I was that person a couple of years ago and yes I was a hypocrite.

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Anotherazwriter,

I'm a vegetarian.
I take your opinion of me on board but I will be happy when conservation works. Be that with hunters being able to hunt or not. Whatever works is my goal. If I just wanted hunting banning why did I write the articles I did. I could have quite easily adapted to fit that mould that would say hunting is not good for conservation at all.

A vegetarian is in some ways a hunter's best friend, because they prove everyday you don't have to eat meat to live. Those that eat meat do so for their own pleasure.

Now that we have established most of the world's population kills animals (directly or indirectly) for their personal pleasure, I guess it would be logical to discuss hypocrisy when it comes to the morality of hunting, eh?

The debate of hunting as a conversation tool is worthy of merit, but conservation is not why most anti-hunters protest what we do - they find it morally reprehensible, even though the VAST majority of them eat meat. Ironically, they somehow justify eating meat because the animal was raised for food...hmmm...but yet these same people protest canned lion hunts??

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said here. I cannot and will not defend the anti-hunter who thinks it is perfectly acceptable for an animal to die for meat. I was that person a couple of years ago and yes I was a hypocrite.

Do you wear or carry leather? Eat eggs?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
No one was forcing you to eat meat but you chose to eat it.What does that tell you? You liked the taste of it but now you tell people not to have that same pleasure.Is that because it does not serve your interest?

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
No one was forcing you to eat meat but you chose to eat it.What does that tell you? You liked the taste of it but now you tell people not to have that same pleasure.Is that because it does not serve your interest?

Absolutely, I was a hypocrite as I've already stated.
Also as already stated to Saeed I'm not telling anyone they can't eat meat, each to their own. Yes I love the taste of meat but I don't need meat to live and do not want animals die for me to do so. It is a personal choice, just as your choice to eat meat and hunt is a personal choice.

To be clear I have always thought of meat hunting and trophy hunting as two separate entities and whether you like it or not many antis separate them too. The arguments of whether we need meat in our diet to be as healthy as possible is key to this separation of the two forms of hunting. People can accept more easily the killing of an animal if it has a very visible benefit in their opinion, ie health. What they find more difficult to accept is as they see it the killing of an animal just to put it stuffed in a trophy room. They see no benefit to man or animal in this.

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
No one was forcing you to eat meat but you chose to eat it.What does that tell you? You liked the taste of it but now you tell people not to have that same pleasure.Is that because it does not serve your interest?

Absolutely, I was a hypocrite as I've already stated.
Also as already stated to Saeed I'm not telling anyone they can't eat meat, each to their own. Yes I love the taste of meat but I don't need meat to live and do not want animals die for me to do so. It is a personal choice, just as your choice to eat meat and hunt is a personal choice.

To be clear I have always thought of meat hunting and trophy hunting as two separate entities and whether you like it or not many antis separate them too. The arguments of whether we need meat in our diet to be as healthy as possible is key to this separation of the two forms of hunting. People can accept more easily the killing of an animal if it has a very visible benefit in their opinion, ie health. What they find more difficult to accept is as they see it the killing of an animal just to put it stuffed in a trophy room. They see no benefit to man or animal in this.

***

Ms. Burns, with all due respect, perhaps you should pose this question to the anti-hunters: Did the ethically harvested wild game referenced below commit suicide? Cheers!

Zimbabwe: The conception of the Bubye Valley Conservancy required an incredible amount of foresight, but also the wisdom to realise that in the business of wildlife conservation there is no success unless you have the support of the surrounding communities. The Conservancy donates over 45 tonnes of meat to the local communities each year, which effectively removes the incentive for meat poaching.

Zambia: Sport hunting has reportedly multiple benefits to economies and local communities; however, few of these benefits have been quantified. As part of their lease agreements with the Zambia Wildlife Authority, sport hunting operators in Zambia are required to provide annually to local communities free of charge i.e., provision a percentage of the meat obtained through sport hunting. We characterized provisioning of game meat to rural communities by the sport hunting industry in Zambia for three game management areas (GMAs) during 2004–2011. Rural communities located within GMAs where sport hunting occurred received on average > 6,000 kgs per GMA of fresh game meat annually from hunting operators. To assess hunting industry compliance, we also compared the amount of meat expected as per the lease agreements versus observed amounts of meat provisioned from three GMAs during 2007–2009. In seven of eight annual comparisons of these GMAs, provisioning of meat exceeded what was required in the lease agreements. Provisioning occurred throughout the hunting season and peaked during the end of the dry season (September–October) coincident with when rural Zambians are most likely to encounter food shortages. We extrapolated our results across all GMAs and estimated 129,771 kgs of fresh game meat provisioned annually by the sport hunting industry to rural communities in Zambia at an approximate value for the meat alone of >US$600,000 exclusive of distribution costs. During the hunting moratorium (2013–2014), this supply of meat has halted, likely adversely affecting rural communities previously reliant on this food source. Proposed alternatives to sport hunting should consider protein provisioning in addition to other benefits (e.g., employment, community pledges, anti-poaching funds) that rural Zambian communities receive from the sport hunting industry.

Namibian Conservancies: Of the associated benefits, meat from wildlife utilization (i.e. - sustainable sport hunting) should not be underestimated. Meat is rated as a key benefit by most conservancy members, many of whom are poor and cannot afford to buy much meat. In 2011 over 386 tons of meat were distributed to conservancy members, which at a rate of N$ 17 per kg equates to N$ 6.5 million in non-financial benefits.

quote:

People can accept more easily the killing of an animal if it has a very visible benefit in their opinion, ie health. What they find more difficult to accept is as they see it the killing of an animal just to put it stuffed in a trophy room. They see no benefit to man or animal in this.

quote:

Originally posted by Poyntman:
This has honestly been a very civilized and thoughtful conversation.

Jolouburn,
You have been thoughtful in your responses.
Many points run through many of our minds...

Why do you think, as an example, intellectually why "Antis" seem to have no issue with Fishing when it's intellectually the same ( save for artificial emotional constructs) ?

The utter Hypocracy (of some aspects) has already been addressed and you sir were both respectful and honest.
As stated...eating meat...wearing animal based products, etc

What about the Hypocracy of people simply having different views?
Why do these people believe they have the right to infringe upon ours??? That's my biggest issue

I don't ask people to understand, agree, or partake on things so WHY do they believe our rights should be taken away?

When trouble brews....it's our skirts they all hide under for protection.

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

People can accept more easily the killing of an animal if it has a very visible benefit in their opinion, ie health. What they find more difficult to accept is as they see it the killing of an animal just to put it stuffed in a trophy room. They see no benefit to man or animal in this.

The point that I am trying to make is that donated meat is a "very visible benefit" of trophy hunting. Damn, I sure hate the words "trophy hunting".

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
jolouburn,

You would do well to consider what would happen to these vast swathes of pristine environment if they were left alone and without a presence. There is a short clip on the forum about Chinko project and you would do well to have a look at it. It is on par with what is happening in most concessions. Unfortunately there are a few that tarnish our name and normally they are portrayed as hunters. Most of the undesirable images come from the canned Lion hunting industry of which many are opposed to.

One of my clients has funded a water project for one of the schools and if you want to volunteer then you can join me in this project. These children know that the money comes from hunting and the sustainable utilisation of their lands.

quote:

I'm sorry if you don't like the word trophy hunting but I don't know any other way to describe the difference between simply hunting to eat or hunting to put animals in a room of your house.

quote:

To be clear I have always thought of meat hunting and trophy hunting as two separate entities and whether you like it or not many antis separate them too. The arguments of whether we need meat in our diet to be as healthy as possible is key to this separation of the two forms of hunting. People can accept more easily the killing of an animal if it has a very visible benefit in their opinion, ie health. What they find more difficult to accept is as they see it the killing of an animal just to put it stuffed in a trophy room. They see no benefit to man or animal in this.

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:
Ms. Burns, with all due respect, if you are really interested in "objective journalism", perhaps you should ask Mr. Andrew to setup a conference call (via Skype) between you, Mr. Andrew, and Chief Kaindu. My understanding is that it was Chief Kaindu and his community who moved out of the Kafue floodplains to make way for Mr. Andrew's successful wildlife conservation project. Ethical hunters and anti-hunters can rant and rave until the proverbial "cows come home", but the real stakeholders are the conservancy owners/directors, concession lessees, local chiefs, headmen, and their villagers. What say you?

quote:

They certainly don't eat it for health benefits; they eat it because it tastes good and they somehow feel it is morally justified.

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
Every vegan blog I’ve read has warned those who are considering abstaining from eating meat that they will need a vitamin B-12 supplement to avoid anemia, and eat large doses of certain plants to replace the calcium, protein, omega-3 fatty acids, iron and zinc the rest of us get from eating meat and animal products.

To me, this says we humans were intended to eat meat.

Bill Quimby

quote:

I do not question it and the only side effects are occasional mood swings and illogical thinking

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

People can accept more easily the killing of an animal if it has a very visible benefit in their opinion, ie health. What they find more difficult to accept is as they see it the killing of an animal just to put it stuffed in a trophy room. They see no benefit to man or animal in this.

The point that I am trying to make is that donated meat is a "very visible benefit" of trophy hunting. Damn, I sure hate the words "trophy hunting".

Ah right, I did get your point then :-)

I'm sorry if you don't like the word trophy hunting but I don't know any other way to describe the difference between simply hunting to eat or hunting to put animals in a room of your house.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:

quote:

They certainly don't eat it for health benefits; they eat it because it tastes good and they somehow feel it is morally justified.

With all due respect AZ...HORSE SHIT! Meat has distinct health benefits in the human diet. There are a few select pro athletes who are strict vegetarians but for the majority, if you want to be a well rounded performance athlete, meat will be a part of your diet. To say that meat has no health benefits is simply incorrect.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:

quote:

They certainly don't eat it for health benefits; they eat it because it tastes good and they somehow feel it is morally justified.

With all due respect AZ...HORSE SHIT! Meat has distinct health benefits in the human diet. There are a few select pro athletes who are strict vegetarians but for the majority, if you want to be a well rounded performance athlete, meat will be a part of your diet. To say that meat has no health benefits is simply incorrect.

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:
Ms. Burns, with all due respect, if you are really interested in "objective journalism", perhaps you should ask Mr. Andrew to setup a conference call (via Skype) between you, Mr. Andrew, and Chief Kaindu. My understanding is that it was Chief Kaindu and his community who moved out of the Kafue floodplains to make way for Mr. Andrew's successful wildlife conservation project. Ethical hunters and anti-hunters can rant and rave until the proverbial "cows come home", but the real stakeholders are the conservancy owners/directors, concession lessees, local chiefs, headmen, and their villagers. What say you?