quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Raysendero, When someone asks me a question about firearms and permits, i think fire arms in general not just ones used to hunt.
Are you telling me that everyone who has a fire arm is as safe as you claim to be with one? Can you honestly say the average Joe on the street should be able to carry a weapon with no training? How would you feel if someone you love or yourself was injured or even killed by someone with a fire arm that has had no training?
When it comes to fire arms i believe better safe than sorry and i have not only the audacity but the right too to hold that opinion.
Now perhaps rather than being hostile and judgemental you could calm down and respect my right to an opinion and check your facts before you lose your temper with me.

You have no real idea what i know or do not know about firearms and their use! I could be an expert for all you know and have studied them for years.

I haven't lost my temper - Others on this site that know my writing style for years can attest to that. I'm forming my opinion of you solely on your writings on this thread. And You are avoiding giving any "facts" when You just had the opportunity to do so! So figure you have little experience in handling of firearms and actually fear them from your image of "Joe".

I've never met "the average Joe on the street" so don't know him. Bet you don't know him either - But your already are afraid of his gun handling safety skills!

Let's try again - You claim the audacity to "school" us and regulate us. This was and is my point. You still don't get it!

Mrs. Jo,

If you look carefully at how hunters describe why they hunt a pattern emerges.

You find that it is almost a spiritual thing described in poetic ways by people that have no buseiness being poets.

Hunting is a way for people to get away to bond with friends. To engage with the majesty and beauty of nature. For just a few fleeting days each year to have a single purpose and goals in a world that is often devoid of it. The pursuit of your game, the work that begins if you are successful. And after a long day of chasing Kudu the evenings whether it is in a cabin at deer camp or around the bush tv. Bragging and teasing and generally just talking about your successes and failures in the field.

Take away the hunt and it turns into a camping trip. A far less satisfying event.

John

quote:

I am from the UK as stated in my last but one post, take it you didn't read it lol

No, I did read it and if you will go back up the page and look at the posts responses in order, my question was posted at 7:30, and your first mention about where you are from was not posted until 16:29, this site has a little down time sometimes, so posts and responses may be widely spaced.

One thing that I believe in, is that there are no "Average Joe's" in hunting. Hunters are dedicated and opinionated.

We are dedicated to see that our wildlife populations are managed at levels to maintain the species and ensure that there are excvess animals that we can shoot.

Too many times well intentioned, but terribly mis-informed people simply don't have the proper sources of information available, or the sources they have are wrong.

Lions, because they are apex predators, cannot be managed like deer in parks. Because of their basic biology, they cannot be managed like leopards.

The problem to many people do not understand, is that where as sport hunters pay for the priveldge of hunting and perhaps shooting a wild lion, a villager trying to protect his goats/sheep/chickens/family does not have to adhere to the same strictures as the sport hunter.

Lions pose a direct and immediate threat to the natives, and if there is no consideration from their countries goverment to maintain healthy, sport huntable populations of lions, lions that will bring in much needed revenue to the country or to the local villages, those villagers are going to kill every lion they see regardless of age/sex or the extinction of the species.

The thing about having opinions, especially open minded ones is that they can change.

Thanks John i take all your points on board.

Raysendero,
I quote - 'Let's try again - You claim the audacity to "school" us and regulate us. This was and is my point. You still don't get it!'

No i have not tried to school you, i don't have the gun education to do that. And no i have not tried to regulate you either, that is not within my power. If it were i would research a lot more and then make a decision. I can only make an opinion when asked 'now' on what my knowledge and beliefs are 'now'.
Besides i would pretty much say gun regulations are a pretty moot point in this discussion, i answered a previous posters question because he asked it. Prior to that i hadn't given a thought to what gun regulations for hunting were.

John and crazyhorseconsulting, I will come back to your posts later as i am 'supposed' to be working and havent the time to dedicate to them right now.

Jolouburn,

You will be completely unsuccessful trying to separate guns and hunting. There are to one another as inhaling is to exhaling.

I am surprised at the civility to this point.

I would like for you to point out a forum where people of your mind are, I will sign up and see how I am treated.

Regards,

Steve

Hi John,

I quote - 'You find that it is almost a spiritual thing described in poetic ways by people that have no buseiness being poets.'

As i do not hunt i will admit i have a little trouble understanding the 'enjoyment factor' hunters gain. However i am guessing that it is similar to that which i gain going on a photo safari.

crazyhorseconsulting,
Apologies.
I am well intentioned. Well informed? Not as much as i'd like and that is why i am here. I do comprehend what you are saying and i will take it on board as i research further here and elsewhere. Thanks.

Nganga,

I know guns are to hunters what pen is to writer and i didnt mean to try and seperate them. All i meant was that i dont see what gun regulations have to do with the conservation of the lion!

Im not sure what you are trying to say with the rest of your post!! Are you surprised people have been so civil to me or me to them or both?

If the first and i have caused you offence i apologise it was certainly not intentional.

As for forums for 'anti-hunters' i am sure there are many but i only peruse the facebook page 'lion aid' at present. I do not know what sort of a welcome you would recieve anywhere to be honest but i can see it being more hostile than the welcome i have recieved here.

No, there is no problem, your civility is refreshing. I looked at the vitriol on the lionaid page and I have sincerely enjoyed peaceful our debate on Accurate Reloading.

I agree that you have been treated in a fair manner and that I would not be so warmly welcomed into the forum of contrary opinion.

Steve

jolouburn, no apologies neccessary. Internet forums/chatrooms/bulletin boards are a very cold emotionless medium and misunderstanding other individuals intentions in their posts and responses happen on a regular basis.

Hunters as a whole have been attacked on many levels by those wanting hunting stopped and the base scheme for those attacks deals purely on emotionally charged mis-information.

Lion hunting is the one that is being focused on at present. It is being used as a stepping stone. It matters not to the folks wanting it stopped, that once the "Sport" hunting interest and income is removed from the equation, there will be no incentive to prevent the natives from exterminating the remaining animals.

Don't know how much looking around at the Lion Conservation topic area you have done, but it is easy to see discussions cocerning such things as all of the lions in one pride, lions that were long term research animals, being poisoned by locals. Is there any uproar over that, No. The anti hunting element wants one specific activity stopped and care less what happens to the animals they are trying to save after they get what they want.

If the anti's are successful ingetting lion hunting stopped, then they will move on to elephants, and then something else ad infinitum.

Jolouburn,

Why is killing an animal to eat it okay but killing it for a "trophy" (I personally despise that word) is somehow morally inferior? You don't have to eat meat, yet you choose to do so. Why? You justify your actions by saying you don't kill the animal - but one surely dies. And here is a real dirty little secret: you don't have to eat meat to live - vegetarians prove everyday you can live without eating meat. Therefore, I can only conclude you eat meat because you enjoy it. Some vegetarians can't believe anyone could derive pleasure from eating meat, just as you can't see how we derive pleasure from hunting. Kind of hyopcritical to question us, don't you think?

How do you feel about abortion? Some people find it morally reprehensible but others believe there are questions of morality that we just can't/won't know until we meet our maker - if that occurs. And since we can't know what is truly morally okay on any number of issues, perhaps each of us should make their own moral choices.

I am always stunned by people like you who want to make moral choices for me but insist that turnabout is not fair play.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:
Thank you very much for all your replies so far.

I have no problem from a rational point of view with people who hunt to eat as long as the population of the hunted animal is sustainable.

Mr or Mrs Jolouburn.
The hunting of Lion can and is sustainable within Game reserves that manage it. The ideal situation is to increase or better manage reserves that can sustain Lion and other indigenous game populations.
To do this within a third world country you will need income and importantly will require the use of these large areas. For instance, take a Nature Reserve such as the massive Niassa Game Reserve in Mozambique (Similar to Zimbabwe's Zambezi valley Safari Areas and Tanzania's Selous Game Reserve est) . This area is not overly conducive for "Eco" type Safaris yet it's a hunting Safari paradise (a growing paradise due to management I might ad) with its large areas and increasing game population. It would be a mission to fund this area and keep it free of Mining, Forestry, Poaching and Farm works. This can and is being achieved with the help of Controlled Tourist hunting.
As for understanding hunting. Like any of my passions I find It hard to explain why I love hunting. Perhaps it just a natural emotion in this now very unnatural thing we call modern civilization ?

quote:

Hunters as a whole have been attacked on many levels by those wanting hunting stopped and the base scheme for those attacks deals purely on emotionally charged mis-information.

Wow i think i've found how to quote - woo hoo!!

Crazyhorseconsulting,
I will certainly agree that the majority of anti-hunting responses to hunting are emotional. Honestly the first thing i think when seeing a pic of a hunter and their kill is poor thing! I cannot help that and that is why i will never hunt, it's not my thing.
However there are those out there who are capable of seperating their emotions from rational thinking and do attempt to understand and do whats best for the animals. I would hazard a guess that there are people who act purely emotionally on both sides of the fence.

quote:

Lion hunting is the one that is being focused on at present. It is being used as a stepping stone. It matters not to the folks wanting it stopped, that once the "Sport" hunting interest and income is removed from the equation, there will be no incentive to prevent the natives from exterminating the remaining animals.

I know that a few animals are being concentrated on at present, but yes lions seem to be the prevalent one, and yes i agree that if lion hunting is banned or temporarily stopped many people will move on to the next animal. Not a bad thing as long as intentions are good and emotions are kept in check.It just seems a shame to me that the fence dividing hunters and anti-hunters cannot be removed and we all work together. A pipe dream though i fear.
I cannot really comment on what will happen if lion hunting is stopped as i am still researching and reading suggested material from here.

quote:

Don't know how much looking around at the Lion Conservation topic area you have done, but it is easy to see discussions cocerning such things as all of the lions in one pride, lions that were long term research animals, being poisoned by locals. Is there any uproar over that, No. The anti hunting element wants one specific activity stopped and care less what happens to the animals they are trying to save after they get what they want.

I have read through quite a few of the threads in this part of the forum and i am going to be very honest and say that i was hugely and pleasantly surprised to find hunters are so concerned about the conservation of the lion.
I know there was quite an uproar on twitter and there have been media reports about the poisoning. Some of this came from anti hunting groups and some not.

anotherazwriter,

Why is killing an animal to eat it okay but killing it for a "trophy" (I personally despise that word) is somehow morally inferior?
With respect you have the right to believe it is ok and to take part in hunting for manes, tusks, horns etc etc and i have the right to believe the opposite. I have not once said your beliefs make you morally inferior to me or vice versa.

You don't have to eat meat, yet you choose to do so. Why?
I believe in a balanced and healthy diet and i believe that includes eating meat.

You justify your actions by saying you don't kill the animal - but one surely dies.
I don't justify my actions by saying it's ok for me to eat meat because i don't have to kill it. I said that i don't eat any meat that has been hunted, ie shot. I choose to eat meat that is farmed and killed in a different way. I also said i don't particularly like the method the farmed meat is killed by either but i make the choice to eat it. I'm sure you will agree that i have the right to choose not to eat hunted meat just as you have the right to eat hunted meat.

And here is a real dirty little secret: you don't have to eat meat to live - vegetarians prove everyday you can live without eating meat. Therefore, I can only conclude you eat meat because you enjoy it.
Yes i enjoy some meat, i'm not a fan of chicken but i eat it because it is part of a good healthy diet. I am aware i don't have to eat meat but as i said before, part of a balanced healthy diet.

Some vegetarians can't believe anyone could derive pleasure from eating meat, just as you can't see how we derive pleasure from hunting. Kind of hyopcritical to question us, don't you think?
Not at all, i would not mind a vegetarian questioning me on my choice to eat meat. And i think if you look at my original question i didn't question your choice to hunt i asked what you feel you contribute to the conservation of the lion. It is only later when asked questions that i have stated any views on hunting. But not once have i questioned your right to hunt.

How do you feel about abortion? Some people find it morally reprehensible but others believe there are questions of morality that we just can't/won't know until we meet our maker - if that occurs. And since we can't know what is truly morally okay on any number of issues, perhaps each of us should make their own moral choices.
I personally think every case of abortion is different and should be treated as such.

I am always stunned by people like you who want to make moral choices for me but insist that turnabout is not fair play.
Show me where i have tried to make a moral choice for you. I have never mentioned morals once other than when questioned by you. Is it at all possible that rather than taking anything i say as a personal attack on your morals that we could concentrate on the important issue i can came here for, the conservation of the lion?

Mr or Mrs Jolouburn.
Mrs, i'm a girlie.

The hunting of Lion can and is sustainable within Game reserves that manage it. The ideal situation is to increase or better manage reserves that can sustain Lion and other indigenous game populations.
And this is why i am here, to learn more about how hunters feel they are or are contributing to conservation.

To do this within a third world country you will need income and importantly will require the use of these large areas. For instance, take a Nature Reserve such as the massive Niassa Game Reserve in Mozambique (Similar to Zimbabwe's Zambezi valley Safari Areas and Tanzania's Selous Game Reserve est) . This area is not overly conducive for "Eco" type Safaris yet it's a hunting Safari paradise (a growing paradise due to management I might ad) with its large areas and increasing game population. It would be a mission to fund this area and keep it free of Mining, Forestry, Poaching and Farm works. This can and is being achieved with the help of Controlled Tourist hunting.
Thanks

As for understanding hunting. Like any of my passions I find It hard to explain why I love hunting. Perhaps it just a natural emotion in this now very unnatural thing we call modern civilization ?
I think i can understand a base impulse. Since time began there has been hunter/gatherers who brought home the bacon so to speak and must have gained satisfaction from doing so, from providing for their family. I'm guessing that that impulse is still there in most of us, whether it is bringing home a wage packet or bringing home a kill. The satisfaction of providing for ones family.

quote:

Originally posted by jolouburn:

I said that i don't eat any meat that has been hunted, ie shot. I choose to eat meat that is farmed and killed in a different way. I also said i don't particularly like the method the farmed meat is killed by either but i make the choice to eat it.

Not to palaver an off-the-topic-subject...but could you please elaborate on the specifics of how the meat you eat is killed and the specifics of how you would like for it to be killed?

Hi ledvm,

Sure, cattle is rendered unconcious by electric shock and then hung upside down where it's throat is slit.
Horrendous and horrible in my opinion but once they are uncocncious supposably painless. I do not doubt though that the original shock surely hurts.

In an ideal world i would have my meat killed painlessly. Is this viable? I don't honestly know. I think in reality i would have to say the most painless way possible whatever that may be.

Having said all that i accept that an animal hunted and killed in one shot probably feels no more pain or possibly less i don't know than an animal shocked.

However it is the 'tales' of how it took 3,4 shots to bring down an animal that put me off eating hunted meat. That surely has to be more painful than an electric shock!

Also i have heard of animals being shot not fatally and then escaping either not to be killed on this occasion or hunted for several hours more before a fatal shot is delievered. Again this has to be more painful and ensues in longer suffering for the animal.

I make a choice not to eat hunted, ie shot meat but i do not claim that noone should eat hunted meat, it is personal choice. After all i have also seen tales on here of how many people that meat fed and see the benefit of this.