Isn't that the catchy phrase of the newest film by Derek Joubert, and his nut-job, anti-hunting, wife? As I recall it is. Definitely a propoganda film, aimed at the un-informed public, in hopes of putting a stop to lion hunting for good. Oh, and a great way to raise millions of dollars from the gullible, mis-informed public as well. I often wonder if these folks really believe in what they preach, or is it nothing more than a means to an end - MONEY? Sad as it seems, its an unfortunate fact we must face, these loonies are out there and working to shut us down.

Thus, as I, along with others, have taken up the fight for the lion, lion conservation, and African wildlife conservation as a whole. I think I have become most saddened, and frankly heart-broken, by the obvious lack of concern for conservation efforts among some of our own. I mean that sincerely, heart-broken and saddened, by the actions of some, and the continued support of it by others. Fact is, this is a different reaction from what some maybe have come to expect, or at least, believe from me. I spent 8 - 10 years training for and competing in, amateur body-building, and a few more years participating/training in organized fighting. So, confrontation, physical interaction and aggressiveness is not something that I am un-accustomed to. My back-ground, and type-A personality may have been what partially led to my original and overly aggressive thread pertaining to "wrldhunter's" lion shot with Muchinga/Abie in Zambia. I did however realize, an aggressive approach is probably not the answer, and since then I have tried hard to simply present my position/concerns/facts, and hoped to shed some light on the urgency of the situation. And that's all I am hoping and trying to do now, before its too late. Mistakes I've made, learning from them is the important thing. I sincerely hope the lion is not made to suffer, from our continued mistakes.

At a meeting we (LCTF) had with John Jackson - C.F. in June 2011, he told us an interesting story about a face to face meeting he was part of with several very influential members of the anti-hunting community a few years ago. Simply stated by the Antis themselves, and agreed with by JJ. The moral of the story was we as "hunters", provide more fuel for their cause, than they could ever hope to gain on their own. The current shooting of young/immature lions lately, and the support of it by some, is only further proof of this. More importantly, we are alienating those that would and must support us if we are to succeed, the scientists! Like it or not, agree with it or not, the scientific community holds the best hand in this poker game. When it comes to the potential ESA listing of the Lion, or the CITES 1 uplisting of the Lion, the USFWS, the U.S. Department of the Interior (Secretary - Ken Salazar), and CITES, will listen to the recommendations of the world's leading Lion Scientists/Experts, period, end of story! As a collective group, the scientific community all agree and support the theory that the shooting of 2-4 yr old lions is and will continue to have a negative impact on the sustainability/longevity of the wild lion. That's it, that's the fact, and arguing against it, is just arguing for the sake or arguing. So, as hunters why in the world are we not working hard to conform to what the best available science says is the way forward to the best Lion Conservation/hunting efforts?

PLEASE NOTE - Anyone I mention here specifically, is simply done so as an "Example", its not meant as a disagreement or intolerance of their message or opinion. I wrote this separate thread, as I have been gone for several weeks, and I simply could not read or keep up with all of the postings in the Lion Conservation Forum. I was personally prompted to do so, because of the most recent AR hunt report posted in regards to another northern Zimbabwe lion shot.

1. Some have dis-agreed with us vehemently, "505Gibbs" and his brother "Smarterthanu", for starters. We've been called Zealots, said we want to "control" hunters, argued with us that the scientists are wrong, and said we have acted like hunters who shoot young lions are beneath us? Others have said I/we are bad communicators, etc.

2. Recently "crbutler" mentioned in a post that some believe alot of the scientists are anti-hunters?

3. Some have said, as we too have said, the BIGGEST threat to the lion is human/lion conflict, not hunting. A fact that no one will dis-agree with, at least I don't think so?

So, I'm gonna try and put forth the best argument I can and let the chips fall where they may. Regardless of your opinion, please believe me when I say that I simply want what's best for the African Lion, African wildlife, and the longevity of the lion/lion hunting and hunting of the rest of Africa's wildlife. I mean that sincerely, and I mean that for us ALL! I fight hard against the shooting of young lions only for one reason. Because I honestly believe if we don't stop doing it, we will lose it all. Plus, I believe in the science, I really do.

FIRST, "crbutler" I don't claim to know all of the scientists involved in the lion issue, but I certainly know the most influential ones. Namely, Craig Packer, Luke Hunter, Colleen Begg, Paula White, and others. These scientists are widely considered the world's experts on the African Lion, or at least the ones that the officials making the decisions on the lion's future, are going to listen to. I have spent loads of time with Dr. White, both in Zambia and here in the states, and I have spent plenty of time communicating via email/phone with the others. Not one of them has ever voiced an anti-hunting sentiment to me, not once. In fact, just the opposite. All of them have recognized the need for continued lion hunting, and support it, but have all voiced concern that wide ranging lion hunting practices must change, for the betterment of the LION! Dr. White in particular, who is from U.C. Berkley (hugely liberal school), and a california girl, is a monstrous supporter of hunting and lion hunting in particular. She too has even taken a little grief from fellow scientists, as she wants to see the laws make the taking of a 5 yr old lion legal (simply because proper ID of 5 yr old plus lions can be difficult). But she too, has preached to me about the need for NOT shooting 2-4 yr old lions! So, all I can say is the ones that I know, and the ones that really matter in this issue at least, are NOT anti-hunting at all.

SECOND, and specifically to "505Gibbs" (who by the way, hunts with us in eastern Colorado, so I don't hate the guy) and "smarterthanu" (who should be hunting with us, if he wants to kill a big deer), let me propose the following idea. As mentioned, I recognize you two do not agree with us, so rather than simply telling us we are wrong, telling us the scientists are wrong, etc, etc. Wouldn't the best thing to do, be to prove us and them wrong? We are working with, and trying to follow the best available science at the moment. Not control others or deminish their hunting accomplishments. Science says, shooting lions under 5-6, or pride males with dependent cubs, is hugely detrimental to the longevity of the lion in a particular area, period! Just as the link to the article by Dr's Packer & Whitman, "Modeling the Effects of Trophy Selection and Environmental Disturbance on a Simulated Population of African Lions", placed on page 11 by "Bwanamich" clearly describes. http://forums.accuratereloadin...51/m/6761048751/p/11

Arguing that this is all wrong, is just that, arguing. Considering the decision makers of the world will listen to this rationale, because of who it comes from, calling names and saying why, why, why, is hardly gonna fix/change this widely recognized sentiment. Only sound science, and wide ranging support of it, will accomplish that goal.

So my question to you guys is this. Can you provide valid, and peer reviewed science, that contradicts the recognized science of the day? Can you provide wide ranging support for your stance (quotas should be what matters, not age limit/laws) from recognized agencies/organizations? For example, TPHA (Tanzania Professional Hunters Assoc), TAHOA (Tanzania Hunting Operators Assoc), ZPHA (Zambia Professional Hunters Assoc) are all in support of the shooting of only mature/6 yr old plus lions. Can you provide an official stance from one single African Professional Hunting Organization that is NOT in favor of this widely recognized concept? What about the hunting organizations like DSC or SCI, last time I checked, they too were in support of the 6 yr old law/rule as it pertains to hunting the African Lion. My friends, this is what its gonna take, not just a few guys on AR railing against us for trying to control, bad-mouth and slander others! Look guys, I too support your ultra conservative views, believe me, I do! I am the most anti-socialist, pro-capitalist, Obama administration hating individual, you could ever find. But facts are facts, and we must work within the parameters of the USFWS, CITES and the Department of the interior, period! They'll listen to facts/figures and science, but not a couple of Texans screaming and ranting, that they/we are all just a bunch of socialist/control freak, anti-hunting, nut jobs. So please, if you can provide contradictory info, to the best info available at the moment, do so, and we'll all likely support it? Otherwise, you're really just wasting everyone's time, including your own!

THIRD, without question the biggest problem is the lion/human conflict, we all know that. However, hunting and the vast amount of hunting blocks throughout Africa (185,000 km2 in Tanzania, 145,000 km2 in Zambia and 45,000 km2 in Zim) are currently providing a HUGE buffer/safety zone, outside of the currently established National Parks. Within many of these blocks, Lion Hunting is a huge ticket item, and a huge necessity for the hunting within theese blocks to continue. Without the revenue generated from lion hunting, many of the outfitters could not stay in business. Thus, leaving the block un-protected/un-hunted, and simply opening the door for the flood of natives to ravage the place, and the game included. Knowing this fact, imagine for a moment that the ESA listing for the lion comes to pass. Supported by the scientists/lion experts of the world, because the hunting community failed to conform to best known/accepted Lion Hunting practices of the day. Leaving roughly 60% of the current lion hunters (Americans) out of the mix. How long is it gonna be, before the hunting industry in some of these places simply faces collapse? Now, don't take my word for it. Ask many of the outfitters in these areas, just as I have, what a devastating effect the loss of lion hunting would have upon their future, and the future of their hunting block/s.

Ladies & Gentlemen, the bottom line is this. Currently, the leaders of the organizations (USFWS, CITES, etc) who make the decisions, listen to the science, and the organizations who carry the knowledge/experience they deem worth listening to. As it pertains to the African Lion issue, that at the moment is the scientific community, and to a lesser degree, organizations like SCI/DSC, CF, and the leading African Pro Hunters/Operators associations. And to my knowledge, every single one of them is in agreement with, and support of, the science that says lions under 5-6 yrs old, and male lions who have dependent cubs, if shot, are done so to the detriment of the wild lion, period!

With that said, let it be known that I fully believe, as do the members of the LCTF, and many PH's throughout Africa, as well as several of the largest hunting organizations/PH organizations in the world. That if we as hunters continue to shoot and support the shooting of male lions, like the 4 posted on AR, from nothern Zimbabwe over the past couple months, we are sealing our own fate, and most unfortunately, the future fate of the African Lion, and potentially most of Africa's current wildlife. I can guarantee you this, if we as hunters continue to shoot/support the shooting of these lions, the scientific community will absolutely lobby against any sort of continued lion hunting, and will lobby in favor of the ESA listing, and the uplisting of the lion to CITES 1. Believe you me, if the scientific community takes the position if favor of these up-listings, the powers to be, WILL LISTEN. Obviously you can agree or disagree, either way my position will remain the same. The shooting of these young/immature lion must stop! I do not mean to intentionally offend anyone, and I apologize in advance if it appears that way. My only intention is the hope that continued facts/figures and education, will help facilitate the change necessary to bring about much needed lion hunting reform, nothing more.

Pictured below is a lion shot in the Zambezi Valley just 3 weeks ago (July 2011). Proof positive that big-maned, mature lions can and are still taken there, if selective hunting is practiced by the PH in charge of the hunt. However, if 2-4 yr old lions are continually shot, how does one ever expect them to reach maturity? Secondly, could continued shooting of young lions be the reason why the majority of the lions we now see shot from these areas are mostly immature, being that few male lions have or are reaching full maturity in the first place? Why is it the vast majority of the lions taken recently from the Save valley Conservancy are good maned, mature lions, and the lions we have recently seen coming from the Zambezi Valley are mostly immature/young lions? Management/shooting practices is the answer, its really quite simple!!!



If any of you are interested in helping the LCTF, or can offer some valid/varified info, be it contradictory or in agreement with the current stance taken by us, please contact me anytime. I don't claim we have all the answers, we are simply going with the best science/info available at this moment.

I sincerely appreciate your time and consideration in this matter, and I hope lion hunting reform will become a more widely accepted practice in the very near future!!

Thank you,

quote:

I was personally prompted to do so, because of the most recent AR hunt report posted in regards to another northern Zimbabwe lion shot.

Aaron, are you referring to the Dande North post by Indy? If so, are you aging that lion off of the pic on the report or do you have further information?

Aaron,

I can't see WHY anyone wants to shoot a 2-4 year old lion. I can see a mistake being made, but not a deliberate choice. If my PH gives me the green light to shoot a lion and I shoot him and it turns out he was mistaken, why should the hunter pay legally in addition to the hunt costs, trophy fees, etc.? If I shoot an animal against my PH's wishes, because I just "have" to shoot it, then I deserve more significant sanctions.

My biggest beef with the whole "modification" of hunting practices is that we have had this become the first target of people who are supposed to deal with facts. I get resentful that they feel the need to place more regulatory burden on the people who are causing the least amount of trouble (hunters) while not dealing with research to come up with innovative ways to make man-lion conflict less of an issue. These scientists are putting themselves into a legal issue in this matter.

I can understand hunters are the low hanging fruit.

I guess what really gets me is that we have some politically motivated scientists lobbying a political appointee to make a decision on a political matter, and the scientists have not risen up in arms to say, "whoa there, Tex. That's not scientific thought." as a united group.

Science is a tool, not an answer.

I don't have all the info or data but I am quite sure that there are numerous programs all over the lion range states that are trying to deal with the issue of human/lion conflict. Dr Lawrence Frank has suh projects going on in Kenya. Similar one's are currently operating in Tanzania, albeit not everywhere and still in the infancy level of implementation.

The issue is that the Anti's have identified a "weak spot" in the sport of lion hunting; a weakness that can easily be exploited because Science and Research is available and very much public knowledge amongst the decision makers/Governments and supports their ESA application. They see this as an easy avenue to achieve a small victory in their battle to close hunting. For the neutral decision makers (if that is what they can be temred as?), it is a simple decision for them to make, particularly if no one is arguing against it or objecting to it. Other than CF, I am not aware of any other Org that has publicly stated they will oppose the petition. LCTF, unfortunately, has just been formed and have little proven track record in discussions with the USFW, CITES, etc. I am not so sure they will be invited to the table when the final discussion comes. Hopefully I am wrong? So getting the "experts" to support our cause at that table and stand beside us is critical. To do this, we have to reform and we have to reform based on available research and science. And besides, reform is flexible not set in stone!

quote:

I guess what really gets me is that we have some politically motivated scientists lobbying a political appointee to make a decision on a political matter,

There are not any scientists lobbying for ESA uplisting...only NGO groups like HSUS...big difference.

That is a major point I am trying to get across...the science is on our side as long as we change the few things that science shows that we need to change.

quote:

So getting the "experts" to support our cause at that table and stand beside us is critical. To do this, we have to reform and we have to reform based on available research and science. And besides, reform is flexible not set in stone!

If you really want to save the African lion then you need to make them more expensive. There is not a lion out there for every hunter who wants one.
Hunters need to stop whining and start paying in to fund scientific research on the ground.

quote:

the science is on our side as long as we change the few things that science shows that we need to change.

So, if there is any true issues with hunting, the scientist will vote in favor of the ESA listing, knowing that will mean the end of the free ranging lion?

sadly probably accurate and PETA would rather them be extinct than anyone ever shoot one again. I hope not to see uplisting as lions will be sent to parks to live out their lives instead of being free range.

Hey guys,
I've been reading quite a bit...most of you know I've been highly involved in wildlife research for the past 3 yrs, specifically in Africa.
Better quotes I've seen!!

quote:

Originally posted by African Hunters Quest:
Hunters need to stop whining and start paying in to fund scientific research on the ground.

You would be amazed how difficult it is to raise money to fight anti's, bs scientists, and NGO's with motives. Now, just so we're clear, I've not received one penny in salary from donated funds...so don't even think I have a financial motive.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

the science is on our side as long as we change the few things that science shows that we need to change.

So, if there is any true issues with hunting, the scientist will vote in favor of the ESA listing, knowing that will mean the end of the free ranging lion?

I am not saying that is an absolute...just saying that there ARE things that the hunting industry could do better and that the scientists would like to see some changes. I say that if it is good for the lion we should ALREADY be on board.

quote:

Originally posted by Oryxhunter1983:
Hey guys,
I've been reading quite a bit...most of you know I've been highly involved in wildlife research for the past 3 yrs, specifically in Africa.
Better quotes I've seen!!

quote:

Originally posted by African Hunters Quest:
Hunters need to stop whining and start paying in to fund scientific research on the ground.

You would be amazed how difficult it is to raise money to fight anti's, bs scientists, and NGO's with motives. Now, just so we're clear, I've not received one penny in salary from donated funds...so don't even think I have a financial motive.

Just like OH1983 says...it is difficult to raise the kind of money you need for long-term scientific studies.

Then...it takes years to aquire data. We really don't have that kind of time. We need to work with the people we have.

Some of these people have years and years of data and experience. The ones in which I have named numerous times don't want to get rid of hunting blocks as it will reduce lion habitat significantly.

Aaron, I may be one of the few, but I agree with you and Lane 100%. I do however think there is a breakdown in communication between client and hunter. Most guys like to book their own Lion hunt. Usually via one of the shows around the country. They spend a lot of time with a PH; some wining and dining, but the bottom line is; at what point does the client fail to communicate with the PH: "I am NOT interested in shooting a Lion with milk on his lips!" Most seem to be oblivious to this seemingly small detail and are happy as a wolf in a flock of sheep when they pull the trigger on Simba Jr. At what point does it become the responsibilty of the hunter/client to say "No cubs." And the PH...let's not let them walk away from the obligation to not allow clients to shoot young Lion's. If in doubt...don't! I know a number of men who have passed on young Lion's simply because they are dedicated to hunting only mature Lion's. It's difficult to age a Lion on the ground sometimes, especially at low light or at night. But most are shot over bait and there should be ample time afforded by the PH before he says "take him." Most hunters will never be able to afford the grand price Lion hunting commands, and that is unfortunate. But Lion's aren't the only high priced hunt...there are many, too many today. But bickering and name calling only gives the anti crowd more power, and they laugh at us. If you want to see piss and vinegar, come watch what we deal with over these Wolves. You'll get your fill of name calling and freaks threatening to kill you, like nothing you've ever seen before. The Lion deserves better than this and we all as hunters should stand tall on this matter. I don't hunt 'Coon's with a dog pack, but I'll defend any one of you that does. Why? Because it's a legal method of hunting in many areas/States and the last time I checked, Raccoon's were in great numbers. Think about this, we need to stand united...or we fall.
LDK

quote:

I guess what really gets me is that we have some politically motivated scientists lobbying a political appointee to make a decision on a political matter, and the scientists have not risen up in arms to say, "whoa there, Tex. That's not scientific thought." as a united group. I think Lane responded to this one.

Not really.

Saying that its NGO's that are doing the twisting, and that all the scientists are saying bad things would happen if Lion hunting would be stopped, its just that unless you do what they say you have to do they will keep quiet, and let the NGO's have their way seems a bit disingenuous.

It almost seems that you are saying between Lane and yourself that the involved scientists are behaving in a childish manner- "I won't tell the truth unless you agree to do it my way..." You state that they are not anti hunting, that they realize that hunting is the only way to keep free ranging population of Lion, but they will not endorse this unless we agree to make some changes that they think are needed.

If this is truely the hunter's decision to make, why all this fol-de-rol? Why not just get the outfitters and safari companies to sign on that these are our conditions and that's that?

Do you honestly think that I can tell Adam Clements or Luke Samras that I want to hunt Lion my way and the heck with what they want to do- that I'm going to shoot every lion, cub, and lioness with cubs out of a chopper, and then keep the one I want, and be d%^$%ed with what my PH says? Have you, Aaron ever told the PH that you were going to do it your way to make it easier to kill a lion? (Harder I can see, but easier?)

If this is more a "tell your PH this is how you want to hunt them" idea, then you are going to have a hard road, as you have to convince each and every person who goes over there do do it in this fashion, and in reality even then there will be those who are on their once in a lifetime hunt who will say that they don't care, that they want a Lion and be danged if its a 2 year old, sustainability is not their concern.

Sustainability IS the concern of the industry.

That you have convinced me that we need to not shoot young cats, is nothing (especially given that I didn't think shooting a young lion would be something I would be proud of in the first place...)

Convincing the industry itself that rogue outfitters need to be stopped and have PH's come forward when they see bad practices and have this acted on quickly is what you and the various scientists need to work on.

A nuclear threat at their (PH and outfitter) livelihoods that they all see as being a constant situation is going to probably encourage the opposite actions (make what you can now, because in 1-5 years they will ban it anyhow...) This is the attitude your scientists seem to be putting forth.

Let me say first, I don't have a problem with Tanzania placing a law on its books that they want mature lion taken only.

I don't have a problem that the Niassa reserve came up with its way of hunting lion.

I don't have a problem with the way that Zimbabwe manages its lion population.

I don't have a problem with Kenya banning hunting when they did. (after all its their country, and at the time there was no "Kenya" to point out the dreadful mistake they were making.)

I do have a problem with Botswana's ban, but only so far as it seems that it was not scientifically based. I do recognize that it is a independent nation, and they do have the right to govern as they see fit though.

As for the US government's role here- I can't for the life of me see why the scientists are not publicly stating what a power grab this whole petition is on the part of the Secretary of the Interior, instead of being a part of it. ("I will make the determination...")

As for the comment that there are no scientists that are on the petitions side, I somehow doubt that there are not some PhD's in HSUS or PETA that have credentials, and as far as the USG is concerned ARE experts- even if they are truly not.


A little more humility on the part of the scientists would not go awry either- something on the order of "this is our current best judgement," and state something about in their opinion how long they feel this should last until it is revisited. When I read some of this information, in particular Dr. Packer, he seems to be way too sure of himself given his data's limitations, but then again, maybe I'm reading way too much into his remarks.

I've given Conservation Force some money regarding this issue. Mainly because he seems more legal based, and that is really what I see this issue as. The point made by someone above that LCTF is too new to have a seat at the table at this time seems to point out that for effect, maybe we should be concentrating out resources there.

Can you give me a reason to give to LCTF instead of Jackson's outfit?