quote:

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

Dr. Butler,
John Jackson has been a consultant of LCTF from its inception. We DO NOT want to compete with him for money. Infact...we plan to give to him. Please continue to support Conservation Force.

As to your other statements...ALL I can say is this:

WHAT...is wrong with doing what is best for the lion. It is not like the scientists are telling you to stand on your head in the corner of your room for a week.

They are just asking to do what science (including Paula's work) has shown to be best. Nothing drastic at all.

AND NO noted lion expert is working towards ESA listing.

Lane, there is nothing at all wrong with what is doing what is best for the lion.

But both you and Aaron have repeatedly asked why some folks have doubts about the motives of the scientists and by extension the LCTF. I have been trying in my best efforts to explain to you what these issues might be. You asked, I attempted to answer.

But you also seem to be saying that the hunters should be for these new regulations. When someone (like me) has pointed out that there are certain errors in what you seem to be saying, its ignore or deflect.

I am glad that you guys are so passionate about the subject. I think I'm probably better educated than the average person who is interested in the subject, and I admit that there is a lot I don't know. Clearly, I'm not a lion biologist, but biology is biology, and what holds in medicine (human applied biology if you will) at its basis also applies in the other biological sciences. You are a vet. You know that if you give a horse penicillin it will have an effect on a susceptible organism, just like it will on a human. The doses are different, but the effects and routes of elimination are the same. Similarly, Lion biology is no different than my undergrad wildlife biology (which was targeted at migratory birds in my classes, with the statement made by my profs that while the specifics may be different in another population, the method remains the same...)

Most of what has been suggested I have no issue with personally, other than the fact that they are using unproven science as a basis for law instead of using it as a "best practices" model for managing a concession.

However, if no noted lion experts are working for the ESA then we really have nothing to worry about with regards to that, right? After all you said yourself that Dr. Packer is a friend of ours and he will make the decision....

All we really should be discussing is what changes we should support to make hunting better, right?

Yet ALL of your topics have been "The End is nigh! Repent all ye sinners!" Heck, the topic here is "The Last Lions!"

So either the science is going to be followed, the lion will remain a hunted species for US import and we need to have a logical discussion on what are lion hunting best practices, which is certainly something that should be supported, but probably with much better results at SCI/DSC and the various indigenous hunting organizations (Governmental, and hunting such as PHASA, and similar in all the countries that have or might have lion hunting), and to have you and the scientists involved stop beating the drum that doom is at hand for hunting, and just strongly word statements to Mr. Salazaar that this is wrong without all this condition mandates.

Or all of you should be saying that we should be concerned and the end is here, and it doesn't matter a good G^% D(*&% what the science says its all a political crap shoot, and the folks we are supposed to be allied with are demanding concessions for their aid, and it will be a moving target.

Given that I seem to be the only one saying anything that you disagree with, and that I really don't have a bone to pick with how this is done, I am going to sign off on this topic for a while and see just what happens here without me being either a loudmouth or a lone voice in the crowd, depending on what side you think I'm on.

Good luck. We all need it!

quote:

So either the science is going to be followed, the lion will remain a hunted species for US import and we need to have a logical discussion on what are lion hunting best practices, which is certainly something that should be supported, but probably with much better results at SCI/DSC and the various indigenous hunting organizations (Governmental, and hunting such as PHASA, and similar in all the countries that have or might have lion hunting), and to have you and the scientists involved stop beating the drum that doom is at hand for hunting, and just strongly word statements to Mr. Salazaar that this is wrong without all this condition mandates.

Or all of you should be saying that we should be concerned and the end is here, and it doesn't matter a good G^% D(*&% what the science says its all a political crap shoot, and the folks we are supposed to be allied with are demanding concessions for their aid, and it will be a moving target.

Given that I seem to be the only one saying anything that you disagree with, and that I really don't have a bone to pick with how this is done, I am going to sign off on this topic for a while and see just what happens here without me being either a loudmouth or a lone voice in the crowd, depending on what side you think I'm on.

Good luck. We all need it!

Doc,
Well said and you are not "alone". I have seen this before and we will see it again. Protection of the lion is seen by some as the most noble of causes, unfortunately this lends to people going overboard and acting emotional. They want to be the ones to say "I saved the lion", and in their efforts to further their own notoriety, logic and common sense goes out the window while others are berated and abused for thinking differently or not being willing to accept what is presented at face value.

quote:

berated and abused for thinking differently or not being willing to accept what is presented at face value.

First off Brad...YOU my friend are the biggest berater of all times.

You have called me name galore on this forum and I will never engage with you on the forum again.

You saying some one else is a berator...is laughable!!!

quote:

First off Brad...YOU my friend are the biggest berater of all times.

You have called me name galore on this forum and I will never engage with you on the forum again.

You saying some one else is a berator...is laughable!!!

I have called you nothing more than what you have proven yourself to be. If anything is "laughable" it is the irony of you bitching about my statement while saying you will never "engage" with me on the forum again. If you are looking for accurate adjectives to use, "shameful" would describe your deceptive, haughty, unbalanced approach to this subject.

quote:

Most of what has been suggested I have no issue with personally, other than the fact that they are using unproven science as a basis for law instead of using it as a "best practices" model for managing a concession.

CRBUTLER

the problenm here is that there isnt time for the science to be settled, if it ever can be in a biome . Some time in the real world you have to work with what you know.

"Best Practices " changes as we learn more, but waiting for certainty is just doing nothing.

To my mind this is a process while you are looking for an end product.

SSR

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:

quote:

Most of what has been suggested I have no issue with personally, other than the fact that they are using unproven science as a basis for law instead of using it as a "best practices" model for managing a concession.

CRBUTLER

the problenm here is that there isnt time for the science to be settled, if it ever can be in a biome . Some time in the real world you have to work with what you know.

"Best Practices " changes as we learn more, but waiting for certainty is just doing nothing.

To my mind this is a process while you are looking for an end product.

SSR

Cross - Excellent insight, excellent point! Nobody has all the answers, but to do nothing, waiting for all the answers would be awfully counter-productive for the lion.

CR - This whole issue is a huge dynamic, and you more than most certainly seem to get the bigger picture. I agree, alot of it is ultra frustrating, especially dealing with the "scientists", and their own political/financial agendas, of which, they ALL have one. If I honestly did not agree with the need for shooting only 5-6 yr old plus lions, I would not be doing this at all. Is the science, or the opinion of the scientists, the end all answer? No!! But with such a huge political dynamic, we have no choice but to try and conform to some degree.

As for the difference between us and JJ-CF, very simple. He's focused on the legal issues, we are focused on the industry reform. You mention supporting Zim's lion policy, well fact is, Zim's lion policy is a HUGE part of the problem! Zim Nat Parks requires the operator to pay for the lion quota they get, regardless of whether the quota is shot/paid for by the clients. So if an outfitter has 2 lion on quota, and is required to pay $4k - $5k per lion, he's much more likely to shoot 2 lion, regardless of age/maturity, rather than lose money. An unfortunate by-product of some African Countries, GREED!

In Tanzania for example, each outfitter is only required to pay for 40% of their total quota per year. So, shooting every lion on quota is not as pressing to a TZ outfitter, than to a Zim outiftter.

With that said, one thing the LCTF wants to look at doing is helping the Zim outfitters (financially) with this problem, at the same time, try to work with Zim Nat Parks to change this rule as it pertains to the lion quotas. Just a quick example, of why supporting the LCTF will be beneficial. We will focus on industry reform, and let JJ focus on the law.

I think the scientist figure that the lions are screwed if we don't change our practices and screwed if they cancel hunting. And frankly they are probably screwed no matter what due to changing demographics and politics.

The pessimistic side of me says all the best hunting practices in world will only serve to forstall the demise. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.. after all maybe we can ensure our kids have wild lions even if theres won't.

quote:

one thing the LCTF wants to look at doing is helping the Zim outfitters (financially) with this problem,

Aaron,
Please expand on this statement.

We will try to help reform the current status, and in turn, try to help Zim operators in the process. Its something we are considering, but no decisions have been made.