Choctaw
Member
No kidding. We can't kill pigs fast enough here.
Courageous big game hunting runs afoul
- Thread starter leadcounsel
- Start date
- Status
Jim Watson
Member
Just what do these "conservation organizations" do with the money?
Send groceries to the natives so they don't have to poach for money or bush meat?
Birth control for the animals so they don't overpopulate the range? Or for the natives so they don't destroy habitat?
The sport hunter pays a lot for a hunting license and trophy fees, maybe more trickles down from the corrupt government than the "conservation organization" and the natives usually get to eat any game shot besides camp meat.
Send groceries to the natives so they don't have to poach for money or bush meat?
Birth control for the animals so they don't overpopulate the range? Or for the natives so they don't destroy habitat?
The sport hunter pays a lot for a hunting license and trophy fees, maybe more trickles down from the corrupt government than the "conservation organization" and the natives usually get to eat any game shot besides camp meat.
X-Rap
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 6,657
Guy should have just gone to Milwaukee and hunted their lion.
I can't see going to a country run by a violent dictator under any conditions.
There's an interesting story about Mugabe eating a zoo for his birthday, I'm on my phone and don't know how to copy and paste but it's a good read, makes the Dr. look like a vegan.
I can't see going to a country run by a violent dictator under any conditions.
There's an interesting story about Mugabe eating a zoo for his birthday, I'm on my phone and don't know how to copy and paste but it's a good read, makes the Dr. look like a vegan.
horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,755
Back to hunting topics what would you use to hunt a lion ???? Me I'm thinking some big ole double rifle would be cool but I want a scope and at least a football field between us so let's say 300 win mag for caliber????
CoRoMo
Member
Maybe for a great many of the plains ungulates, but a lion is a big cat that can kill you! So begin at .375 and up, you're generally in good shape.
sage5907
Member
I just wonder how the guy got out of the country before the authorities realized that he had shot old Cecil. Maybe the 40 hour story gave him time to catch a plane and be long gone!
That may well be good insurance to stop a charge and what I'd expect a guide to be using as backup. But lots of lion have been taken with 7X57, 270, and 30-06.
I've been researching the topic for a while. Seems to me the real blame here needs to be placed on the animal lovers who turned this animal into a tame pet. It happens quite often with deer here. People who spend too much time watching Bambi forget that these are supposed to be wild animals who are afraid of humans. But they let them get accustomed to being around humans and even being fed by them. This is where Cecil was.
Which is fine as long as he was enclosed in a no hunting preserve. From what I can gather the hunter was legally hunting off the preserve. The lion, with no fear of humans made himself an easy target and was killed when he left the preserve.
Despite the screams of animal rights groups there are plenty of lions available to be hunted. They are far from being an endangered animal.
leadcounsel
member
Sadly this statement fails to take facts into account. I'll trust National Geographic instead, which states:
Yep, that's a very small number indeed.
Strangely National Geographic, and other leading experts on the topic, don't suggest going to kill one and mount the head. Instead, they want donations to organizations that will protect these animals, study them, and create sustainable habitats and prevent their being killed. Gosh, how weird.
Thank you to all of the brave "hunters" who have killed these and other majestic animals for sport. :banghead:
Judge Not Lest Ye Shall Be Judged
Many years ago a man, his wife, and a small infant survived a ship wreck.
The family was adrift for many days. The man and his wife were going to starve to death along with their baby.
Long story short they killed and ate their baby. They were charged with murder.
It was in the United Kingdom that the trial was held.
As they stood before the court the judge stated he did not have the right nor the wisdom to sentence them for what took place in the raft on the open sea.
In short he told them that God would have to judge them for what they did and that for the remainder of their lives they would have to live with what they had done.
No matter what the punishment at the end of the day there are two facts we must remember.
The old lion was in agony for forty hours with an arrow sticking out of his body.
After tracking the old lion someone had the mercy to shoot and kill him.
The old lion was then beheaded and his body disposed of.
None of this should have happened. All of us know this in our hearts.
Who can place a value on the amount of joy that the lion brought to all who encountered him. In his thirteen years what was the value of his life?
$55,000.00?????
What will we do when our children ask us what a lion was really like, and we have to go to a museum to show them one?
Many years ago a man, his wife, and a small infant survived a ship wreck.
The family was adrift for many days. The man and his wife were going to starve to death along with their baby.
Long story short they killed and ate their baby. They were charged with murder.
It was in the United Kingdom that the trial was held.
As they stood before the court the judge stated he did not have the right nor the wisdom to sentence them for what took place in the raft on the open sea.
In short he told them that God would have to judge them for what they did and that for the remainder of their lives they would have to live with what they had done.
No matter what the punishment at the end of the day there are two facts we must remember.
The old lion was in agony for forty hours with an arrow sticking out of his body.
After tracking the old lion someone had the mercy to shoot and kill him.
The old lion was then beheaded and his body disposed of.
None of this should have happened. All of us know this in our hearts.
Who can place a value on the amount of joy that the lion brought to all who encountered him. In his thirteen years what was the value of his life?
$55,000.00?????
What will we do when our children ask us what a lion was really like, and we have to go to a museum to show them one?
ClickClickD'oh
Member
Vernon1 said:
What do you do now if your children ask what a lion is like?
DeepSouth
Random Guy
For those who care about his side of the story.
sage5907
Member
The game authorities say that neither the landowner or the professional hunter had a lion in their big game quota thus making the taking of the lion illegal by all those involved. It doesn't take much to figure out that the reason they did not have a lion in their quota was that the property was bordering the game preserve and the game authorities wanted to protect the lions.
wankerjake
Member
BTW is $55K for a lion a reasonable going rate? I was under the impression lions ran a good deal more than that.
leadcounsel
member
For those thinking that leaving the fate of these cats, elephants, etc up to the African governments, consider these impoverished uneducated nations have a track record of poor management and corruption, so it’s not comforting knowing the fate of these creatures is left to the highest bidder. This is, after all, the region that exported and uses slavery, is always embroiled in regional conflict, blood diamonds, and refuses the science behind the spread of HIV or birth control, believing that mystic shamans and having sex with uninfected virgins is the cure. So, I’m not very confident in their problem solving abilities to save these creatures from extinction.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
A history lesson for Leadcounsel, snipped from an article by Dr. Dave Samuel:
"Recently our Fish and Wildlife Service made a terrible decision to stop the import of elephant trophies taken in Zimbabwe and Tanzania. Once announced, conservationists in America and Africa spoke out; presenting the reasons such a ban will hurt elephant populations. And this discussion isn’t a question of whether this ban will hurt elephant populations. All experts know that it will. No, this ban creates the situation of when and how badly elephants will suffer.
The safari hunter that took this great elephant, put thousands of dollars into the local and country economy.
The safari hunter that took this great elephant put thousands of dollars into the local and country economy.
(Even though poaching is taking a growing number of elephants in Zimbabwe, the ONLY way to generate funds is via elephant safaris. And the 500 or so harvested every year there is nothing compared to the thousands being poached. That is why this USFWS ban is so devastating and ill conceived.)
Though elephant numbers are declining in Zimbabwe, poaching, not hunting, is the reason and almost all anti-poaching resources are generated by safari hunting. In addition, “operation campfire” takes money from safaris and puts it into local villages. Hunters and those local communities are the number one deterrent of poaching.
In Tanzania each hunter pays a daily $150 conservation fee that keeps poaching scouts in the field. For the normal 21 day elephant hunt, that adds up to $3,150 per hunter, money that is used to stop poaching. The sad history is that in Africa hunting bans do not work.
Here are some examples. The most famous hunting ban in Africa took place when Kenya abolished it in 1977. After the ban, elephant numbers plummeted from 175,000 to 30,000 Black rhino numbers went from 8,000 to around 500. Some will argue that this decrease did not happen because hunting was stopped. They’ll note that poaching increased. OK, but when you stop hunting in Africa, poaching increases. Every time. It is the safari hunters, professional hunters and their scouts, plus the local villagers who benefit from safari hunting, that help keep the poachers out. When hunters are in the bush, poachers are less active there. It’s plain and simple.
Stop hunting and the money to keep the anti-poaching forces stops resulting in an increase of poaching.
Stop hunting and the money to keep the anti-poaching forces stops resulting in an increase of poaching.
Another hunting ban took place in Tanzania in 1973 when there were 380,000 elephants and 18,000 black rhinos. When hunting was reopened ten years later, elephant numbers were down to 80,000 and black rhino numbers were thought to be less than 100. Robin Hurt, famous conservationist and safari operator in Tanzania notes that after the ban was lifted, elephant numbers grew to 130,000 in 2009.
Since that time, poaching has increased dramatically and more funds (more than is provided via safari hunting) are needed to bring poaching down. The recent ban will do nothing to increase elephant numbers since safari hunting isn’t the problem. Poaching is.
Another ban took place in the Democratic Republic of Congo (you will recognize the former name of that country as Zaire) in 1984. There they have the forest elephant and although estimates are almost impossible to obtain due to the dense forest jungle, since the ban forest elephants are rare and white rhinos are gone.
Stop hunting. We’ve heard it and we’ll continue to hear it. Stop hunting sounds simple, but it is a complicated, negative policy for wildlife."
"Recently our Fish and Wildlife Service made a terrible decision to stop the import of elephant trophies taken in Zimbabwe and Tanzania. Once announced, conservationists in America and Africa spoke out; presenting the reasons such a ban will hurt elephant populations. And this discussion isn’t a question of whether this ban will hurt elephant populations. All experts know that it will. No, this ban creates the situation of when and how badly elephants will suffer.
The safari hunter that took this great elephant, put thousands of dollars into the local and country economy.
The safari hunter that took this great elephant put thousands of dollars into the local and country economy.
(Even though poaching is taking a growing number of elephants in Zimbabwe, the ONLY way to generate funds is via elephant safaris. And the 500 or so harvested every year there is nothing compared to the thousands being poached. That is why this USFWS ban is so devastating and ill conceived.)
Though elephant numbers are declining in Zimbabwe, poaching, not hunting, is the reason and almost all anti-poaching resources are generated by safari hunting. In addition, “operation campfire” takes money from safaris and puts it into local villages. Hunters and those local communities are the number one deterrent of poaching.
In Tanzania each hunter pays a daily $150 conservation fee that keeps poaching scouts in the field. For the normal 21 day elephant hunt, that adds up to $3,150 per hunter, money that is used to stop poaching. The sad history is that in Africa hunting bans do not work.
Here are some examples. The most famous hunting ban in Africa took place when Kenya abolished it in 1977. After the ban, elephant numbers plummeted from 175,000 to 30,000 Black rhino numbers went from 8,000 to around 500. Some will argue that this decrease did not happen because hunting was stopped. They’ll note that poaching increased. OK, but when you stop hunting in Africa, poaching increases. Every time. It is the safari hunters, professional hunters and their scouts, plus the local villagers who benefit from safari hunting, that help keep the poachers out. When hunters are in the bush, poachers are less active there. It’s plain and simple.
Stop hunting and the money to keep the anti-poaching forces stops resulting in an increase of poaching.
Stop hunting and the money to keep the anti-poaching forces stops resulting in an increase of poaching.
Another hunting ban took place in Tanzania in 1973 when there were 380,000 elephants and 18,000 black rhinos. When hunting was reopened ten years later, elephant numbers were down to 80,000 and black rhino numbers were thought to be less than 100. Robin Hurt, famous conservationist and safari operator in Tanzania notes that after the ban was lifted, elephant numbers grew to 130,000 in 2009.
Since that time, poaching has increased dramatically and more funds (more than is provided via safari hunting) are needed to bring poaching down. The recent ban will do nothing to increase elephant numbers since safari hunting isn’t the problem. Poaching is.
Another ban took place in the Democratic Republic of Congo (you will recognize the former name of that country as Zaire) in 1984. There they have the forest elephant and although estimates are almost impossible to obtain due to the dense forest jungle, since the ban forest elephants are rare and white rhinos are gone.
Stop hunting. We’ve heard it and we’ll continue to hear it. Stop hunting sounds simple, but it is a complicated, negative policy for wildlife."
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
You do realize who those critters ultimately belong to, right?
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,079
Besides the illegal shooting of Cecil and the bear he poached in Wisconsin, the dentist from Minnesota also paid out almost $130,000 6 years ago for a sexual harassment charge from one of his former employees. This guy's lawyer must love him.
Funny, when I first heard the story about the bow hunting dentist from Minnesota involved with the illegal shooing of a protected lion, I wondered if it was the same Minnesota dentist that the local game warden talked about to our Hunter Safety classes. He gave the example of the illegally shot bear as to show the students how far our DNR will go to prosecute poachers. Bear permits are hard to get in Wisconsin. It can take from one to nine years worth of preference points to draw a permit depending on permits issued and amount of applicants in the zone you wish to hunt. It is not uncommon for folks to apply to a lesser desired zone in order to get a permit, but then hunt another zone where the odds are better to get a bear, or where they have permission to hunt. The DNR made an example outta the doctor because of this, thus the steep fine of almost $3000. The warden stated tho, that even that stiff a fine for someone with the doctors money is nuttin more than a light swat on the hand. While the doctor could have afforded to go any where in the world and shoot as many bears as he wanted to legally, there probably was more thrill to shoot one illegally. Common amongst poachers.
Funny, when I first heard the story about the bow hunting dentist from Minnesota involved with the illegal shooing of a protected lion, I wondered if it was the same Minnesota dentist that the local game warden talked about to our Hunter Safety classes. He gave the example of the illegally shot bear as to show the students how far our DNR will go to prosecute poachers. Bear permits are hard to get in Wisconsin. It can take from one to nine years worth of preference points to draw a permit depending on permits issued and amount of applicants in the zone you wish to hunt. It is not uncommon for folks to apply to a lesser desired zone in order to get a permit, but then hunt another zone where the odds are better to get a bear, or where they have permission to hunt. The DNR made an example outta the doctor because of this, thus the steep fine of almost $3000. The warden stated tho, that even that stiff a fine for someone with the doctors money is nuttin more than a light swat on the hand. While the doctor could have afforded to go any where in the world and shoot as many bears as he wanted to legally, there probably was more thrill to shoot one illegally. Common amongst poachers.
ClickClickD'oh
Member
leadcounsel said:
Well, that's it... You've convinced me. It's clearly time to go to war, invade these nations, kill lots of people and seize their wildlife.
ElevenBravo
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2013
- Messages
- 70
yes, I question the decision to hunt a large animal like that with a bow. Safari calibers were created for a reason. Even if bow was an appropriate choice of weapon, after 40 hours and the lion still not dead indicates that he took an extremely poor shot. One begins to wonder if he's just an unethical and bad shot, or deliberately wounded the beast.
The shooter's statement contains a lot of weasel wording. He knows he's in the wrong, and trying to create a scenario where he's not culpable for his actions.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
A hundred bucks says that Leadcounsel will not address the numbers I cited in post #65.
Jim Watson said:
Well, just what makes the money that trophy hunters pay for their hunt so much better than any money that conservation organizations allocate to try to preserve the same species without killing them. A rich Westerner that pays a ton of money to kill an animal so the local poachers can't just doesn't sound like conservation to me. Donate that same money to an organization that works in the area (on a local level) that is working to install positive change to ensure the longevity of these animals. Saying that you pay $50k to hunt a lion because you're concerned about their future and want to help in the conservation effort is just a convenient excuse to legally kill a lion.
oneounceload
member
$100 says he's a vegan.......
Seriously, LC - you need to stop citing far-left media as "reliable" sources. Were there mistakes? Sure. But your tirades are immature in this regard. As pointed above, the numbers regarding hunting and conservation, whether here, Africa or elsewhere, show the benefits and value added by hunting, (and not just monetarily).
Seriously, LC - you need to stop citing far-left media as "reliable" sources. Were there mistakes? Sure. But your tirades are immature in this regard. As pointed above, the numbers regarding hunting and conservation, whether here, Africa or elsewhere, show the benefits and value added by hunting, (and not just monetarily).
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The difference is that those organizations don't put the money into conservation that hunters do, plain and simple. They are not going to pay landowners to keep those critters and their habitat as-is. The difference is that sport hunting is legal, regulated and provides actual jobs. The difference is that sport hunting provides meat for locals. Poaching doesn't. Hunting perpetuates the species and that is FACT. Did you read post #65?
Craig-
I did read post #65 and what I get from that is that when these countries crack down on legal hunting, the money associated with it stops flowing and forces the locals to poach in order to replace that lost income.
What I'm suggesting, is that the hunters that are hunting for conservation, realize that there may be a better way to conserve the species and donate whatever money they were going to use for the hunt and make the hunting guides patrol for poachers and do other activities to ensure the survival of the local wildlife. If the money continues to flow into the country, I don't see hunting as a nessesity for preservation. Jobs and food will help alleviate the poaching issue.
Full disclosure for oneounceload, I am a vegan.
I did read post #65 and what I get from that is that when these countries crack down on legal hunting, the money associated with it stops flowing and forces the locals to poach in order to replace that lost income.
What I'm suggesting, is that the hunters that are hunting for conservation, realize that there may be a better way to conserve the species and donate whatever money they were going to use for the hunt and make the hunting guides patrol for poachers and do other activities to ensure the survival of the local wildlife. If the money continues to flow into the country, I don't see hunting as a nessesity for preservation. Jobs and food will help alleviate the poaching issue.
Full disclosure for oneounceload, I am a vegan.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked