This Steak is better than That Steak...

[santaman2000]

Don’t misunderstand: I enjoy hunting for it’s own rewards:
1) the comaraderie of a group of hunters
2) the quiet of a lone hunt
3) the satisfaction with a good bird dog on point
4) the thrill of deer dogs on a drive or coon dogs treeing
5) the sheer “buck fever” as I line up a shot
6) the trophies on the wall
7) etc.

The meat is just an added bonus.

 

[TeeDee]

Don’t misunderstand: I enjoy hunting for it’s own rewards:
1) the comaraderie of a group of hunters
2) the quiet of a lone hunt
3) the satisfaction with a good bird dog on point
4) the thrill of deer dogs on a drive or coon dogs treeing
5) the sheer “buck fever” as I line up a shot
6) the trophies on the wall
7) etc.

The meat is just an added bonus.

So do you see the appeal of people going off to Africa to hunt the Big Five for Trophy Hunting whims?

 

[santaman2000]

So do you see the appeal of people going off to Africa to hunt the Big Five for Trophy Hunting whims?

Most definitely! One of my heroes is still Fred Bear taking an elephant with a 75# recurve bow.

 

[Broch]

Don’t misunderstand: I enjoy hunting for it’s own rewards:
1) the comaraderie of a group of hunters
2) the quiet of a lone hunt
3) the satisfaction with a good bird dog on point
4) the thrill of deer dogs on a drive or coon dogs treeing
5) the sheer “buck fever” as I line up a shot
6) the trophies on the wall
7) etc.

The meat is just an added bonus.

Mmmm… I think we'll have to agree to disagree for once - There is no doubt a kind of thrill when the prey is in the sights but I take no pleasure in the kill, I don't participate in group hunting (well, a couple of us walking the hedges and fields maybe), I have never and will never hound an animal, there is no sport in shooting or any other form of hunting for me, I shoot to kill to eat it because that is, in my mind, the most humane form of gathering meat; it has run wild, lived a life.

I do not, however, campaign to stop others who believe differently

 

[TeeDee]

Most definitely! One of my heroes is still Fred Bear taking an elephant with a 75# recurve bow.

Indeed - I have to disagree with your desire on that. I like others here have seen the Big Five in their natural environment - I hope they continue to be there for others going forward.

 

[santaman2000]

Mmmm… I think we'll have to agree to disagree for once - There is no doubt a kind of thrill when the prey is in the sights but I take no pleasure in the kill, I don't participate in group hunting (well, a couple of us walking the hedges and fields maybe), I have never and will never hound an animal, there is no sport in shooting or any other form of hunting for me, I shoot to kill to eat.....

Ironically there is a well established etiquette regarding the spoils when group hunting for deer. The shooter gets 1/2 the meat, the whole hide, and all trophies while the other half the meet is divided among the rest of the hunting party. we usually waited until near the end of the season to actually do the division.

 

[santaman2000]

Indeed - I have to disagree with your desire on that. I like others here have seen the Big Five in their natural environment - I hope they continue to be there for others going forward.

I dare say those of us who hunt hope the same thing. The difference being that the hunters pay most of the conservation costs in the form of license fees and taxes on related equipment and trips. Not to mention that a paying hunter gives the locals an incentive to preserve the species as a way to support their families rather than exterminating them to protect their livestock.

 

[Allison McKenzie]

The animals pay with thier lives. Which might be ok for deer and pheasant, but when dentists kill lions it starts to look a bit off.

 

[santaman2000]

The animals pay with thier lives. Which might be ok for deer and pheasant, but when dentists kill lions it starts to look a bit off.

Yes. Said dentist killed an old lion that was within a year at most from being killed by a younger competitor. In the process he provided jobs for many of the locals and strengthened the local lion pride. And yet, most of the western world still has no understanding of that.

 

[TeeDee]

I dare say those of us who hunt hope the same thing. The difference being that the hunters pay most of the conservation costs in the form of license fees and taxes on related equipment and trips. Not to mention that a paying hunter gives the locals an incentive to preserve the species as away to support their families rather than exterminating them to protect their livestock.

I'd have to see REAL facts and data on that to agree with it - as its a common argument.

I am a Pro Conservation at heart - and I have had passionate debates before that IF one could prove selling a licence to shoot and kill One Tiger ( or other endangered animal ) ABSOLUTELY was proven to ensure another TWO Tigers went on to live and breed - I would back it. I wouldn't necessarily enjoy backing it but at some points you need to step back and take emotion out of the picture.

Its a numbers game - no matter how deplorable or crass the act , if it was PROVEN to lead to an increase in the Healthy DNA pool available I would be ( unfortunately ) For it if all other methods had failed.

 

[TeeDee]

Yes. Said dentist killed an old lion that was within a year at most from being killed by a younger competitor. In the process he provided jobs for many of the locals and strengthened the local lion pride. And yet, most of the western world still has no understanding of that.

I again would need to see proven facts on that.

 

[santaman2000]

I'd have to see REAL facts and data on that to agree with it - as its a common argument.

I am a Pro Conservation at heart - and I have had passionate debates before that IF one could prove selling a licence to shoot and kill One Tiger ( or other endangered animal ) ABSOLUTELY was proven to ensure another TWO Tigers went on to live and breed - I would back it. I wouldn't necessarily enjoy backing it but at some points you need to step back and take emotion out of the picture.

Its a numbers game - no matter how deplorable or crass the act , if it was PROVEN to lead to an increase in the Healthy DNA pool available I would be ( unfortunately ) For it if all other methods had failed.

I don’t know a lot about areas where tiger hunting is practiced so I’ll leave that one to someone else. However regarding African big game hunting this article is pretty informative

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=15&ved=2ahUKEwigt8iPoa_pAhVYZM0KHeyQAWcQFjAOegQIBRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.safariclub.org%2Fnews%2Ftrophy-hunting-solution-conserving-africas-wildlife&usg=AOvVaw2fj1AgOavpU3sq5XrKacS2

while this link is to an article of the amount hunting licenses alone generate in the US: over $800million per year to state conservation coffers. (this is before the excise tax on guns, ammo, and other hunting gear) and before hunter spending in local economies is figured.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=11&ved=2ahUKEwjeoJDUoq_pAhVNbs0KHVFED3sQFjAKegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationforce.org%2Fhunting-is-by-far-the-largest-funding-me&usg=AOvVaw1Zk5ucRl11G7acTu5K5aKq

 

[santaman2000]

I again would need to see proven facts on that.

No offense, but I’m not going to do all the research for you. I’m sure you’re as capable as I am of googling the related articles. Just direct your search towards the pro articles as well as the anti articles. Public opinion has a way of putting the anti articles at the top due to their prevelance in the algorithms.

That said, even the anti articles make a big deal of Cecil’s (the lion) advanced age. They just fail to note that the way lion society works is that the older males are killed or driven off by younger competitors.

 

[Allison McKenzie]

I have been off doing a bit of research, and for the Hwange national park, former home of cyril, game licences do not make up a significant part for the funding. In the cwf annual report (depressing reading, i wish i hadn't read it) funding is 45% bed tax, 40% institutional grants and 15% individual donations. To a total of 280k usd in 2018.

Individual donors mostly appear to be photographers who 'give generously'.

There is mention of hunting, but in the context of reduction, problem animal control, poisoning, poaching and quota abuse. They acknowledge the cyril incident as harmful.

Having reseached beyond this, I accept this is not clearcut for all parks, but for hwange it appears to be policy to look after lion souls unless they are likely to eat people.

 

[santaman2000]

I have been off doing a bit of research, and for the Hwange national park, former home of cyril, game licences do not make up a significant part for the funding. In the cwf annual report (depressing reading, i wish i hadn't read it) funding is 45% bed tax, 40% institutional grants and 15% individual donations. To a total of 280k usd in 2018.

Individual donors mostly appear to be photographers who 'give generously'.

There is mention of hunting, but in the context of reduction, problem animal control, poisoning, poaching and quota abuse. They acknowledge the cyril incident as harmful.

Having reseached beyond this, I accept this is not clearcut for all parks, but for hwange it appears to be policy to look after lion souls unless they are likely to eat people.

Probably quite accurate. The problem however is that you say you researched a National Park. The national parks aren’t the sum of conservation. As for the park officials response that killing Cecil was harmful, that would be true: or was harmful to THE PARK. The parks was using him as a tourist attraction rather than using pride management in concert with natural lion behavior (I.e. they’d rather have an old lion that draws in tourists than letting him be killed or driven off by a younger lion as is the way of nature) Look up articles not put out by the parks (remember they’re essentially a business venture as well)

The poisoning you mentioned is in agreement with my statement that locals are trying to exterminate certain species to prevent predation of livestock. That in turn is in agreement with my statement that hunters spending money in local economies make those species an asset to be protected rather than a liability to those same locals.

There’s no perfect solution but the issue is far more complicated than the anti hunting groups would have you believe.

 

[Allison McKenzie]

Forgot to say, Zimbabwe does sell hunting, it is affordable at £5000ish for a male lion. Sold by auction.

 

[santaman2000]

Forgot to say, Zimbabwe does sell hunting, it is affordable at £5000ish for a male lion. Sold by auction.

Remember that £5000 is just for the basic license. The hunters then spend a great deal more in the local economy (going back to earlier comments about making lions an asset to be protected rather than a predator to be eradicated in the minds of the locals)

 

[Allison McKenzie]

I agree, it is complex. And in 1 respect i have changed my mind. The report told a story of a problem lion that was shot as a protective measure. I presume the rights for this were sold and i now feel that this is justified hunting and can see at least 1 case of ethical killing if a lion.

It still makes me sad though.

 

[santaman2000]

I partially agree with you Allison. While I understand the process of natural selection and know that Cecil was due to be replaced, I still also understand how many (myself included) might be saddened by his loss. The very fact that the Park officials had given him a name and very likely used it often in their tours set up a situation where he was no longer simply part of the natural cycle. That act guaranteed would be a personal figure to many, many people (kinda like the pets I referenced earlier that I’d have difficulty eating)

 

[Paul_B]

My cousin had a game park in South Africa. Bought it in a state and turned it around before selling up. He could never stick with things once he had turned them from failing to successful, something to do with the be challenge and not being needed once turned around.

From being at the coal face of this so to speak he told me of the unscrupulous practises in that industry. He was only there for the change in scenery/challenge and had no strong views either way on hunting when he went out there. He was pretty negative after being out there for a year or so. He was too tied in financially to get out before it was turned around though.