Petition by HSUS and HSI to ban Leopard Import

johnnyblues · Jul 28, 2016

Royal27 said:
I've said it before and I will say it again. If you want to hunt an animal that is legal to hunt, do it. These import bans only work if we allow them too.

@Philip Glass and his lion hunt is a great example of this.

I don't really quite understand what your saying my friend. Yes of course we can go and harvest a lion or a non importable elephant but for me to just say I killed it and show some pictures of that just doesn't sit well with me, and of course this is just one mans opinion. We have to stop them at the root cause not just tippy toe around their victory! This kind of thinking empowers the anti hunting morons into victory. That statement is not meant for you royal, it's just a broad comment. We have to fight fire with fire.

johnnyblues · Jul 28, 2016

vette447 said:
Thanks guys. Third trip to Africa and first time after Leopard. I am going into it with excitement and guarded optimism.

Best of luck.

Royal27 · Jul 28, 2016

Agree Johnny. Not saying we shouldn't fight, we should.

I'm saying an import ban shouldn't stop us from a LEGAL hunt. Antis will make the same argument you just did except saying that a cat shouldn't be killed just to sit in your living room. That certainly doesn't sit well with them. If there isn't another option why not still hunt? Hunting is supposed to be about the memories and experience. I can get that without taxidermy.

Wars are won with lost battles lost. I won't stop hunting an animal I want to hunt because of an import ban and a lost battle. Doing so strengthens the other side and adds credence to their win. I will keep hunting what I want and keep doing what I can to get an import ban reversed while doing so.

johnnyblues · Jul 28, 2016

I

Royal27 said:
Agree Johnny. Not saying we shouldn't fight, we should.

I'm saying an import ban shouldn't stop us from a LEGAL hunt. Antis will make the same argument you just did except saying that a cat shouldn't be killed just to sit in your living room. That certainly doesn't sit well with them. If there isn't another option why not still hunt? Hunting is supposed to be about the memories and experience. I can get that without taxidermy.

Wars are won with lost battles lost. I won't stop hunting an animal I want to hunt because of an import ban and a lost battle. Doing so strengthens the other side and adds credence to their win. I will keep hunting what I want and keep doing what I can to get an import ban reversed while doing so.

I understand your point as I hope you understand mine. For me taxidermy in my mind gives meaning to the harvest. Pays tribute to the quarry. We've been giving inches for years to the anti hunting community, now we're losing miles. The fight has to change to protect us . Unfortunately it's not. SCI in my opinion is just not doing enough, social media has changed our world sometimes for the good sometimes for bad. Anti hunting sentiment grows here and abroad, because no one is truly fighting the fight.

Royal27 · Jul 28, 2016

I do understand your side Johnny. I'm simply not personally going to give an inch when not legally forced too.

johnnyblues · Jul 28, 2016

I hear ya brother. I'm just tired of not having a real voice for hunters.

lcq · Jul 28, 2016

Biddleman said:
What an ignorant prick!
Scientific data doesn't mean a damn thing to these people. Liberals never paid attention to truths and facts and never will. If American sportsman think it will stop with just hunting abroad they need to wake the hell up! It's an attack on all fronts. Firearms, hunting, hell even fishing.

I'm so tired of hearing people say, "well that doesn't affect me." I guarantee it will affect them someday and when it does it will be too freaking late. Give an inch...

Bastards

"First they came for the socialists" That should be required reading for the ignorant masses who think they will never be targetted.

Hank2211 · Jul 28, 2016

johnnyblues said:
I

I understand your point as I hope you understand mine. For me taxidermy in my mind gives meaning to the harvest. Pays tribute to the quarry. We've been giving inches for years to the anti hunting community, now we're losing miles. The fight has to change to protect us . Unfortunately it's not. SCI in my opinion is just not doing enough, social media has changed our world sometimes for the good sometimes for bad. Anti hunting sentiment grows here and abroad, because no one is truly fighting the fight.

Johnnyblues, for most of my hunting career I felt the same way. If I wasn't going to keep the meat or some other part of the animal, then there was no reason to shoot it. For that reason, if I were an American, I would allow these import bans to impact my hunting plans.

Then a light sort of went on.

A few years ago I was hunting for duiker in the Eastern Cape and we saw a very old Eastern Cape kudu. My PH said I should shoot it. I said thanks, but I've shot lots of kudu, and really don't need any more kudu trophies. That began a very interesting conversation around my needs and desires as compared to the animals and the hunting world. My PH, not without some struggle, eventually convinced me that this was the wrong approach to hunting. The question should not necessarily be "will I be able to use this animal" but rather, "will someone be able to use this animal."

As hunters, we have a responsibility to help those who are doing what they can to preserve habitat and animals, or who just have to live with wild animals, and we do that by giving those animals value. It's not good enough to say "someone will shoot it, so I don't have to." If we all had taken that approach, there would have been little incentive to bring bontebok, black wildebeest or scimitar horned oryx back from the brink (I note these were all saved by hunters, not by Wayne Pacelle).

Finally espousing this idea had one added personal benefit - since I was only going to do taxidermy on certain, selected animals, I could put the savings towards taking even more animals, and hunting even harder! Since then, I've had lots more fun hunting than I would have had otherwise. Now don't get me wrong . . . I will still mount the Mountain Nyala, if I am lucky enough to get one . . . but that's not a pre-requisite to hunt one any more.

I'm not saying you have to buy this argument. Just that it's there, and if we all bought into it, we could demonstrate to regulators that these sorts of actions will have no impact on the animals taken. That might - just might - cause them to look at what really matters, and forget the silly, emotional arguments of groups such as HSUS.

Just a perspective.

Royal27 · Jul 28, 2016

^^^^

Said so much better than I've been doing. Thanks Hank!!!!

johnnyblues · Jul 28, 2016

Hank2211 said:
Johnnyblues, for most of my hunting career I felt the same way. If I wasn't going to keep the meat or some other part of the animal, then there was no reason to shoot it. For that reason, if I were an American, I would allow these import bans to impact my hunting plans.

Then a light sort of went on.

A few years ago I was hunting for duiker in the Eastern Cape and we saw a very old Eastern Cape kudu. My PH said I should shoot it. I said thanks, but I've shot lots of kudu, and really don't need any more kudu trophies. That began a very interesting conversation around my needs and desires as compared to the animals and the hunting world. My PH, not without some struggle, eventually convinced me that this was the wrong approach to hunting. The question should not necessarily be "will I be able to use this animal" but rather, "will someone be able to use this animal."

As hunters, we have a responsibility to help those who are doing what they can to preserve habitat and animals, or who just have to live with wild animals, and we do that by giving those animals value. It's not good enough to say "someone will shoot it, so I don't have to." If we all had taken that approach, there would have been little incentive to bring bontebok, black wildebeest or scimitar horned oryx back from the brink (I note these were all saved by hunters, not by Wayne Pacelle).

Finally espousing this idea had one added personal benefit - since I was only going to do taxidermy on certain, selected animals, I could put the savings towards taking even more animals, and hunting even harder! Since then, I've had lots more fun hunting than I would have had otherwise. Now don't get me wrong . . . I will still mount the Mountain Nyala, if I am lucky enough to get one . . . but that's not a pre-requisite to hunt one any more.

I'm not saying you have to buy this argument. Just that it's there, and if we all bought into it, we could demonstrate to regulators that these sorts of actions will have no impact on the animals taken. That might - just might - cause them to look at what really matters, and forget the silly, emotional arguments of groups such as HSUS.

Just a perspective.

And an interesting perspective at that. Valid points.

jasyblood · Jul 29, 2016

Hank2211 said:
Johnnyblues, for most of my hunting career I felt the same way. If I wasn't going to keep the meat or some other part of the animal, then there was no reason to shoot it. For that reason, if I were an American, I would allow these import bans to impact my hunting plans.

Then a light sort of went on.

A few years ago I was hunting for duiker in the Eastern Cape and we saw a very old Eastern Cape kudu. My PH said I should shoot it. I said thanks, but I've shot lots of kudu, and really don't need any more kudu trophies. That began a very interesting conversation around my needs and desires as compared to the animals and the hunting world. My PH, not without some struggle, eventually convinced me that this was the wrong approach to hunting. The question should not necessarily be "will I be able to use this animal" but rather, "will someone be able to use this animal."

As hunters, we have a responsibility to help those who are doing what they can to preserve habitat and animals, or who just have to live with wild animals, and we do that by giving those animals value. It's not good enough to say "someone will shoot it, so I don't have to." If we all had taken that approach, there would have been little incentive to bring bontebok, black wildebeest or scimitar horned oryx back from the brink (I note these were all saved by hunters, not by Wayne Pacelle).

Finally espousing this idea had one added personal benefit - since I was only going to do taxidermy on certain, selected animals, I could put the savings towards taking even more animals, and hunting even harder! Since then, I've had lots more fun hunting than I would have had otherwise. Now don't get me wrong . . . I will still mount the Mountain Nyala, if I am lucky enough to get one . . . but that's not a pre-requisite to hunt one any more.

I'm not saying you have to buy this argument. Just that it's there, and if we all bought into it, we could demonstrate to regulators that these sorts of actions will have no impact on the animals taken. That might - just might - cause them to look at what really matters, and forget the silly, emotional arguments of groups such as HSUS.

Just a perspective.

Well said Hank and I agree 100%.

RogerHeintzman · Jul 29, 2016

vette447, Good luck with your leopard hunt.
My second chance for leopard is next year in Namibia. Tags for 2016 were sold out.
My fingers are crossed I get a leopard home before a import shut down.

Philip Glass · Jul 30, 2016

Hank2211 has a good point and one I agree with. Are we hunters or collectors? Maybe I'm throwing some gasoline on the fire here! Believe me I am praying that I get my lion permit and he eventually has a place of glory in my hunting lodge. That said I would not trade the experience of hunting a lion. When I am able I will likely hunt a cheetah someday soon. Knowing I can't import it will be frustrating but I don't think I can let it rule my actions. I love the cheetah and would greatly enjoy the pursuit of one.
Regards,
Philip

johnnyblues · Jul 30, 2016

Such a personal decision. Again just for me I would not hunt an animal I could not import. Again that is just my feeling. I respect members and understand how my fellow members feel.

Custom · Jul 31, 2016

My leopard hunt is booked for next May. I have thought about this a great deal and am not sure what I will do if a ban happens. It is a very personal decision, but this is a very expensive trip and if I can't bring my trophy back it will certainly give me pause.

johnnyblues · Jul 31, 2016

That is exactly how I feel. I personally would never hunt an animal I couldn't import. Such a personal decision. I hunted leopard last year and there was a lot of talk about closing the hunt. I too am tossing around the idea of going back next year but I'm fearful they may not allow me to import. I believe if you have your cities permit in hand you will be grandfathered.

PHOENIX PHIL · Jul 31, 2016

johnnyblues said:
Such a personal decision. Again just for me I would not hunt an animal I could not import. Again that is just my feeling. I respect members and understand how my fellow members feel.

It's your choice Johnny and I'll respect that. I totally agree with fighting this potential ban and lifting others that make no sense. But if you choose to not hunt a leopard or any other animal which is banned for import, you're conceding victory to the antis. And this will only encourage them to continue pursuing more bans.

Royal27 · Jul 31, 2016

I'm going to sound like a broken record here and I hate doing that, but I'm so passionate about this one....

To hunt or not to hunt when taxidermy can't be had is certainly a personal decision, no argument there.

What bothers me is when we say enough is not being done when we aren't doing everything we can ourselves though. If I'm an anti and I read your post @johnnyblues I'm thrilled. The import ban has served it's purpose. I have stopped you from hunting lion and elephant (most places). Woohoo!!!! The import ban was worth my effort!!!! I will work hard on banning import of leopard now!!!

The ONLY way an import ban is effective is if WE support it by not hunting due to an import ban. And yes, say what you will but if you dont hunt leopard again only because of the ban you ARE supporting the ban., not to be confused with liking the ban. Again, to each his own, but don't talk about what others aren't doing whIle holding that position.

After they are successful in stopping leopard hunting without actually stopping hunting of leopard I wonder what will be next?

Wheels · Jul 31, 2016

lcq said:
"First they came for the socialists" That should be required reading for the ignorant masses who think they will never be targetted.

Royal27 said:
I'm going to sound like a broken record here and I hate doing that, but I'm so passionate about this one....

To hunt or not to hunt when taxidermy can't be had is certainly a personal decision, no argument there.

What bothers me is when we say enough is not being done when we aren't doing everything we can ourselves though. If I'm an anti and I read your post @johnnyblues I'm thrilled. The import ban has served it's purpose. I have stopped you from hunting lion and elephant (most places). Woohoo!!!! The import ban was worth my effort!!!! I will work hard on banning import of leopard now!!!

The ONLY way an import ban is effective is if WE support it by not hunting due to an import ban. And yes, say what you will but if you dont hunt leopard again only because of the ban you ARE supporting the ban., not to be confused with liking the ban. Again, to each his own, but don't talk about what others aren't doing whIle holding that position.

After they are successful in stopping leopard hunting without actually stopping hunting of leopard I wonder what will be next?

Agreed.

With that being said, if you are American and want a leopard in your trophy room, schedule it ASAP. Don't go cheap unless that is all you can afford. Use outfitters with high success rates. This will cost real money, but in the end is cheaper than multiple hunts without a leopard. If you can do EOY 2016 quota clean up, all the better. If you are concerned the law will change prior to your hunt, write contingencies into the contract.

USFW has done things since April 4, 2014, that ten years ago, we never thought would happen in our lifetimes.

If you don't care about a leopard in your trophy room, but want to enjoy the experience and the hunt, wait 2-3 years. The prices will probably come way down.

All the best to each of you in your individual decisions.

johnnyblues · Jul 31, 2016

Royal27 said:
n. Again, to each his own, but don't talk about what others aren't doing whIle holding that position.

Royal, I think that particular part of your statement is quite offensive to me. You as well as several other members understand my passion for the sport I hold dearly. Because I won't hunt an animal I can't import doesn't mean I can't feel as though the powers to be aren't doing enough to support hunters and the good we do. If you think that the anti hunting community cares weather we kill lions after they stopped us from importing your sadly mistaken. Once they stop us from importing another big game species they will move onto the next species. This thread splits hairs in my opinion. You must kill at the root! You never allow them to get to the point of convincing USFW to list another animal. As I've said we have NO proper representation to defend us. SCI is no better than Hollywood in my opinion. To sum it up we shouldn't even be having this conversation but we are due to poor hunters rights support.

Petition by HSUS and HSI to ban Leopard Import

johnnyblues

johnnyblues

Royal27

johnnyblues

Royal27

johnnyblues

lcq

Hank2211

Royal27

johnnyblues

jasyblood

RogerHeintzman

Philip Glass

johnnyblues

Custom

johnnyblues

PHOENIX PHIL

Royal27

Wheels

Attachments

johnnyblues

Members online

Forum statistics

Proudly sponsored by

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Share this page