SCI Adopts Policy On Captive Bred Lions

sierraone said:

Phil, if you are going to be anywhere around Pensacola when you hit Florida, PM me.

Click to expand...

Miami

Paul Babaz said:

All, I appreciate the comments and opinions and welcoming Rick and I to AH. This being said, we are all passionate about hunting and because of this there are a lot of viewpoints on everything from method of take, to calibers, brand of equipment, etc. I've seen the cross bow hunters go to battle with vertical bow hunters a few years back in Wisconsin, I've seen the high end gun collectors go after the AR15 guys years back as well. As a coummunity we divide ourselves over differences of opinion when in reality, we should be focused on the big picture which is to protect the freedom to hunt! While HSUS, PETA, Born Free, etc. are organized and united, we are divided. We NEED to be united, regardless of whether you are bird hunter, small game hunter, or big game hunter. It doesn't matter to me whether your prefer dangerous game, or plains game, or whether you hunt with a flintlock, or a fine English double rifle. I am well aware of the arguments on both sides of CBL, and I appreciate the arguments on both sides, but the decision wasn't made based on public opinion.

Lastly, I was corresponding with another member here and went on a bit of a rant which I suggested he share he wanted to. He suggested I share it myself with AH, so I am posting it below. Sorry for the length of this post....

Thanks for the note of support. I had spoke to Rick earlier and encouraged him to get on AH as I believe we should have a presence here, if for nothing else but to dispel the rumors that abound. I will try to be as active as I can on here, and I am sure Rick will as well. Jerome has been great in getting me up to speed and I am grateful.

I'll be the first to say that SCI isn't perfect, but we do catch a lot of flak due to the rumor mill and most originates on another forum where a lot of folks like to pile on without getting all the facts, both sides of the story , or any facts at all. I am happy to speak to anyone and get their feedback on what SCI is doing or not doing. I hear a lot of comments about SCI (both good and bad), and my reply is always the same... to get involved with the local chapter, or volunteer for a committee, etc because "You can choose to get involved and be part of the solution, or sit back, throw stones, and be part of the problem!"

I can't tell you how many times, someone contacts me to tell me about all the things that I'm doing wrong and I typically ask them to get involved on a committee, chapter board, etc. The response is usually the same... "I don't have time...." Really? I have a full time career, 3 daughters, ages 21, 19, and 15, serve on multiple boards in the hunting/shooting community, but yet I find time.

Despite popular belief, SCI doesn't pay me or any of my volunteer colleagues, if anything it costs money to volunteer. Also, we don't take free hunts, free gear, or equipment, etc. For me, I do this because I want to do what I can to be part of the solution, just the same as I vote in every election, lest if forfeit my right to complain about the outcome if it doesn't go the way I want. If I'm not involved, it makes it difficult for me to sit back and be a Monday morning quarterback.

Apologies for the rant, but the owner of another blog has been invited by me to serve on a committee, attend a board meeting, etc. , just to see first hand what SCI is doing and what the facts are, but I've yet to even get a reply.

I appreciate you and everyone here for being so welcoming to Rick and I, and appreciate you being an SCI Member, and hope we can live up to your expectations, because I will so my best. As a hunting community we need to stick together, we may not agree on everything, but I'm pretty sure we agree on 95%, and that should be enough to work on together! Please feel free to reach out anytime to let us know how we can help, or give us a critique, help spread the word, etc.

Good hunting, Paul

p.s. You all can feel free to share my manifesto with all of AH if you'd like. I'm proud to be a hunter and proud to do my part.

Click to expand...

Paul,

Thanks for being here and for publishing your manifesto.

You and Rick are a breath of fresh air. SCI is in the best position of all the hunting organizations to make a statement and a stand. Many of us feel that SCI has abdicated that responsibility in the past. Take SCI's stance on Cecil as an example. DSC made a stand. John Jackson made a stand. Others did as well. SCI did its best to pretend that Cecil did not happen and turned on a member before any evidence was in. SCI was in a position to stand up to all the lies the media was reporting regarding Cecil. If I remember correct, there were 8-10 flat out lies being repeated ad nauseam. Hunters needed a representative to counter those lies and explain true conservation.

SCI is in a position to represent all of us. We plead with you and beg of you, for SCI to lead us. One of the things that leaders must do is listen. Coming onto AH shows you are willing to listen. You don't know how much that means to those of us who have felt ignored by SCI for years.

Thank you again for your presence on AH. I look forward to your participation.

Red Leg said:

And I won’t sue for copyright enfringement. But if it takes off, I want my cut.

Click to expand...

You’ll have to let me know when it takes off. I’ll share all royalties.

Paul Babaz said:

All, I appreciate the comments and opinions and welcoming Rick and I to AH. This being said, we are all passionate about hunting and because of this there are a lot of viewpoints on everything from method of take, to calibers, brand of equipment, etc. I've seen the cross bow hunters go to battle with vertical bow hunters a few years back in Wisconsin, I've seen the high end gun collectors go after the AR15 guys years back as well. As a coummunity we divide ourselves over differences of opinion when in reality, we should be focused on the big picture which is to protect the freedom to hunt! While HSUS, PETA, Born Free, etc. are organized and united, we are divided. We NEED to be united, regardless of whether you are bird hunter, small game hunter, or big game hunter. It doesn't matter to me whether your prefer dangerous game, or plains game, or whether you hunt with a flintlock, or a fine English double rifle. I am well aware of the arguments on both sides of CBL, and I appreciate the arguments on both sides, but the decision wasn't made based on public opinion.

Lastly, I was corresponding with another member here and went on a bit of a rant which I suggested he share he wanted to. He suggested I share it myself with AH, so I am posting it below. Sorry for the length of this post....

Thanks for the note of support. I had spoke to Rick earlier and encouraged him to get on AH as I believe we should have a presence here, if for nothing else but to dispel the rumors that abound. I will try to be as active as I can on here, and I am sure Rick will as well. Jerome has been great in getting me up to speed and I am grateful.

I'll be the first to say that SCI isn't perfect, but we do catch a lot of flak due to the rumor mill and most originates on another forum where a lot of folks like to pile on without getting all the facts, both sides of the story , or any facts at all. I am happy to speak to anyone and get their feedback on what SCI is doing or not doing. I hear a lot of comments about SCI (both good and bad), and my reply is always the same... to get involved with the local chapter, or volunteer for a committee, etc because "You can choose to get involved and be part of the solution, or sit back, throw stones, and be part of the problem!"

I can't tell you how many times, someone contacts me to tell me about all the things that I'm doing wrong and I typically ask them to get involved on a committee, chapter board, etc. The response is usually the same... "I don't have time...." Really? I have a full time career, 3 daughters, ages 21, 19, and 15, serve on multiple boards in the hunting/shooting community, but yet I find time.

Despite popular belief, SCI doesn't pay me or any of my volunteer colleagues, if anything it costs money to volunteer. Also, we don't take free hunts, free gear, or equipment, etc. For me, I do this because I want to do what I can to be part of the solution, just the same as I vote in every election, lest if forfeit my right to complain about the outcome if it doesn't go the way I want. If I'm not involved, it makes it difficult for me to sit back and be a Monday morning quarterback.

Apologies for the rant, but the owner of another blog has been invited by me to serve on a committee, attend a board meeting, etc. , just to see first hand what SCI is doing and what the facts are, but I've yet to even get a reply.

I appreciate you and everyone here for being so welcoming to Rick and I, and appreciate you being an SCI Member, and hope we can live up to your expectations, because I will so my best. As a hunting community we need to stick together, we may not agree on everything, but I'm pretty sure we agree on 95%, and that should be enough to work on together! Please feel free to reach out anytime to let us know how we can help, or give us a critique, help spread the word, etc.

Good hunting, Paul

p.s. You all can feel free to share my manifesto with all of AH if you'd like. I'm proud to be a hunter and proud to do my part.

Click to expand...

Thank you for this. I couldn't agree more! I am glad that both you and @Rick Parsons are here and willing to be part of the discussion. Knowing that the leadership is listening is a very important step in the right direction that I think will go far in minds of hunters. We have been divided for too long and I really can't understand why. We are all passionate about the same thing and we need to focus on that in the future. We don't need to agree but we do need to remain civil, open to discussion and listen to each other and we absolutely need organizations like SCI. I do believe you when you say that you will do your best...

Paul Babaz said:

Mike, I am indeed listening and I apologize for not visiting this thread earlier. To your point on aging a male lion, SCI/SCIF has been funding Dr. Paula White's research on aging a male lion in the field and there are many opinions on this, but there is yet any foolproof method, although there are some who will claim they can accurately age a lion in the field. To me it's similar in my professional life where I see folks who can claim to be able to time the market and able to get out at the top and back in at the bottom, but I can say in the last 25 years, I've yet to see anyone who can actually back up the claim. At any rate, I appreciate all the comments on this issue both in support and the opposition as well. I'm glad folks involved in the discussion. Paul

Click to expand...

Paul,

I hope all is well and it is good to see you posting here. I agree it is difficult to accurately age a lion in the field to within year. However the guideline for a shootable male lion involved more than age. I felt it to be a good guideline and believe it would have been beneficial for the lion had SCI adopted it. That is my opinion. I would like to see a similar guideline even for buffalo. It seems the current SCI scoring system rewards hunters for shooting immature buffalo.

Again these items are guideline for what some consider ethical hunting. I applaud the stance SCI took on the pen raised lion and hope to see a continued push towards conservation and protecting our hunting rights. Good move to DC!!

For those not familiar with the Huntable Male Lion definition here it is. I believe this to be the final form.

Huntable Male Lion:
The hunting and scientific communities agree that lion hunting must be biologically sustainable, in which harvests should have no negative long-term impact on lion populations. An essential step in attaining sustainability is the adoption of standards on what is a ‘huntable’ male lion; that is, a lion that can be hunted without any negative effect on the sustainability of the local population from which it is removed.
The most important factor to consider is age. The exact age of a huntable male lion is dependent upon many regional factors such as habitat and associated differences in lion ecology and social structure and thus, may vary slightly regionally, but the general concept holds true for all. The below definition has been endorsed by scientists working in Tanzania, Mozambique and Zambia.
Huntable male lions are defined as those male lions whose off-take has no negative impact on the sustainability of local lion population dynamics. Research has shown that these are typically lions six years of age or more that have completed at least one breeding cycle. To reduce risks of infanticide, males of any age known to be heading prides or known to be part of a coalition heading prides with dependent cubs (18 months old or less) should not be hunted. Based on these considerations, a huntable male lion is at least six years of age and is not known to head a pride or be part of a coalition heading a pride with dependent cubs. The ideal huntable lion is an older individual known to be a transient, that is, no longer in breeding association with any pride.
For the long-term sustainability of this valuable resource, if the maturity or pride status of a lion is in question, it is strongly encouraged that the hunter foregoestakingthatlion. Research models have confirmed that responsible hunting does not alter wild lion population dynamics if restricted to males which meet the criteria of a huntable lion.

Here is the complete report. Not much reason to re-invent the wheel.

Lion Conservation Task Force, Inc.
A Texas based non-profit organization
Dedicated to conserving Africa’s wild-lions and habitat
P.O. Box 665
Gainesville, Texas 76241
Phone: 303-619-2872 or 903-271-2752
Fax: 580-276-1606
E-mail: ledvm@msn.com and globalhunts@aol.com


Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R9-ES-2012-0025
Division of Policy and Directives Management
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203

February 8, 2013



Dear Dr. Brisendine and Colleagues,

While estimates vary and exact counts are non existent, it is estimated that approximately 30,000 African lions remain in the wild. Their long-term survival is threatened primarily by loss of habitat, retaliatory killing over depredation on livestock, poaching for bone sales to the Middle and Far East, snaring, and the loss of prey.

There are concerns about the negative impact of trophy hunting on lion populations but the extent of the effects is unknown. The Lion Conservation Task Force (LCTF) does agree that with the ongoing decline in global populations of lions and the lion’s range…that reform is warranted in the trophy lion hunting industry, but we are concerned that an up-listing to Endangered status in the US may have unexpected negative consequences for conservation. With 60% of the current sport hunted trophies being imported into the US, up-listing would virtually put an end to the trophy hunting industry in many areas by making it economically unfeasible with resultant impact on the viability of hunting as a form of land use, but would not influence other human causes of lion mortality.


There is an old saying in Africa: “It must pay for it to stay”. While this may be foreign to our way of thinking in the US…it is a fact of life in Africa and one that must be considered.

Lion hunting gives value to the lion and the land they inhabit. This value transforms into habitat preservation, acts as a deterrent against poaching and retaliatory killing, revenue to wildlife authorities for conservation in areas that would otherwise be unsupported (most hunting blocks are unsuitable to photo-tourisms), and continued revenue for under funded wildlife authorities. Rather than eliminating ways for wildlife to generate income, we need to find more ways for rural Africans to benefit from wildlife.

LCTF Recommendations:

• Primarily, we support reform of lion hunting rather than trophy importation restrictions. Science-based management must be implemented by all range countries to ensure that lion hunting is beneficial rather than detrimental to the long term survival of the species. Research has shown that there is a non-impact huntable subset of male lions. Thus, we have defined the ‘Huntable Male Lion’.


The Definition is as follows:
The hunting and scientific communities agree that lion hunting must be biologically sustainable, in which harvests should have no negative long-term impact on lion populations. An essential step in attaining sustainability is the adoption of standards on what is a ‘huntable’ male lion; that is, a lion that can be hunted without any negative effect on the sustainability of the local population from which it is removed.

The most important factor to consider is age. The exact age of a huntable male lion is dependent upon many regional factors such as habitat and associated differences in lion ecology and social structure and thus, may vary slightly regionally, but the general concept holds true for all. The below definition has been endorsed by scientists working in Tanzania, Mozambique and Zambia.

Huntable male lions are defined as those male lions whose off-take has no negative impact on the sustainability of local lion population dynamics. Research has shown that these are typically lions six years of age or more that have completed at least one breeding cycle. To reduce risks of infanticide, males of any age known to be heading prides or known to be part of a coalition heading prides with dependent cubs (18 months old or less) should not be hunted. Based on these considerations, a huntable male lion is at least six years of age and is not known to head a pride or be part of a coalition heading a pride with dependent cubs. The ideal huntable lion is an older individual known to be a transient, that is, no longer in breeding association with any pride.

For the long-term sustainability of this valuable resource, if the maturity or pride status of a lion is in question, it is strongly encouraged that the hunter foregoes taking that lion. Research models have confirmed that responsible hunting does not alter wild lion population dynamics if restricted to males which meet the criteria of a huntable lion.

Authors:
Colleen Begg, Ph.D
Project Leader, Niassa Carnivore Project
Niassa National Reserve, Mozambique


J. Lane Easter, DVM
Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons
Co-founding member, Lion Conservation Task Force


George Hartley, BA, LL.B
Professional Hunter
Tanzania Game Tracker Safaris


Luke Hunter, Ph.D
President
PANTHERA

Aaron Neilson
Professional Hunter
President, Global Hunting Resources
Co-founding member, Lion Conservation Task Force

Craig Packer, Ph.D.
Distinguished McKnight University Professor
Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior
University of Minnesota
Principal Investigator, Serengeti Lion Project

Paula A. White, Ph.D
Director, Zambia Lion Project
Center for Tropical Research
University of California, Los Angeles USA

Karyl L. Whitman, Ph.D
Wildlife Biologist
Co-Author, A Hunter’s Guide to Aging Lions in Eastern and Southern Africa

The LCTF is working to accomplish global acceptance of this definition and currently in the US…the Dallas Safari Club has adopted it and Safari Club International has it under advisement and consideration for adoption. In Africa, the Tanzania Professional Hunting Association is considering adoption. We will continue to strive for universal acceptance of this definition.



• Secondarily, the LCTF also supports law reform in all range countries. We would like to see universal adoption of laws enforcing rules similar to those of the Niassa National Reserve in Mozambique.


Lion Hunting Rules Proposed by LCTF
1. General Rules

1.1 Elected trophies:
• Only male lions may be hunted.
• Only adult males, which are a minimum of 6 years old, may be hunted as the hunting of young lions can cause severe disruption to pride structure and, if excessive, can cause a population to collapse.
• As a rule no problem lions (e.g. man eaters) should be sold as trophy animals. However, should a client be in a position to hunt a problem lion (and specifically man eaters) the issue of the operator/client retaining and exporting the trophy will be assessed by APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY on a case by case basis.

1.2 Trophy monitoring:
• For each lion on quota, a monitoring kit will be provided by APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY containing a datasheet and blood sample paper.
• For each lion trophy, the Professional Hunter is expected to take photographs (side view, front view of head and shoulder, nose, teeth and full body), and a blood sample from bullet wound while in the field.
• All questions on the datasheet must also be completed.



2 Trophy Quality Control

2.1 Responsibility: monitoring of trophy quality shall be conducted by the APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY.

2.2 Procedure: The APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY shall arrange to collect trophy kits (photographs, blood samples and datasheets) from the operators and measure and age the skulls before trophies are certified for export.

2.3 Export eligibility: Absolutely no lion verified by the APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY to be less than 4 years of age shall be eligible for export.



3. Assigning of Quotas:

3.1 Points System:
• Quotas will be assigned independently for each concession dependant on the age of lion trophies taken in the previous hunting season according to the Points System.
• The points system is self-regulating; it rewards ecologically sound hunting by allowing an increase in the quota to a maximum of five. Hunting of young lions under the age of six years is penalized. Operators receive no decrease in quota for not shooting a lion.
• Using this system, the off-take in each block will increase or decrease in accordance with real densities in each concession, accounting for hunting effort, anti-poaching measures (i.e. decreased illegal off-take) and natural population fluctuations (disease, drought etc.).
• The maximum of five lion for each concession is in place initially to ensure that the quota remains within 2 - 4% of the predicted adult male population. It is considered unlikely in the foreseeable future that more than five male lions of appropriate age will be available in each block. However this can be reassessed in the future.
• New concessions will be awarded an initial quota of two lions.
• If the quota is reduced to zero (i.e. only young lions are shot in the previous year), no quota is provided for the next year, but the quota will start at one lion the following year.
• Details of all trophies (datasheets, photographs of mane, teeth and nose) will be kept on file with APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY. It is mandatory that a premolar be made available from each trophy so that field aging techniques can be fine-tuned over time.

3.2 Procedure:

The Points System is a three-step process:

Step 1:
At the end of each hunting season each lion trophy taken is aged by APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY representatives based on teeth, nose color, mane development and general body condition.

Step 2:see Niassa Reserve Rules above to understand this chart...it did not transfer well...they are the same
Points are assigned to each trophy according to the following system.
Number of Points for Each Trophy
Quota >6yrs No Trophy 4-6 yrs <4 yrs incomplete info
quota of
3 or more 4 3 2 -3 0
quota of
2 4 3 2 0 0
quota of
1 6 3 0 0 0

For each concession, points are tallied for that year, divided by 3, rounded up to next whole number up to a maximum of 5 lions and that is the quota issued for the next hunting season.

Step 3:
The APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY will endeavor to inform operators of the new quota to allow time for marketing at safari shows in January.

3.3 Unethical Behavior:

In cases of Safari Operators or Professional Hunters behaving unethically (according to the applicable law in the country), APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY may apply more severe actions, which might include trophy confiscation or PH License confiscation or cancellation of the lease agreement with the operator.

It is considered unethical behavior to hunt a lion less than 6 years of age. Specific additional penalties for hunting a lion less than 6 years of age are outlined below and will be levied by the APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY:

• Lions less than 4.0 years of age
o Export will not be allowed and the trophy becomes the property of the APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY.
o The PH responsible for the harvest of a lion in this category will automatically have his/her license suspended for the following hunting season. After 2 suspensions for this violation, a third offense results in a permanent life long ban from obtaining a PH license.

• Lions 4.0 – 4.11 years of age
Export of this category will be allowed with a double trophy fee paid by the client. The second trophy fee will be levied after age certification and will be paid prior to export.

• Lions 4.0 – 5.11 years of age
If a PH harvests 3 or more of these in any consecutive 5 year period or less, an automatic suspension of his/her Dangerous Game license for the period of one year will occur.



4. Trophy Export
• The standard operating procedures apply.
• Only trophies certified as 4 years old or older, after credible post mortem inspection by qualified inspectors of the APPROPRIATE WILDLIFE AUTHORITY, can be exported.
o Lions certified to be in the age range of 4.0 – 4.11 may only be eligible for export after a second additional trophy fee is paid in full.


Tanzania has already adopted a “six-year-old-rule” and is presently ‘considering’ amending its laws to mimic those written above. Of course Mozambique has ‘similar rules’ in the Niassa Reserve and the LCTF is applying pressure for these rules to be put in place in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Namibia, and other Range Countries.



In Conclusion:
The LCTF believes strongly in ethical sustainable hunting as a conservation tool. We also believe strongly that if the governments of the range countries, the hunting industry, and the client hunters themselves embrace rules and definitions as laid out in this letter along adequate protection from poaching that the lion populations will begin to increase to carrying capacity.

We feel strongly that with the positive changes that ‘ARE’ occurring that any unilateral action taken by the USF&WS such as an up-list to endangered status would have catastrophic effects.

Therefore, with the negative consequences of an up-list laid out and the beginning of acceptance of these current recommendations taking place, the LCTF recommends against the African Lion being listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act.



Sincerely,



J. Lane Easter, DVM
Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons
Co-founding member, Lion Conservation Task Force



Aaron Neilson
Professional Hunter
President, Global Hunting Resources
Co-founding member, Lion Conservation Task Force

Paul and Rick thanks for making a token appearance on the forum.
I shall speak with my wallet and not renew my SCI membership and resign as a measurer and I will not be casting a vote for you to the NRA.
I do not wish to be part of an organization where a board makes decisions without a vote of the membership on important issues and policies.

SafariA said:

Thanks Rick . Does this also apply to the 40 and 50k stags sold at auction in NZ ? Would the escape and natural cover be sufficient in these cases

Click to expand...

Ok I would post question again . Maybe someone can give me an answer . @ Paul and Rick. One more question . It was stated that the decision was based on public opinion. Where do we draw the line ..... Public opinion is against all hunting and especially Trophy hunting . I would also like to know if the Captive stags in NZ qualify for the estate ruling .

Spesifically referring to the 40 and 50 k auction items .

I would appreciate if someone could give me clarity .

Good to have you guys on board here. !

Paul Babaz said:

I appreciate the arguments on both sides, but the decision wasn't made based on public opinion.

Click to expand...

SafariA said:

One more question . It was stated that the decision was based on public opinion. Where do we draw the line ....

Click to expand...

SafariA, if you are referring to the pen raised lions Paul stated the decision was NOT made based on public opinion.

Mike70560 said:

SafariA, if you are referring to the pen raised lions Paul stated the decision was NOT made based on public opinion.

Click to expand...

Thanks Mike sorry my mistake ! I read it wrong ! Apologies !

Would still like to get an answer on the other question though ....

SafariA said:

...............

Would still like to get an answer on the other question though ....

Click to expand...

Rick Parsons said:

I tried to post another comment and got stopped cold by a message that said that I was violating some kind of forum rules with my comment. I'm a lawyer by trade so I know about rules, and I was flummoxed. So if it continues I'll get with the forum owner or moderator to figure out what I'm doing wrong. If anyone can help out on that , please jump in.

Rick Parsons, CEO
Safari Club International

Click to expand...

https://www.africahunting.com/threads/hi-from-sci.42172/


Hopefully, it is resolved and @Rick Parsons can answer your question.

@Rick Parsons ,
Glad you are here and engaged in the discussion regarding SCI’s stance on the CBL topic.
You have stated that SCI’s position is not based on public opinion. I must admit that my impression up to this point has been that public opinion was a big factor. I’m willing to accept what you’ve said and chalk it up to misperception on my part.
Can you comment on what effect, if any, the turmoil within PHASA, SAPA, and the formation of the new South African organization (I forget the name/acronym) has had on SCI’s position and their taking up the issue and coming out more “publicly” with a statement of SCI’s position on the issue?
What is the number one biggest contributing factor that caused SCI to take up the issue now and to formally adopt the current position?
Also, can you share some insight on what seems to be a more critical view of Captive Bred Lion hunting and the hunting of other captive bred game? Is there a difference in viewpoint? Should there be?
Thank you sir. Would love to hear anything you or @Paul Babaz has to say on these topics.

I agree with @IdaRam and would also like to hear the answer to the distinction point that @BRICKBURN brought up.

I find the distinction point particularly interesting as based on the SCI current estate hunting guidelines it doesn't seem that a distinction is needed as CBL doesn't meet the current guidelines regardless, and should have never been allowed based on that alone.

Rick Parsons said:

The collective judgement of our Board, which is large and is full of experienced hunters, was that there was a distinction between breeding and hunting an apex predator in a hunting estate setting and the hunting of other species in the same setting.

Click to expand...

IdaRam said:

Also, can you share some insight on what seems to be a more critical view of Captive Bred Lion hunting and the hunting of other captive bred game? Is there a difference in viewpoint? Should there be?

Click to expand...

Actually, this is the one point I'd differ on. I will argue that based on the current guidelines SCI has been easier on CBL, not harder.

If last month you went to SCI with a kudu and told them it had been raised in a pen and released 3 days before the hunt it would have been refused for the record book. If you had done the same thing with a lion it would have been accepted I believe. And again, I'm basing that off of the rules I've read, not personal knowledge of what truly would have been done.

Royal27 said:

Actually, this is the one point I'd differ on. I will argue that based on the current guidelines SCI has been easier on CBL, not harder.

If last month you went to SCI with a kudu and told them it had been raised in a pen and released 3 days before the hunt it would have been refused for the record book. If you had done the same thing with a lion it would have been accepted I believe. And again, I'm basing that off of the rules I've read, not personal knowledge of what truly would have been done.

Click to expand...

So am I correct that this comment is related to only being entered in the record book? This entire thread has much confusion for my old brain. Thank goodness I am not going to be hunting elephants and lions during this lifetime!!!! Maybe the next one!

sierraone said:

So am I correct that this comment is related to only being entered in the record book? This entire thread has much confusion for my old brain. Thank goodness I am not going to be hunting elephants and lions during this lifetime!!!! Maybe the next one!

Click to expand...

Record book is what I refer to when being accepted by SCI. I assume that if an animal isn't allowed in the books that SCI doesn't believe it was hunted within their ethical standards.

I believe that SCI as an organization has every right to have it's own set of ethics, as you and I both do. And, the same right to not participate in something they believe is unethical by their standards.

Royal27 said:

Record book is what I refer to when being accepted by SCI. I assume that if an animal isn't allowed in the books that SCI doesn't believe it was hunted within their ethical standards.

I believe that SCI as an organization has every right to have it's own set of ethics, as you and I both do. And, the same right to not participate in something they believe is unethical by their standards.

Click to expand...

OK, so as far as SCI is concerned, being allowed by SCI policies/rules is synonymous with being eligible for their record book?

sierraone said:

OK, so as far as SCI is concerned, being allowed by SCI policies/rules is synonymous with being eligible for their record book?

Click to expand...

Not to speak for them, but I think that's a fair assumption.

Royal27 said:

Not to speak for them, but I think that's a fair assumption.

Click to expand...

Got it! Thanks.

Buckdog said:

Paul and Rick thanks for making a token appearance on the forum.
I shall speak with my wallet and not renew my SCI membership and resign as a measurer and I will not be casting a vote for you to the NRA.
I do not wish to be part of an organization where a board makes decisions without a vote of the membership on important issues and policies.

Click to expand...

Buckdog,

A couple of years ago SCI was promoting an idea that I completely disagreed with. Myself along with quite a few members started sending emails to the SCI leadership. They listened to us and this is how I met Paul Babaz. BTW that issue went my way.

Instead of resigning you may consider trying to either change the SCI decision or leadership. A board of directors is in place to make these decisions. That is what they do.

I have struggled somewhat with this issue. On one hand I feel no legal hunting should be banned. Without the South African outfitters there would be far less game in SA. On the other hand I have my opinions on what is ethical. Just because it is legal does not make it right and also I do not expect everybody to live by my ethics.

DSC and SCI have not banned any hunting (nor can they). They are not supporting it and giving members guidance to ethical hunting practices. You can be a member of both and still go shoot a canned lion. If anything, these decisions have brought to light the practices of canned lion hunting. Hunters I know have shot cattle killing lions that crossed under the fence in to the game area while on a plains game safari (for an additional fee of course) and actually believed that is what happened.

What I hope happens is the market dictates the outcome, in other words hunters self regulate and quit this practice to a point of it not being economically feasible to operate these shoots.