Posting photos of dead wild animals could be illegal soon

JPbowhunter said:

as the replies keep mounting one thing is starting to show, the antis are probably right that most hunters don't care near as much about conservation as they make out.

Im beginning to wonder why anyone ever bothered hunting africa before social media because being able to put pics up everywhere appears to be a primary motive for a lot of guys.
Forget hunting, take anything like golf, fishing, football, going to a kids dance recital what would you think of someone who said "nah I'm not doing that there anymore they don't let us put pics on facebook ". I for one would be thinking the guy probably wasn't in it for the right reasons to begin with if something so petty put him off.

Hunting to me is about a lot of things, killing something is way down the list and being able to put those pics on social media is so far below even that its not a consideration.

People need to take a breath and think about what's a priority when they chuck on their hunting gear in the morning

Click to expand...

This is a very captivating thread and I am enjoying the different points of view, even though this is terribly frustraring at the same time.
I don’t get the same message at all from these 8 pages of posts.
This comes to mind:
MATTHEW 13:13
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

JPbowhunter said:

as the replies keep mounting one thing is starting to show, the antis are probably right that most hunters don't care near as much about conservation as they make out.

Im beginning to wonder why anyone ever bothered hunting africa before social media because being able to put pics up everywhere appears to be a primary motive for a lot of guys.
Forget hunting, take anything like golf, fishing, football, going to a kids dance recital what would you think of someone who said "nah I'm not doing that there anymore they don't let us put pics on facebook ". I for one would be thinking the guy probably wasn't in it for the right reasons to begin with if something so petty put him off.

Hunting to me is about a lot of things, killing something is way down the list and being able to put those pics on social media is so far below even that its not a consideration.

People need to take a breath and think about what's a priority when they chuck on their hunting gear in the morning

Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point of most of the comments.

JPbowhunter said:

as the replies keep mounting one thing is starting to show, the antis are probably right that most hunters don't care near as much about conservation as they make out.

Im beginning to wonder why anyone ever bothered hunting africa before social media because being able to put pics up everywhere appears to be a primary motive for a lot of guys.

Click to expand...

My opposition to this lunacy has nothing to do with my wanting to post pics on FB or anywhere else.

It has to do with someone trying to exercise power over my life when they have absolutely no legal right to do so.

I suspect there are many others here who object for the same reason.

tarbe said:

My opposition to this lunacy has nothing to do with my wanting to post pics on FB or anywhere else.

It has to do with someone trying to exercise power over my life when they have absolutely no legal right to do so.

I suspect there are many others here who object for the same reason.

Click to expand...

T, your point hits home for many of us. I am not on Facebook or any of the social media sites that NAPHA mentions in their letter.

I have a choice of hunting in Namibia or not hunting in Namibia. At this moment, all else being equal, I would choose another location to hunt, since I don't like being told what to do.

My guess is that Americans make up a substantial portion of Namibia's foreign hunters. Most Americans that have the financial ability to hunt in foreign countries, probably have a strong built in aversion to being told what to do.

My guess is this will negatively effect Namibia's hunting industry if they choose to implement these rules.

JPbowhunter said:

as the replies keep mounting one thing is starting to show, the antis are probably right that most hunters don't care near as much about conservation as they make out.

Im beginning to wonder why anyone ever bothered hunting africa before social media because being able to put pics up everywhere appears to be a primary motive for a lot of guys.
Forget hunting, take anything like golf, fishing, football, going to a kids dance recital what would you think of someone who said "nah I'm not doing that there anymore they don't let us put pics on facebook ". I for one would be thinking the guy probably wasn't in it for the right reasons to begin with if something so petty put him off.

Hunting to me is about a lot of things, killing something is way down the list and being able to put those pics on social media is so far below even that its not a consideration.

People need to take a breath and think about what's a priority when they chuck on their hunting gear in the morning

Click to expand...

Wow, an incredibly judgmental post about people you have never met! I enjoy sites like AH so I can converse with like-minded people about my favorite activity. I love to see their pictures and hear ALL the details about their experiences whether it’s the area hunted, the camp, the PHs, successes, failures, and yes - their PICTURES OF DEAD ANIMALS. I think most of us on this site would be disappointed if we couldn’t post pictures of our animals but that has nothing to do with our motives for hunting. Being able to post a picture on this site would never enter into my reason to hunt. Of course I hunt for the best of reasons and I fully support conservation far and away more than pictures but excuse me but I didn’t realize that motives for hunting were the subject of this thread sir!

SCOTT CWO, WELL SAID!!, the sand in your boots, bugs, the thorn cuts, blisters, the pain of carrying a 9-10 lbs rifle for what may seem like hours and miles on end only to have the wind shift and see the animal you have been stalking slip away in a heart beat and yet tomorrow morning before daylight you will drag your sorry ass out of a bed-bed roll and dump the sand-dirt out of your boots, putting burning iodine on your many thorn cuts and start it all over. I have had many days like that and I would not trade them for any thing and look back and laugh about the hard hunts I have been on with out firing a shot.

I think many of us feel the same way about this issue, but we've gotten a bit cross-threaded.

Since I have been a "supporter", let me clarify a few things. First, I have supported Namibia because I think they are well-motivated, and they want to preserve hunting. I have no reason to doubt the words of the Minister, the Namibian Constitution or NAPHA. I don't think these are evil or ill-intentioned people. If you think this is a conspiracy to end hunting in Namibia, then we do in fact disagree.

If you think this is a violation of your rights, I've already addressed that in another post. Suffice to say it isn't.

If you think this is a bad idea, or one that is likely to be ineffective, then most of us probably agree.

I don't think this will work. But doing what we've been doing for decades won't work either. It's not enough to up our game, although we do have to do that. More importantly, we need to change the game. The antis have changed the game on us through social media, with the results we see around us every day. They raise more money, they spend more money and they use emotion to hammer us, successfully. All of this, while doing nothing for wildlife or habitat conservation.

Who's winning here? Not hunters. Life is getting harder and harder for hunters every day.

So rather than threatening Namibia - one of the best places to hunt in Africa - I believe we should engage with the government and NAFTA. We all want the same thing. There should be a win-win here.

But it may be hard to see sitting way up there on that horse.

well I have not been on a horse since my last elk hunt, thank you. maybe the Namibian officals should get off the blame the hunter high horse. this no picture ban is not going to change any one, let alone the anti,s. why not put a program together with the facts and figures with the total benefits hunting brings to Namibia, from the time a hunter arrives at the airport to the time he leaves. and put a money value-amount on it for people to see right up front. the amount of money a hunter spends at a outfitter is not the only money spent on a hunt. I have no trouble with not posting any photo,s in Namibia, but once I,m home I will not let a official in a suit at a desk decide for me what I can post or not post. as I have better things to do with my money than maybe defend myself from a law suit from another country, I,ll pass that country if it become law. would this picture get me banned- arrested?

leslie hetrick said:

well I have not been on a horse since my last elk hunt, thank you. maybe the Namibian officals should get off the blame the hunter high horse. this no picture ban is not going to change any one, let alone the anti,s. why not put a program together with the facts and figures with the total benefits hunting brings to Namibia, from the time a hunter arrives at the airport to the time he leaves. and put a money value-amount on it for people to see right up front. the amount of money a hunter spends at a outfitter is not the only money spent on a hunt. I have no trouble with not posting any photo,s in Namibia, but once I,m home I will not let a official in a suit at a desk decide for me what I can post or not post. as I have better things to do with my money than maybe defend myself from a law suit from another country, I,ll pass that country if it become law. would this picture get me arrested?

Click to expand...

The industry has been doing all of the things you're suggesting for some time. Academics make the same point. The IUCN supports a well-regulated hunting industry. Governments publish data on the benefits of hunting. None of it is stemming the tide or making a difference. And the solution is to do more? This is about feelings, not about facts. It's about emotions, not about education.

Let me ask you a question. Are you saying that not one person's mind was changed by seeing pictures of that giraffe? That not one American voter changed their mind about lion hunting when they read about and saw pictures of Cecil? These are the things that matter to those who make the laws - did you notice just how fast your President changed his mind about elephant imports after the public outcry? Do you have any idea how easy it is for an animal rights organization to "influence" an African politician?

So let's keep doing the same thing . . . and expect different results?

so lets post pictures of lions killing impala-zebra, croc,s killing wildabeast-zebra ect, oh wait its on the discovery channel all the time. the trouble with the liberal press is they don,t print the truth if it doesn,t fit their story. is the outrage because the giraffe was black, or that the lion had a name? I don,t think it changed any pro or con. if any money is lost by hunters by passing nambia do you realy think the anti,s will pony up, I don,t. if this is made law it will lower the amount of money taken in from hunting and my small amount of over all money will go else where. no amount of twisting the facts will change it. and I know for a fact how easy it was to get a boarder crossing official to over look a few things $$$$$. stop pouching in your countries if you want to raise your animal count, but with out hunters money to pay guards and buy equipment it will be harder as the whiners and bitchers, just bitch and whine and wait for the next thing to whine and bitch about.

We should fight ignorance with facts.

We shouldn't try to smother it with ineffective, liberty-destroying feel-good initiatives.

I agree with @Hank2211, we can’t keep doing the same thing and expect different results. As a user of Facebook I have to be very careful of what I post. It takes nothing for stuff to blow up there. It’s overrun with leftist. And they are controlling the social narrative. Don’t believe me just look at some of the posts.

wesheltonj said:

I agree with @Hank2211, we can’t keep doing the same thing and expect different results. As a user of Facebook I have to be very careful of what I post. It takes nothing for stuff to blow up there. It’s overrun with leftist. And they are controlling the social narrative. Don’t believe me just look at some of the posts.

Click to expand...

Like many here, I have never posted a trophy pic on Facebook. And I never will.

I also don’t want to start the slide down that slippery slope toward the ultimate nanny state (some would say it’s too late).

Reasonable minds can disagree.

WAB said:

Umm, isn’t this social media?

Click to expand...

I wonder:
Is this site full of PETA and/or antihunters?
Is africanhunting.com a sosial media, and that means that we are not allowed to post pictures at this site.
I`m just wondering...


This one was shot somehwere in Africa.

So I guess some one will have to explain to me how Namibia will save face and preserve their hunting by doing this ?

Does anyone think that an emotional out break over a photo is linked to some country ? Emotional people don't care where. Most people have never heard of Namibia . Nor in the minds of people will they remember where the photo was taken.
Would we not have to ban hunting photos worldwide for this to be effective ? Including outfitters.
I agree people post some of the dumbest photos on Facebook etc.
Man has been telling hunting stories since cave walls. Do I compare that to today's social media , of course not. But man will always tell it.
There have always been anti hunting people as long as i have been alive.
I believe the common mistake being made right now is the thinking that people sitting on the fence are going to sway hunting . That is possible. Most I meet just really don't care enough to do anything about it. They are outraged by a photo and move on. I think they would vote anti hunting if given a chance, but
Most of hunting is not being taken by vote from the public as of late. It is is being taken from back door methods.
I followed the "rare black giraffe " post on face book from the day it started. I can't tell you where it was taken. It didnt stick in my mind . But to my suprise following that post on face book ,the original thread wasn't anti hunters or fence sitters doing all the negative posts. It was mostly HUNTERS ! Hunters with the statement that you should not kill animals for the trophy. Only meat. I went to a bunch of their pages and it's full of dead deer images and mounts they have had done from deer.
We do need to make some changes in how we fight to save our hunting rights.
Do what you've always done , get what you always got. But what, this is the problem.

leslie hetrick said:

well I have not been on a horse since my last elk hunt, thank you. maybe the Namibian officals should get off the blame the hunter high horse. this no picture ban is not going to change any one, let alone the anti,s. why not put a program together with the facts and figures with the total benefits hunting brings to Namibia, from the time a hunter arrives at the airport to the time he leaves. and put a money value-amount on it for people to see right up front. the amount of money a hunter spends at a outfitter is not the only money spent on a hunt. I have no trouble with not posting any photo,s in Namibia, but once I,m home I will not let a official in a suit at a desk decide for me what I can post or not post. as I have better things to do with my money than maybe defend myself from a law suit from another country, I,ll pass that country if it become law. would this picture get me banned- arrested?

View attachment 237561

Click to expand...

You are banned to walk 40 days in the dessert, with only 1 gallon of water.

thanks for the picture, good job with meat for the locals along with some money. I think their are a few closet leaners to peta here. what Namibia is trying to do is called the Chicago two step.

the walk would do me good, but I want something a lot stronger than water. say 100 proof.

Hank2211 said:

Let me ask you a question. Are you saying that not one person's mind was changed by seeing pictures of that giraffe? That not one American voter changed their mind about lion hunting when they read about and saw pictures of Cecil? These are the things that matter to those who make the laws - did you notice just how fast your President changed his mind about elephant imports after the public outcry? Do you have any idea how easy it is for an animal rights organization to "influence" an African politician?

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone here is saying that "not one" person has been influenced by "bad" pictures, or even by "good" pictures with lies and misinformation attached to them. We definitely need to change how we react, and combat the anti emotional lies with fact and reason. No argument. Zero. In my opinion however; this should not lead to us giving up right of free speech, which this does (we will have to disagree here). Why else would a government take away the right to discuss a LEGAL activity if not taking away free speech?

Interestingly enough, Danene seems to agree with me as she freely admits this may not be legal, although I suppose her concern could be for any of a number of other legal reasons.

Hank2211 said:

If you think this is a violation of your rights, I've already addressed that in another post. Suffice to say it isn't.

Click to expand...

Where is the line drawn? We all know that anti Vegans hate all meat. Should all pictures of food containing meat be outlawed from social media? Would that stop them?

How about restaurant windows? Perhaps they should be made illegal in all restaraunts that serve meat to prevent the below? Seems like a simple and straight forward solution....

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/apr/12/ethical-eating-vegan-protest-meat-Canada

Would a government not be restricting rights if a driving permit had a condition that you couldn't say things the government found to be detrimental in order to get the permit? You agreed to the driving permit conditions after all, just as with a hunting permit.

Crazy examples, perhaps, and perhaps not. It simply bothers me when government restricts rights in order to quell protest and shape public opinion, and in my opinion, that's exactly what this is. There are always exceptions of course, such as the need for national security or military needs, but this doesn't seem to fall under anything I believe is an exception.


Again, I believe this to be a misguided effort to do the right thing, nothing more and nothing less. And it's a Namibian issue. No doubt. Time will tell on this one and we will see if it even gets truly implemented, or if it's changed and stopped.


Changing subject slightly.... Since this is and has been such a big deal to NAPHA, per Danene, for at least the last year and they are and have been so strongly against hunter trophy photos I wonder why they didn't make it against NAPHA rules long ago for posting of photos to be against the rules of hunting with any NAPHA member? Hmmm.....

Hank2211 said:

...............- I believe we should engage with the government and NAFTA. We all want the same thing. There should be a win-win here.
.......

Click to expand...

As a Canadian I wonder if Dr. Freud would have something to say about this NAFTA slip!