Discussion in 'Articles' started by saeng101, Nov 24, 2017.
At night with spotlights over bait.
If Rhino and BWB could climb fences and kill people there would be a different issue.
Also, if they could manage to throw litters it might be a different matter as well.
After luring it out of a National Park and destroying the radio collar by cutting it off and turning it in to park rangers.
you forgot remote target acquisition systems as well. Get it together man. You will never get to the top by being so sloppy.
my last post on this subject,plains game and lions raised for hunting,wild plains game and lions for hunting,same thing,period.rigged hunting for either,bull shit,no way.fair chase,go for it.
I have never met Ivan Carter in person, but I’ve been a fan of his show and videos for a while. I appreciate what he does for hunting and consevation. My perception of him is that he is a stand up guy and is devoted to conservation. I’m disappointed by his position but I understand it. It may prove to be short sighted in the long run. Time will tell. After all, elephant hunting is pretty prominently in the cross hairs as well.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
For clarity, I don’t support “canned lion hunting”. I do support Captive Bred Lion hunting when conducted in accordance with the 30 day minimum release period and on a large enough property with multiple water holes and animals for the lions to hunt. To my way of thinking canned lion hunts are the types of hunts where a lion is released into a relatively small enclosue and shot within hours of being released. Does anyone here support that type of hunt? I don’t believe so. Yet, all Captive Bred Lion hunts seem to be getting lumped into the category of canned hunts.
I don’t believe any hunter/conservationist/sportsman or woman should support that type of hunting. In fact, we should condemn it. Strongly and vocally. In my estimation this is where we have screwed up by the numbers. There has been so much in-fighting, politics, agendas, etc. creating so much rancor and division it’s next to impossible to join forces or even have a civilized discussion about the matter.
This is what makes me so pissed off at all the alphabet soup hunting organizations. PHASA, SAPA, NAPHA, SCI, on and on and on... There hasn’t been an adult in the room! Politics, power and money seem to have ruled and we’re all paying the price.
I don’t think we help our cause in the battle with the anti’s with much of what has been posted here in the past. But I think our position has been hurt more severely by not coming out strongly with condemnation of the TRUE canned hunts and the operators who conduct them.
I do not subscribe to the mindset of “support regardless, or keep your trap shut”. If we had all done a better job of vehemently speaking out against “canned lion hunting” and doing our own policing of the practice, once again we might be in a different place.
I ask you all, would we be where we are today if we, sportsmen and the alphabet soup groups, had vehemently condemned “canned lion hunting” ie; release one day and shoot the next, and drawn a clear distinction between canned hunts and properly conducted CBL hunts conforming to the 30 day realease period?
As things sit now, I fully expect the antis are planning a victory party that includes a strategy session on how to move from the CBL issue to free range lions and elephant, then leopard, giraffe and hippo, then on to the small cats...
We must figure out a way to put differences aside and work together. So far our “leaders” (what a joke) seem to be leading us to nothing but greater division.
Sorry, I’m sure this could have been stated more eloquently. I’m sure many disagree. I’m sure the alphabet soup groups think I’m a jerk. And I’m sure I’m wrong on some aspects. I’m also sure people need to start working together and stop putting their self interest ahead of everything else. Especially the so called leaders and alphabet soup groups.
PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS CASTIGATE THEIR SA COLLEAGUES FOR BENDING “ETHICAL HUNTING” RULES
Statement by Danene van der Westhuyzen, President of the Namibia Professional Hunting Association
The Namibia Professional Hunting Association (NAPHA) feels compelled to issue this statement in reaction to the decision reached by the Professional Hunting Association of South Africa (PHASA) to, by way of amending a constitutional definition, now allow for and condone, inter alia, the “hunting” of captive bred lion.
NAPHA, cannot sit idly and allow actions which we firmly believe to be contrary to both our aims and objectives, as well as the internationally recognized principles of ethical hunting in Africa, to go unanswered
PHASA decided at their Annual General Meeting held on 22 November 2017 that, in future, their constitution would define the term “ethical hunting” as: “Ethical hunting shall mean all types of hunting permissible by law”. This amended definition was approved at their AGM by majority vote.
NAPHA is shocked and deeply disappointed that PHASA has decided to take the low road by amending its constitution to include a bland and superficial definition of the word “ethical” that now leaves the door wide open to abuse and exploitation by those who clearly have no concern for the future of hunting in Africa, or around the world.
It must also be unequivocally stated that this amending of the PHASA definition of the term “ethical” flies in the face of the Code of Ethical Sport Hunting Conduct for Africa, co-signed at Victoria Falls in 1997 by the late Mr Basie Maartens, acting as president of PHASA, as well as the Operators and Professional Hunting Associations of Africa Memorandum of Understanding, also co-signed by PHASA, which clearly define what these bodies deem to be termed ethical.
NAPHA recognizes that the majority vote which approved this constitutional amendment was achieved by a vote of less than one third of its membership. NAPHA wants to believe that the majority of hunters in South Africa do not support this change in constitution as well as condemns any form of Captive Bred Lion practices, and shall therefore continue to have NAPHA’s support in rectifying this grievous wrong.
NAPHA would like to place it on record that there is a distinct and profound difference between the definitions of the concepts of “legal” and “ethical” and that, just because something might be legal (or not yet deemed to be illegal), it is therefore ethical.
There is no law expressly forbidding knowingly shooting a pregnant animal, or animal with dependent young but, by any definition of the word ethical, this would be condemned by any right minded human being with even the vaguest comprehension of what ethical means. In terms of the amended definition approved by PHASA, this type of action would now be deemed by them to be ethical.
By reaching this decision, PHASA has decided to ignore the majority opinion of both the hunting and the non-hunting community around the world and, by so doing, has placed all the hard work undertaken by various institutions in support of sustainable hunting as a tool of conservation, in jeopardy.
Both NAPHA and numerous other African Professional Hunting Associations have, in the past, warned PHASA that, by even considering this course of action, they are heading down a very slippery slope where short-sighted decisions would be detrimental to the entire hunting industry worldwide.
In addition to this, the decision taken by the majority of PHASA members now leaves the door wide open in South Africa to engage in Captive Bred Lion Shooting (please note that NAPHA, along with the majority of African Hunting Associations affiliated to OPHAA (Operators and Professional Hunting Associations of Africa) as well as APHA (African Professional Hunting Association), considers this type of activity to be in direct contravention of what we consider fair chase and ethical hunting, therefore, cannot be called hunting).
There is a very fine line between Captive Bred Lion Shooting and Canned Lion Shooting, if any; and this activity has been condemned around the world.
PHASA, by engaging in fancy semantics, attempts to veil or justify their decision but, irrespective of what PHASA might choose to call it, canned and captive shooting are rejected by all ethical hunters who believe that there is small difference between the two. In addition to this, semantics aside, this decision will be met with shock and disgust by the non–hunting public worldwide.
Despite this, PHASA has chosen to ignore the warnings of numerous Hunting Associations in Africa and world opinion and now allows for the shooting of Captive Bred Lion.
As such, NAPHA has no choice but to condemn this short-sighted and ill-advised decision by PHASA in the strongest possible terms and has no choice but to distance itself from this decision which has severely tarnished the reputation of the entire African hunting industry.
We shall continue to stand firm in our beliefs and support Hunting Associations throughout Africa and the world who share our mission and vision, whereby ethical and fair chase hunting outweighs any short-sighted focus on financial gain.
Maybe if they helped to make more standardized rules for CBL hunting, like self sufficiency of the lions and no hand reared animals, put that on paper, and everyone has something they can point to making things less muddy.
I will start by said I have no interest in hunting a CB or Ranch or Wild lion. But others do and to each their own within the rules. PHASA as set down their rules for CBL and SCI theirs. While I prefer SCI rules over PHASA, nothing in the changes of PHASA constitution approves the operation of "canned hunts".
I just cannot believe that all these other groups want to say that a release lion for a minimum of 30 days fenced as the same as a "canned hunt" where the lion is release and shot in a small enclosure still under the influence of drugs. We just keep on shooting ourselves in the foot with all the infighting. And don't get me started on Boone & Crockett response - disgusting to imply that any fenced or farmed raised animal hunting is not fair chase and canned.
Pretty sure "CBL" and "self sufficiency" are mutually exclusive.
Sorry I was traveling for the last 3 days. Herewith a document from Phasa to give clarity to some misconceptions ....
Here a more comprhensive piece of info .
Interesting - when did it become illegal to hunt lion with a bow in SA? Is that new, or did I just miss it over the last year or two?
Bow has always been restricted . They need to issue a special permit for bow. Lions were listed on TOPS in 2008 and the Lion Breeders subsequently started a legal action against government . In the interem restrictions on Lion in TOPS reg were not enforced due to court action . I am unsure if there are any final decision on this yet . I will refer back with the relevant info .
I just read the NAPHA full statement. I can't help but think there is a little bit of them taking their own interest here and trying to advertise Namibia as a hunting destination. I think this is part of the issue is there is only so many hunters, so many dollars and every org is fighting for their share. I don't mean to single out Namibia vs RSA. There is 3 different sheep orgs, on another forum there is a battle between RMEF and the mule deer society (or something like that). We hunters are a funny group, we like to hunt but want to hunt what we want to, when we want and how we want. We also cheer when another group loses.
Cecil was a wild lion, and this hunt is what got pressure on the import ban. We should have been quicker to clean up CBL, but now that they are trying it us that keep kicking them down.
The sanctimony exhibited in this thread is staggering.
Let's keep fighting among ourselves and looking down our noses at each other until there's no hunting left. Look, I get the whole "let's not turn non-hunters into anti-hunters by doing stupid stuff" argument. I'm on-board. But can we please be a little more respectful of each other and recognize that our fight is with the anti's and not with other hunters?
Do I want to "hunt" a lion that was raised somewhere else and put in an enclosure 30 days ago just for me? I don't. I also don't want to hunt a sable/kudu/buff/etc. under the same circumstances and I don't see the difference in species. But just because I don't want to do it doesn't necessarily make it wrong. If there's a market for it, it will always exist. Legally or illegally. Wouldn't we rather regulate it ourselves than invite a government or other outside agency into the mix? When everyone throws their toys out the pram that's what you are doing - inviting in outside agencies to settle your internal dispute. At some point that outside agency will just say no lion hunting at all.
I guess as I get older I'm just a little less willing to tell others what they can and can't do based on my definition of "ethics." I do what I like to do the way I want to do it. But I don't expect everyone else to agree with my preferences and I try not be contemptuous of folks who don't agree with me.
Apologies for the rant and to whomever I offended in the process.
In my opinion I applaud Boone and Crockett, mainly for their consistency. They are against the hunting of any animals that live behind high fences- be it lions, elk, deer or whatever. If SCI is opposed to CBL but has no problem with high fence deer and elk hunts that happen in North America I'd ay that's a big double standard. Look at what the top elk and deer in the BC record book score and look like and compare them to the SCI ones. The SCI ones are mutants that come from estates- where they are given hormones, supplements etc... to get them to grow antlers that score extremely high. Look how common 200" whitetails are on Texas game ranches in the present day. A 200" whitetail from a wild population is extremely rare. Another problem with high fence hunting is the size of the property for instance and the fact that on some you might know exactly which animal is where especially for the higher price tag animals. Also you are basically guaranteed to get an animal of the size you pay for. In a "natural setting" this isn't the case. There was a thread on here- where I think a member went on a cape buffalo hunt in Moz. for like 15k or something and shot an almost 50" buffalo. A hunt for a similar sized one was being offered by an outfitter on here for over 50k in South Africa and I think the hunter was basically guaranteed to get it in 2-3 days. I can definitely see how when you are guaranteed a certain animal goes against the idea of fair chase.
Now I don't mean to say all high fence hunts are like this but I would say some of these issues are fairly common in high fence hunting regardless of the species or continent. It would be very difficult to vet and approve every single outfitter- i.e. who runs the operation fairly and not etc... it would cost a lot of money. Hence why I can respect the position of Boone and Crockett of not allowing any animals taken from behind high fences.
I have no problem with any group who does not like fenced hunting or raised animals. I have a problem when they look down at guys who are ok with it. You can not like something with out talking down about it.
We as hunters are either going to make it as a group or not. As divide as we are because we may not like something will be the end of use. The shame is we are our own worse enemy because we think we need to push are own ethics on others.
@SafariA , thank you for continuing to provide information on this topic and PHASA. You’re doing a good job of helping to inform folks of the facts. I believe this will go a long way toward restoring credibility to an organization that sorely needs it. I hope you have not taken personal offense to my comments regarding PHASA. They are most certainly not directed at you, but at the unprofessional and irresponsible behavior that has occured in the past.
Keep up the good work. It does not go unnoticed. Thank you.
Separate names with a comma.