Discussion in 'Articles' started by saeng101, Nov 24, 2017.
Yeah, I’m getting old, I forgot about the big H ammo.... ;-)
@firehuntfish, there are plenty of excellent ethical outfitters in SA. But also there are enough that fully practice put and take, which is not conservation.
I will go back to each their own. I have no problem hunting white-tail over bait, or shooting from a blind or the back of a truck, it's just how its done in my home state. I understand some folks find that shooting and not hunting, or even "unethical" to them, I don't. While I personally, don't high fence hunt white-tail, they have a natural range of 640 acres according to TPWD. You would be hard pressed to tell me that its not fair chase when some ranches are several thousand acres, those deer will never know the difference between a high and low fence and its certainly not a "canned" hunt. I would challenge anyone to spot, stalk and walk South Texas, where the brush has not been cleared, its just not possible.
I have high fenced hunted in RSA, 25K acres continuous, to me that's not a "canned" hunt either, that's more then enough range for Plains game. I understand that may not be hunting to some folks, but for me its was fine. 25k acres would be on the low end of the natural range of a lion. The more food the smaller the range, the more scarce the food the larger the range up to 200k acres. If I was interested in hunting lions (I'm not) on a ranch, I would have to know a lot more about the ranges of those cats. To me, no difference between PH knowing where the game hangs out at in a high fenced operation, versus a "no fence" operation where the tracker spots some fresh poop driving, he tracks the animal, sets up your sticks and the PH tell you to shoot it X spot.
The real problem is we are doing ourselves in wanting to tell each other "how to" hunt based on our own ethics, thinking that will appease the anti's and influence the masses - It will not. Hunters are not out to force to make everyone a hunter, whereas the anti want to force everyone to be a non-hunter.
Is Conservation the only legitimate justification for hunting?
Many fish and wildlife agencies across the United States say the answer is no.
Some plant game specifically for hunting with no conservation objective. Put and take.
Many agencies manage deer and elk populations for maximum hunter opportunity, not maximum conservation value.
I understand the argument that there is a difference between lion and plains game or deer.
I ask the question in more of a broad context, not as it pertains to lion, but because it is not uncommon to read statements and infer that if it is not conservation hunting, it is not legitimate or ethical.
Is the answer different depending on what and where you are hunting?
That's a much different inference than your original statement, and I'm glad that you walked it back...
I am completely aware of the many ethical outfits that offer naturally propagated species with fair chase opportunity within RSA. I am proud to represent one of the finest here... I am also completely aware of those outfitters that hunt their clients on small game farms in a put & take scenario. However, to imply that the RSA model as a whole is undermining the conservation efforts on the African continent is an untrue, and frankly quite ridiculous. There are lots of prospective first-time African hunters reading these threads, and it would be a disservice on behalf of all outfitters and PHs that are represented here to offer opinions that don't represent the facts in regard to the various hunting opportunities that are offered in the African continent.
I'm quite certain that everyone on this forum would love the chance to experience a month-long safari in a "wild Africa' setting. I am envious of those hunters who can afford to experience Africa like Hemingway did... However, for the vast majority of hunters looking to visit Africa, that is not a practical reality especially for those looking to experience Africa with family. Africa offers the hunter more opportunity at more different species than any other destination on the planet. Thankfully, however, Africa also offers many options that are all fun and challenging by their own rights.
And, I will agree that I would also personally like to see the practice of put & take become non-existent, I do believe that the revenue generated from the licenses and permits on all legally taken game in RSA still goes to fund the law enforcement, wildlife & park management, and anti-poaching efforts as a whole? The practice itself may not be conservation, but the result kinda is...
Well said Dan.
We need to be very careful when we use the word 'conservation.' I note, for example, that it's used to describe the banning of hunting in Kenya, which arguably has had a seriously damaging impact on wildlife numbers, and it's used to describe almost any hunting or ranching practice which someone doesn't like. I personally don't see how breeding lions hurts lion conservation, but then I'm apparently a little thick on this subject.
The wildlife model adopted in places such as South Africa and Namibia, and even Texas, has done more for the conservation of game than all of the anti-hunters and their contributions both financial and otherwise ever have. And let's be clear - without hunters, the South African and Namibian models would crumble, along with wildlife numbers.
True, hunting pays for conservation, period.
The whole CBL debacle over the years that has been abused by certain individuals for the sake of the dollar has done more damage to the hunting industry in SA than any other single activity in the local hunting industry.
Trust me the abuse will continue until all breeders and ranchers who allow this hunting to take place on their properties become part of the 5% and not part of the 95% and actually stick to the rules, sadly I do not see this happening.
Have no optical illusions about PHASA, they are just an organization and have no powers regarding CBL hunting or the control thereof. They can only expel a member for misconduct, that has to be quite severe in order to get expelled.
Policing and enforcing the rules for the 5% will not and cannot be policed by anybody, they will only rely on the the ranchers word that the rules are followed.
My experience tells me the rules will not be followed. Rules have been in place and not followed in the past.
The mighty dollar compared to our monopoly money will ensure that.
I have another twist on this one for you all. I keep getting comments by PM on this highly volatile issue and wanted to pass some information along for discussion.
I'll avoid the discussion of hunting vs shooting here. Let's get off of the hunter and focus on the supply side.
Indeed many producers and promoters are wanting to, and have been advocating for Lion production (supply and harvest) to come under the department of "Agriculture" not MET. Therefore, I can only conclude that CBL production, in these people's view actually has nothing to do with hunting and conservation.
The breeders of Lions and promoters of the harvest are actually just farmers of Lions that found a creative way to harvest their domestic product by selling a product in a particular way. The interest is solely monetary.
Sales: It is all about the story!
A guided hunt over bait be it for bear or deer is "easier" than a spot and stalk one and generally speaking expected trophy quality is probably higher- you'll see more animals. However I would say it is still fair chase as there is a very real possibility that a particular animal coming to the baits may be spooked and not show up, get shot by another hunter in the vicinity, or only come during non-shooting hours etc... For example, I am not aware of any baited black bear outfitter in Ontario that is advertising that they can guarantee a client a record book bear if they pay a certain fee for it. This brings me to my problem with high fenced hunting. Google high fenced deer or elk hunts. A lot of the outfitters advertising them- first of all have a price list based on trophy quality- pay X amount to shoot X sized animal. Secondly a lot of them also say hunts typically take 2-3 days and that they have 100% success rates. Some of these operations claim to have properties that are thousands of acres in size. So if you want a 500" elk and have the $$$$$ for it you will get a 500" elk. Trophy quality is simply determined by $$$$ whereas in a wilderness setting it is partially determined by luck. There are no gurantees and that's what makes hunting different from shooting.
This is also I think what has led to the popularity of high fence deer and elk hunts you are guaranteed a certain sized animal if you pay a certain amount. There is no uncertainty of getting a smaller animal or none at all. Is that really fair chase??
@LivingTheDream , that quote hit me hard, because it is reality. I've lost all my deer hunting spots, I would have never thought it possible 30 years ago. But I can foresee the future and hunting opportunities are not GOING UP. They are going down, it's going to take deeper pockets to continue hunting like we did in the past. Sheep and quality elk hunting is QUITE EXPENSIVE. South Africa and Namibia has great hunting for the $$$. If hunting costs continue to skyrocket higher and higher, very few people will want to take up hunting.
Hunters need to realize that how they classify themselves or other hunters has little to do with the outcome politically and the future of recreational hunting. The huge majority, the non-hunters, will judge and decide.
I agree that the majority who are non-hunters will decide, but on the basis of what?
I’d suggest that in the battle for the hearts and minds (and if you’re an anti, the wallets) of non-hunters, how we present ourselves, how we speak of each other, and how we support each other, will be very relevant.
It’s for that reason that I oppose canned hunting of any variety, and that I support captive bred animal hunting of any variety. I believe it’s a valid distinction, and one that non-hunters can and will understand.
Captive bred hunting is a slippery slope, one that can eventually affect us all. You can't pinpoint one specific animal and not expect others to apply the circumstances to others. Captive bred pheasants are very common in the US and widely accepted. Yet the same people who embrace pheasant hunting condemn the same tactics being applied to other animals. By infighting we allow the anti hunters a foothold to use eventually against all of us.
Instead of judging others and passing judgment against certain forms of hunting I believe that it's far wiser to simply apply your personal opinion by engaging in or not engaging in these forms of hunting. If you find a form of hunting objectionable refrain from engaging in the sport. If enough hunters refrain from certain types of hunting then the lack of demand will eventually eliminate the practice. If there are sufficient people to promote it then it will continue.
We don't need to form battle lines of opposition. Allow individuals to make up their own mind.
Did PHASA require ALL members to hunt with ONLY SAPA facilities?
Can anyone add some elaboration on the points in BOLD?
"The South African Predator Association (SAPA) intends to co-ordinate and promote the interests of its members with the view of establishing and maintaining a healthy and profitable predator breeding and hunting industry in congruence with national and international conservation principles and current national and provincial legislation."
STANDARD - A1
The following standards with regard to keeping facilities must be adhered to:
Minimum size of: 400m2 per animal
Maximum of 10 animals per unit.
Positioning for minimum human imprinting.
SAPA Standard A2
Size of hunting area as per legislative requirements.
Natural veld area.
No cultivated land
Diversity of habitat
Sufficient non-domesticated prey available.
Water provisioned area.
Position of hunting area
At least 1 km away from breeding/keeping facilities.
Minimal unnatural structures.
SAPA Standard B2
Minimum interaction with the human environment from birth
No hand rearing
General “hands off” management techniques with regard to feeding, husbandry, medical care and environmental enrichment
Identification of animals bred and raised for hunting purposes is compulsory
No trade in human imprinted animals.
SAPA Standard F1
Everything possible should be done by the landowner, the PH and the hunting outfitter to deliver a real African experience.
Appropriate sport hunting conduct is to be applicable to all hunts of managed ranch lions.
A standardized SAPA evaluation questionnaire is available from the outfitter and may be completed and signed by hunters as part of a quality control procedure.
SAPA Standard F2
A written contract, in agreement with the relevant legislation and in line with hunting agreement and marketing material, in which all vital aspects of the hunt are stipulated
The client should be properly briefed about all operational aspects of the hunt.
Emergency procedures need to be explained to the hunter and the hunting party.
Hunting must take place according to the principles of fair chase.
http://www.sapredators.co.za/images/photos/SAPA Norms and standards for hunting .pdf
Yes Phasa members may only hunt these accreditted facilities !
Are there other accreditation bodies in RSA?
Thanks for the reply.
So, PHASA has hitched it's wagon to the SAPA standards by the resolution duly passed at the AGM. Fair enough.
Richard can someone (PHASA/SAPA) expand upon the BOLDED ideas set out above in my earlier post #235 regarding SAPA's posted standards to help make it clear for everyone to see.
I hope this helps create the clarity everyone is striving toward.
I decided to head to the SAPA site and look at some articles.
I'm a little confused why SAPA has this YOUTUBE video linked on its website. It's pretty well an opinion piece that comes out against CBL hunting. If they used the canned word one more time they would need to change the title.
The comments about this being historical footage that gets reused by media.
Was there something wrong with the hunts on this video?
Screen shot from SAPA web page, sourced below. Conclusion: It was a legal hunt.
What strides have been made by SAPA to "root out all unethical practices"?
This would be useful factual information for hunters to have to discuss CBL.
SAPA Thanks for helping to feed the Lions in this emergent situation.
Ingogo Safaris was not a member of SAPA nor do they appear to be members of PHASA. (that I can find)
It appears they continue to offer Lion hunts on their webpage per price list.
I am ignorant of Lion breeding, rearing, husbandry and would like some help. I realize this was an emergent situation, but, is the typical fashion in which Lions are fed?
Separate names with a comma.