rwade545 Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 Some nice pictures there, I grew up in Southern Africa (Zimbabwe) and have alway been brought up with the mentality of you should eat what you shoot. I have always been a keen conservationist and have never taken part in any big game hunts. However having spent a lot of time in national parks as well as the surrounding tribal trust lands I feel that I too can add a little bit here. Previously there were very well managed elephant culls to control the population. These would have been performed by government contracted individuals. Someone then decided to sell some of the rights to hunters. This move enabled the population to be controlled, generated employment and a source of income. The people living in the lands around the national parks concentrated on conservation of the wildlife instead of turning it into farming. The hunting industry also helped to develop tourism to other areas of the country. over the past 15 years i have noticed changes, the areas around national parts are now more some holdings and this causes tension when ever animal/person contact occurs. The animals are no longer protected outside the parks and poaching has increased. The elephant population is now greater then some of the parks can support and as such they are causing a large amount of damage and during the past few years when rain has not come on time it was a regular site to see dead animals from lack of water and grazing. As such a well managed conservation/culling program is important to managing the natural population. Hunting is a way of ensuring skilled personal undertake part of this duty and helps to generate much needed income. These are just my own personal opinions and what I have noticed. My late uncle was a big game hunter and professional hunter and his opinions and experiences have also been a source of information, and other members of my family have safari camps in different parts of Africa ( in national parks and in tribal lands surrounding them). I personally prefer to photograph big game but each to their own, To people in the sporting shooting/ ecological area it is easy to justify, to a person on the street who watches BBC and that is their only understanding then it could be harder to justify. Hope you get it sorted if you want to do it. regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwade545 Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 also where ever you go in africa, enjoy the scenery and other creatures, here are a few pics from my latest trip there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwade545 Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) although not shot by myself this is in our country cottage has a rowland ward award the not too many of these left . Edited September 30, 2012 by rwade545 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwade545 Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 i have the copyrights to all picture and they are not to be reproduced with out my permision Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildfowler.250 Posted September 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 The Kudu is a brilliant picture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo999123 Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 Great pics looks like it must of been a fantastic time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwade545 Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 thanks, I cant wait to go back in December. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 Regardless of the fact I understand that big game hunting and the animals conservation go hand in hand it still grates on me. Personally I wouldn't shoot a big cat or elephant for all the money in the world, maybe any sort of big game? It's just personal preference I guess, I need a reason to shoot something which goes beyond hanging it's head on a wall. However, I shoot and kill things so I won't bash those that do enjoy this type of hunting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 I am stiil of the opinion shooting big game with a camera (doc holiday reference) can benefit their conservation rather more. I hope no-one gets the bug to shoot one because they are 'rare' - couldnt live with my conscience I am afraid No. The chap who previously posted on the issue is correct. Camera safaris are high traffic and low revenue. Hunting is low traffic and high revenue. When you are able to convince someone to pay £50K to photograph an Elephant you may be corect though. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docholiday Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 No. The chap who previously posted on the issue is correct. Camera safaris are high traffic and low revenue. Hunting is low traffic and high revenue. When you are able to convince someone to pay £50K to photograph an Elephant you may be corect though. J. not sure the camera safais coud be classed as low revenue, they are very high volume and still use the same planes, often guides and camps, I would guess there overall income is higher than shooting income due to numbers. I will go back with my cameras one day and enjoy myself, having worked in Kenya in the 90's I would love the oppertunity to go back with the cameras I now own. Would also love to go back to hunt buffalo and antelope, would recomend any of Peter Capsticks books for a good read on hunting in the 80's in Africa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 Regardless of the fact I understand that big game hunting and the animals conservation go hand in hand it still grates on me. Personally I wouldn't shoot a big cat or elephant for all the money in the world, maybe any sort of big game? It's just personal preference I guess, I need a reason to shoot something which goes beyond hanging it's head on a wall. However, I shoot and kill things so I won't bash those that do enjoy this type of hunting. would it change the fact that the elephants that are shot generally get descended on by the local villagers and get eaten. In an area of subsistence farming they provide very important protein. Its an interesting one and I think you have to learn a bit about it to comment, we all know that land here managed for shooting benefits a whole range of species and much the same in Africa. Elephants don't just graze on woodland they destroy it so what happens is get too many and the desert encroaches as the trees are destroyed. By selling hunting then you put a value on the animals for the locals and government and give an incentive for them to be managed. With the type of farming that goes on rogue elephants did used to be dispatched by poisoned spears and arrows as lets face it the average villager can't fence them out and has nothing to produce a humane kill. You also have to remember the sheer numbers you are talking about and the areas involved, some of the reserves are massive and they are running into real problems by stopping culling alltogether some of them are simply running out of food as the populations increase massively. Lions etc are slightly more controversial but much of the same applies and you'd be surprised how controlled the hunting is and the prices paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libs Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 If you do book a trip, get yourself down to Holland and Holland in Northwood for some practice on the large calibre rifles, fire off an email informing them of what you are up to and they will be happy to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 not sure the camera safais coud be classed as low revenue, they are very high volume and still use the same planes, often guides and camps, I would guess there overall income is higher than shooting income due to numbers. I will go back with my cameras one day and enjoy myself, having worked in Kenya in the 90's I would love the oppertunity to go back with the cameras I now own. Would also love to go back to hunt buffalo and antelope, would recomend any of Peter Capsticks books for a good read on hunting in the 80's in Africa Perhaps not low revenue but low revenue per person. You have to have a lot of people taking photos of animals to equal the revenue of one person with a rifle. Lots of people means lots of disturbance to the environment so hunting is unquestionably more 'green' (I hate that phrase) than photo safaris. I've read Capstick's 'Death in the Long Grass' and it is quite simply a staggering book. Everyone who is remotely interested in firearms or hunting things should read it! J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 Perhaps not low revenue but low revenue per person. You have to have a lot of people taking photos of animals to equal the revenue of one person with a rifle. Lots of people means lots of disturbance to the environment so hunting is unquestionably more 'green' (I hate that phrase) than photo safaris. I've read Capstick's 'Death in the Long Grass' and it is quite simply a staggering book. Everyone who is remotely interested in firearms or hunting things should read it! J. Agreed I bought it when it came out in the 70"s and still get it out for a read cover to cover now and then . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakari Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 About a quarter of the down the page here: http://www.shakariconnection.com/bookshelf-authors-c.html Going back to money etc. A better term might be high impact/lower income whereas hunting is low impact/high income. FWIW, some people can/will spend something in the region of US$250K on a 21 hunting safari whereas most photographic safaris cost a fraction of that amount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Mate, I'll guarantee you it is utter tripe . Your man may well be a God in immunology but he knows **** all about cheetahs or Africa. However, if he'd care to contact me, I'll be delighted to put him in touch with the leading cat experts in Africa who will be happy to correct his misconceptions. It might be possible between cheetahs in the same home range (though I SERIOUSLY doubt it) but never in a million years would it be possible between any two cheetahs. I'd certainly be interested to see what scientific paper he got that from though. I don't actually see what it has to do with the viability & justification of African hunting but either way, If you can't post the link(s) to the papers, perhaps you could post the link(s) to the site(s) where you got that info please? In recent weeks, I've seen sites that say there are only 4 or 5 white rhino left alive, that they turn the colour of the soil they eat & that all rhino are grazers that weigh several thousand kilos & all live on the savannah............. but it doesn't mean that any or all of that is necessarily true. FWIW, King cheetahs are very inbred but I have my doubts that interchangeable skin grafts would work even with them. The chap who did the research is Stephen O'Brien. Some questions have been raised about his methodology and whether low genetic variation within the species leads to any population damage, but the study itself is out there if you care to look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudpatten Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Amazing! If the home grown anti`s in the shape of the RSPB,ALF or the LAC`s,etc issue "statistics" in this country we all rubbish them for the nonsensical drivel that they are. Yet if the international arm of the anti movement in the form of WWF, IFAW etc, come up with a load of fantasy about big game, some seem to swallow it hook ,line and sinker. Gullable is a word that springs to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Amazing! If the home grown anti`s in the shape of the RSPB,ALF or the LAC`s,etc issue "statistics" in this country we all rubbish them for the nonsensical drivel that they are. Yet if the international arm of the anti movement in the form of WWF, IFAW etc, come up with a load of fantasy about big game, some seem to swallow it hook ,line and sinker. Gullable is a word that springs to mind. So does that mean you will be shooting Nellie next year then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted October 3, 2012 Report Share Posted October 3, 2012 Nothing to do with being an anti. If Pine Martins were made lawfully fair game next year I would still opt not to shoot them. I'm happy for people to shoot antelope etc. of which there are millions but restraint should be shown with endangered species that could very well disappear in my lifetime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 The issue with a controlled shooting of species like elephant and lion etc is you put a large value on them, the local people then look after them rather than killing them and they get far more government protection. You have to look at the situations where these animals live people are subsistence farming a fair number of the quarry can make them starve when they destroy crops or on a side issue actually kill them such is the nature of the game. These people don't care about conservation they care about living a hand to mouth existence, when they have a situation where they can get a hunter in who pays to shoot a rogue elephant that is destroying their crops and the village gets the meat its a lot better than doing the job with a poisoned spear. Shooting means there is an incentive to keep a health managed population there is no incentive to wipe species out, ones that are really endangered don't get shot at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudpatten Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 For once I agree entirely with A14x. Right back at the start of this debate someone spoke of the status of the leopard suggesting that it was in decline. Whilst internationally some of the more exotic species of leopard are not doing well, in Africa, the leopard population is doing exceptionally well. It is neither rare nor endangered. I have absolutely no desire to shoot Nellie or any other of the big five, but please, lets base our decisions on factual information and not anti hunting propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 as far as nellie is concerned this is a bit out of date but you get the general gist. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/feb/26/environment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakari Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 On the subject of Mr Big Ears, articles 8 & 10 might be of interest here: http://www.shakariconnection.com/african-hunting-articles.html I have a lot of respect for Ron Thomson who wrote the latter article & he tells me that the figure of 5000 elephants in the KNP was pretty much an arbitary figure that was set very early on in the establishment of the KNP and his tree studies suggest that about half that would be more accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlistairB Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 I went to a reception hosted by an outfitter recently, he told me that the only elephants/lions etc you could shoot these days were rogues and you werent allowed to take any part of them as a trophy, only a photo! So they get both revenue incoming (you stay have to pay big bucks to shoot a rogue), they get crop and village protection from the animal, and the village gets food and you get to shoot one of the big 5. Sounds like win win to me if your pockets are deep enough. AB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudpatten Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) Shakari, Love your work. My favourite song of yours is "Hips don`t lie", and your dancing in the video was stupendous. Edited October 4, 2012 by mudpatten Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.