100 pound & 90 pound bulls taken in Botswana!

[WAB]

Did anyone see CBS news this morning? I threw up in my mouth a little....

I don’t listen to Communist Bull Shit (CBS).

 

[baxterb]

It’s a great Bull no doubt. But it’s also worth considering that we wouldn’t be having these conversations on defending elephant hunting had the hunter merely hunted and gone home. The impetus to continually broadcast stuff on social media knowing it. Will feed the sharks is something I don’t quite understand.

There are things we do everyday that we do not feel the impulse to share, or if we do, do it privately. It’s not about acting ashamed of our actions, but simply knowing the playing field.

If we truly believe hunting elephant has a conservation component, we should do what’s necessary to preserve it, aye? A battle was won to reopen Bots, why do something that brings negative attention to that and put that as risk?

 

[CJW]

It’s a great Bull no doubt. But it’s also worth considering that we wouldn’t be having these conversations on defending elephant hunting had the hunter merely hunted and gone home. The impetus to continually broadcast stuff on social media knowing it. Will feed the sharks is something I don’t quite understand.

There are things we do everyday that we do not feel the impulse to share, or if we do, do it privately. It’s not about acting ashamed of our actions, but simply knowing the playing field.

If we truly believe hunting elephant has a conservation component, we should do what’s necessary to preserve it, aye? A battle was won to reopen Bots, why do something that brings negative attention to that and put that as risk?

The thing about sharks is that even if you think there isn't enough blood in the water for them to smell, they'll still smell it. What I'm saying is, do you really think that the news of these bulls being shot wouldn't get out? One way or another it will find it's way out of the Botswana bush.

How are we supposed to preserve or grow anything if we don't talk about it? Isn't that what this entire forum is?

 

[baxterb]

The thing about sharks is that even if you think there isn't enough blood in the water for them to smell, they'll still smell it. What I'm saying is, do you really think that the news of these bulls being shot wouldn't get out? One way or another it will find it's way out of the Botswana bush.

Yes, I think it’s perfectly possible to hunt quietly. An example: we have all heard of celebrities et al. who hunt but have only “heard” of them. We don’t see the pics, and in this day and age, if there ain’t a pic, it didn’t happen.

I have had conversations with guys who have travelled in the live pigeon shoot circle and some of the names he has dropped privately would be absolute fodder for the antis, yet…nothing…

 

[CJW]

Yes, I think it’s perfectly possible to hunt quietly. An example: we have all heard of celebrities et al. who hunt but have only “heard” of them. We don’t see the pics, and in this day and age, if there ain’t a pic, it didn’t happen.

I have had conversations with guys who have travelled in the live pigeon shoot circle and some of the names he has dropped privately would be absolute fodder for the antis, yet…nothing…

Elephant hunting was re-opened in Bots because the pres. had the guts to tell the bunny huggers that he didn't give a damn about their rhetoric and that the sense in it could be seen as long as you were able to think beyond the nose on your face. I feel the same way. We need much more of that in this world.

The only question I have is how many cows are they putting on quota?

 

[baxterb]

Elephant hunting was re-opened in Bots because the pres. had the guts to tell the bunny huggers that he didn't give a damn about their rhetoric and that the sense in it could be seen as long as you were able to think beyond the nose on your face. I feel the same way. We need much more of that in this world.

The only question I have is how many cows are they putting on quota?

His statement was as much about autonomy as hunting. Saying that they can reopen hunting as part of a country’s self-determination is different than simply flipping then bird to anti hunters.

In any case, these decisions exist only under the right leadership and are only written in sand. Unless you manage it well enough, the decision will simply be reversed at some future point. I don’t think it’s too much to ask that the entire hunting community look deeper than their online vanity to minimize damage. If “F-you” is the game we want to play, we will simply lose what tenuous support we may have by those who remain ambivalent so long as they thing things are done to the overall benefit of the people, animals, and ecosystem. When the impression is that it’s ALL about the ego and selfishness, support drops off the cliff.

 

[CJW]

His statement was as much about autonomy as hunting. Saying that they can reopen hunting as part of a country’s self-determination is different than simply flipping then bird to anti hunters.

In any case, these decisions exist only under the right leadership and are only written in sand. Unless you manage it well enough, the decision will simply be reversed at some future point. I don’t think it’s too much to ask that the entire hunting community look deeper than their online vanity to minimize damage. If “F-you” is the game we want to play, we will simply lose what tenuous support we may have by those who remain ambivalent so long as they thing things are done to the overall benefit of the people, animals, and ecosystem. When the impression is that it’s ALL about the ego and selfishness, support drops off the cliff.

I'm not going to assume anybody's intentions about their decision of taking or posting photographs. I'm also not going to get into a multiple page drama about whether we should or shouldn't share pictures anywhere, especially the internet. It's about how you say F-you and educating people, not merely saying F-you.

I will say this though. After a few posts, it seems that you believe that none of us should post pictures of any animal we shoot since the anti's always use the same tired argument of any hunting being about ego. It's the first arrow they pull out of their quiver whether we show ourselves with a whitetail, a warthog or an elephant.

And with that I will bow out and agree to disagree.

 

[baxterb]

I'm not going to assume anybody's intentions about their decision of taking or posting photographs. I'm also not going to get into a multiple page drama about whether we should or shouldn't share pictures anywhere, especially the internet. It's about how you say F-you and educating people, not merely saying F-you.

I will say this though. After a few posts, it seems that you believe that none of us should post pictures of any animal we shoot since the anti's always use the same tired argument of any hunting being about ego. It's the first arrow they pull out of their quiver whether we show ourselves with a whitetail, a warthog or an elephant.

And with that I will bow out and agree to disagree.

why give them arrows?

i once gave a presentation to a class at the university of Washington on elephant hunting. I have never hunted elephant. But after an hour I had made more reluctant allies than enemies. That’s success.

we have the same end goal, I just prefer not to lay in speed bumps for the masses who otherwise might be tolerant of uncomfortable truths. The ends of the spectrum have their minds made up, it’s the middle that deserves the attention and respect.

the blood origins podcast with the photographer on this Bull is an example.

 

[Scott CWO]

why give them arrows?

i once gave a presentation to a class at the university of Washington on elephant hunting. I have never hunted elephant. But after an hour I had made more reluctant allies than enemies. That’s success.

we have the same end goal, I just prefer not to lay in speed bumps for the masses who otherwise might be tolerant of uncomfortable truths. The ends of the spectrum have their minds made up, it’s the middle that deserves the attention and respect.

the blood origins podcast with the photographer on this Bull is an example.

You do what you want. As outfitters, it’s part advertising to get the word out about the great hunting. These hunts don’t book themselves. If you want to hide hunting on a hunting website, that’s ridiculous.

 

[Cam Moon]

You do what you want. As outfitters, it’s part advertising to get the word out about the great hunting. These hunts don’t book themselves. If you want to hide hunting on a hunting website, that’s ridiculous.

I agree. There's a time and a place, and I can agree that general social media is probably not the best, but to me, this site is different. That's why I don't like faces hidden. If you can't be proud of your actions, and aren't willing to risk taking some heat and having to explain your contribution to conservation, then maybe you shouldn't be hunting. If you're hiding your face, then it shows me (personally) that you are ashamed. I wish that every hunter had the balls to take on the anties and shout out to the world how much of a positive impact hunting has. I know that this is controversial, but I'm entitled to my opinion, and there it is.
I also 100% totally understand that if pictures are being posted (by an outfitter,etc) without direct and specific permission by the people in the photographs, that the faces should indeed be covered out of respect and courtesy.

 

[425SCHADE]

This was a very old elephant. They started tracking him when they saw his dung had unchewed grass and bark - it means old and possibly big bull - the animal's last teeth had worn down and he is not chewing properly. Like all old elephants, he was beginning to starve. His days of breeding were long over - he was in no condition to fight younger breeding bulls. His was to be a slow, solitary death, trying to avoid predators until the dry season rendered his food woody and totally impalatable for him. Death is not pleasant for old elephants - starvation isn't easy, and a huge old animal caught by predators suffers terribly, bit by bit. By contrast, he was stalked and taken with a single brain shot from forty yards. He knew nothing about it.

He was one of just four bulls on this years government quota for block NG13, an area with about 29,000 elephants. The licensed PH, Mr Kachelhoffer, is a Motswana (a Botswanan national).

The elephant was an impressive size because this was his first appearance (talk about luck!) - the area NG13 is almost impenetrable - no roads, no shops, no tourists, no nothing except remote villages. He was NOT a tourist attraction. Nobody was aware he was there, because hunting is only now opening up again after the previous Khama moratorium on hunting (see below). It is the locals who, after many kgotlas (village meetings or courts) and piddling about by lawyers, agreed to let the safari company hunt their land, NG13, for $110,000 per year, plus extra per animal and help with a community vehicle, plus 30 employed to start roads. Hunting is the only real income in this area of subsistence farming.. Many people in the area have given up trying to grow food because of the expanding elephant population. People like this are the folks who asked the present President, Masisi, to do something about the elephant problem. For them, an elephant is a nasty, dangerous five ton garden slug that won't take no for an answer if he fancies your family's sorghum or corn plot. His evening meal or two is your family's annual food supply.

The 350 happy people who received the meat probably fed three more people each. The tracker, a local man, thanked the elephant with sincere reverence for giving his life to the people he now fed and lived in turn.

In all, a humane and fitting end to a great old man - the perfect moral and practical trophy, and a demonstration of sustainable consumptive use of a local resource. Trophy hunters have nothing to apologise for where the hunting is RATS - responsible, accountable, transparent and sustainable.

The rubbish spouted about this "rare, tourist-attracting, genetically important, blah, blah, blah" elephant by ex-President Khama is because Khama hates President Masisi for democratically replacing him. Masisi, once elected, answered the call by his Batswana people living in the north to do something about the damn elephants and the fear and deaths from elephant attacks. President Masisi re-instated carefully controlled hunting to provide jobs, income and compensation and show something is being done. Without it something being done, local people turn a blind eye to poachers, who solve the problem for them. The problem is that poachers often use poisons and kill loads of other things, too, apart from rhinos.

At the same time, previous President Khama had (allegedly!!) stopped all hunting because he had a cosy private monopoly arrangement with an eco-safari operator, Joubert, to take over all the hunting grounds for their photo-tourism partnership. It was a disaster for people and wildlife, and one of the reasons they kicked Khama out. Now, Khama runs around the world making trouble for President Masisi by drumming up animal rights willing donkeys to his cause. Typical of these is the CBTH, a UK parasite private company that collects money from the public to save animals, but doesn't save a single one. It is run by crafty shyster Eduardo Goncalves, who lifts photos of legal hunts from hunting websites and uses them to denounce hunters for "murdering wildlife to extinction". That is his profitable con trick and he is welcome to challenge me in court for saying so. He is the main source of all the "evil hunter" articles around the world that cause concerned debates here on AH too. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, he trousers all the donations.

The story of this big elephant was released to the world press by Africa Geographic, a crafty play on the name of its illustrious National namesake. In reality, though, it is just a pretentious travel agency run by a pushbike riding, bunny-hugging accountant who trucks hundreds of photo-tourists into the bush, turning popular wild places into little better than busy theme parks ....spot an eco- touristy connection running thro' this story, anyone??? It takes 100 photo tourists to replace the income from one trophy hunter. Africa Geographic hates hunters, too. It has nothing to do with animal welfare and everything to do with milking kindly, animal loving but entirely gullible punters.

Anyway, folks, that's a bit of the background to this story. Have a lovely day and may all your brass end up warm......meanwhile, there is a hunter somewhere who is dong cartwheels round his gun room and a taxidermist with tears in his eyes.........

Well written and concise information. Good work, thank you @John Nash.

 

[Cam Moon]

Well written and concise information. Good work, thank you @John Nash.

+1 on that! Very good! Hats off to @John Nash

 

[Frederik]

I am a hunter I am not going to bow down my knee to what I know is the only way to properly manage and sustain our wildlife. We as hunters put in more money and time than any greenies.
Even if someone donates 1 million that money sits quietly making more money in that Cayman's island account than anywhere in Africa or the rest of the world.

We are the foot soldiers seeing and experiencing nature on the ground.
The hungry world who lives next to it only see food and explotation but few out there teaches and show how that wildlife brings life, schools, clinics work and a future.

So if I have hunted legally and if that is my life values I will not hide for what I stand for.

 

[Scott CWO]

My

I agree. There's a time and a place, and I can agree that general social media is probably not the best, but to me, this site is different. That's why I don't like faces hidden. If you can't be proud of your actions, and aren't willing to risk taking some heat and having to explain your contribution to conservation, then maybe you shouldn't be hunting. If you're hiding your face, then it shows me (personally) that you are ashamed. I wish that every hunter had the balls to take on the anties and shout out to the world how much of a positive impact hunting has. I know that this is controversial, but I'm entitled to my opinion, and there it is.
I also 100% totally understand that if pictures are being posted (by an outfitter,etc) without direct and specific permission by the people in the photographs, that the faces should indeed be covered out of respect and courtesy.

My face isn’t blocked in my 2021 story. I will NEVER block my face.

I blocked the faces in the 100 pounder thread because I only had the outfitter’s permission and I don’t know the hunters. My posts were about the animals, not the hunters, so seeing their faces was irrelevant to me anyway. Nobody is or was ashamed of the hunts. The hunters might have been fully okay with posting their faces but I’m not going to do that without their permission. Period.

 

[Cam Moon]

My

My face isn’t blocked in my 2021 story. I will NEVER block my face.

I blocked the faces in the 100 pounder thread because I only had the outfitter’s permission and I don’t know the hunters. My posts were about the animals, not the hunters, so seeing their faces was irrelevant to me anyway. Nobody is or was ashamed of the hunts. The hunters might have been fully okay with posting their faces but I’m not going to do that without their permission. Period.

I understood that. You were quite clear on that earlier, and as I said, I would expect that type of courtesy from anybody in your situation.
Good on you!

 

[baxterb]

I agree. There's a time and a place, and I can agree that general social media is probably not the best, but to me, this site is different. That's why I don't like faces hidden. If you can't be proud of your actions, and aren't willing to risk taking some heat and having to explain your contribution to conservation, then maybe you shouldn't be hunting. If you're hiding your face, then it shows me (personally) that you are ashamed. I wish that every hunter had the balls to take on the anties and shout out to the world how much of a positive impact hunting has. I know that this is controversial, but I'm entitled to my opinion, and there it is.
I also 100% totally understand that if pictures are being posted (by an outfitter,etc) without direct and specific permission by the people in the photographs, that the faces should indeed be covered out of respect and courtesy.

The problem with people having the balls to talk about the net positives of hunting, is the conversation generally starts with a picture of a dead animal and tries to work backward from there to food, habitat, etc.


see what Ivan Carter has done in coutada 11. What you won’t see on his pages are dead animals, other than those that have been poached or snared, which helps to identify the true threat to animals. . Ivan and his crew understand how this works. If you follow the comments on his pages, it is very clear some of the people are not particularly supportive of hunting, but they support Ivan’s work because the results are there and prominently shown


really I don’t care if anyone posts pics or not, but, when the social/ political shit hits the fan, all the sanctimonious backpedaling starts to wear a bit thin. Maybe start with the story of the people, animals, and ecosystems first / but alas, that doesn’t get anyone a certificate or sell hunts.

I’ve said it before: if we don’t tell our stories, other will tell them for us. This is why hunters are so often on the back foot - we start with the means and seem to forget the purpose.

 

[Cam Moon]

The problem with people having the balls to talk about the net positives of hunting, is the conversation generally starts with a picture of a dead animal and tries to work backward from there to food, habitat, etc.


see what Ivan Carter has done in coutada 11. What you won’t see on his pages are dead animals, other than those that have been poached or snared, which helps to identify the true threat to animals. . Ivan and his crew understand how this works. If you follow the comments on his pages, it is very clear some of the people are not particularly supportive of hunting, but they support Ivan’s work because the results are there and prominently shown


really I don’t care if anyone posts pics or not, but, when the social/ political shit hits the fan, all the sanctimonious backpedaling starts to wear a bit thin. Maybe start with the story of the people, animals, and ecosystems first / but alas, that doesn’t get anyone a certificate or sell hunts.

I’ve said it before: if we don’t tell our stories, other will tell them for us. This is why hunters are so often on the back foot - we start with the means and seem to forget the purpose.

Well said!
Have you ever wondered when did hunting become such a controversial issue? It used to be simply a way of life. My, how things have changed, hey?

 

[CJW]

Well said!
Have you ever wondered when did hunting become such a controversial issue? It used to be simply a way of life. My, how things have changed, hey?

For most people it still is but to a few it has always been a sin. I've seen anti-Africa hunting rhetoric in particular dating clear back to the 60's. The article was targeting a father taking his daughter on a PG hunt.

 

[Nomadx2]

This was a very old elephant. They started tracking him when they saw his dung had unchewed grass and bark - it means old and possibly big bull - the animal's last teeth had worn down and he is not chewing properly. Like all old elephants, he was beginning to starve. His days of breeding were long over - he was in no condition to fight younger breeding bulls. His was to be a slow, solitary death, trying to avoid predators until the dry season rendered his food woody and totally impalatable for him. Death is not pleasant for old elephants - starvation isn't easy, and a huge old animal caught by predators suffers terribly, bit by bit. By contrast, he was stalked and taken with a single brain shot from forty yards. He knew nothing about it.

He was one of just four bulls on this years government quota for block NG13, an area with about 29,000 elephants. The licensed PH, Mr Kachelhoffer, is a Motswana (a Botswanan national).

The elephant was an impressive size because this was his first appearance (talk about luck!) - the area NG13 is almost impenetrable - no roads, no shops, no tourists, no nothing except remote villages. He was NOT a tourist attraction. Nobody was aware he was there, because hunting is only now opening up again after the previous Khama moratorium on hunting (see below). It is the locals who, after many kgotlas (village meetings or courts) and piddling about by lawyers, agreed to let the safari company hunt their land, NG13, for $110,000 per year, plus extra per animal and help with a community vehicle, plus 30 employed to start roads. Hunting is the only real income in this area of subsistence farming.. Many people in the area have given up trying to grow food because of the expanding elephant population. People like this are the folks who asked the present President, Masisi, to do something about the elephant problem. For them, an elephant is a nasty, dangerous five ton garden slug that won't take no for an answer if he fancies your family's sorghum or corn plot. His evening meal or two is your family's annual food supply.

The 350 happy people who received the meat probably fed three more people each. The tracker, a local man, thanked the elephant with sincere reverence for giving his life to the people he now fed and lived in turn.

In all, a humane and fitting end to a great old man - the perfect moral and practical trophy, and a demonstration of sustainable consumptive use of a local resource. Trophy hunters have nothing to apologise for where the hunting is RATS - responsible, accountable, transparent and sustainable.

The rubbish spouted about this "rare, tourist-attracting, genetically important, blah, blah, blah" elephant by ex-President Khama is because Khama hates President Masisi for democratically replacing him. Masisi, once elected, answered the call by his Batswana people living in the north to do something about the damn elephants and the fear and deaths from elephant attacks. President Masisi re-instated carefully controlled hunting to provide jobs, income and compensation and show something is being done. Without it something being done, local people turn a blind eye to poachers, who solve the problem for them. The problem is that poachers often use poisons and kill loads of other things, too, apart from rhinos.

At the same time, previous President Khama had (allegedly!!) stopped all hunting because he had a cosy private monopoly arrangement with an eco-safari operator, Joubert, to take over all the hunting grounds for their photo-tourism partnership. It was a disaster for people and wildlife, and one of the reasons they kicked Khama out. Now, Khama runs around the world making trouble for President Masisi by drumming up animal rights willing donkeys to his cause. Typical of these is the CBTH, a UK parasite private company that collects money from the public to save animals, but doesn't save a single one. It is run by crafty shyster Eduardo Goncalves, who lifts photos of legal hunts from hunting websites and uses them to denounce hunters for "murdering wildlife to extinction". That is his profitable con trick and he is welcome to challenge me in court for saying so. He is the main source of all the "evil hunter" articles around the world that cause concerned debates here on AH too. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, he trousers all the donations.

The story of this big elephant was released to the world press by Africa Geographic, a crafty play on the name of its illustrious National namesake. In reality, though, it is just a pretentious travel agency run by a pushbike riding, bunny-hugging accountant who trucks hundreds of photo-tourists into the bush, turning popular wild places into little better than busy theme parks ....spot an eco- touristy connection running thro' this story, anyone??? It takes 100 photo tourists to replace the income from one trophy hunter. Africa Geographic hates hunters, too. It has nothing to do with animal welfare and everything to do with milking kindly, animal loving but entirely gullible punters.

Anyway, folks, that's a bit of the background to this story. Have a lovely day and may all your brass end up warm......meanwhile, there is a hunter somewhere who is dong cartwheels round his gun room and a taxidermist with tears in his eyes.........

This is a very good write-up of the reality of trophy hunting and how if designed properly, it benefits both the long term health of the community and animal resources.

My wife and I made our first trip to Africa in February this year and we learned a lot from the people there. Poachers and even villagers will set traps & snares for animals and in most cases would wound, maim, or kill the animal without ever recovering it.

Without trophy hunters paying the fees they do, there would not be money available for the Anti poaching units. The anti hunters own ignorance of the role hunting plays in protecting the resource actually is a greater threat to the resource.

Thanks for sharing this good back story write-up!

 

[Pheroze]

I don't think anyone appreciates a picture of a dead animal. I have several friends who are genuinely interested and supportive of my trips to Africa and Northern Ontario but have told me not to share dead animal pictures. I respect that. We absolutely have to tell our story. But, remember the audience if you want it to be received favorably.