The president is a game farmer. South Africa isn’t going to stop game breeding because it’s a large part of their economy. CBL is viewed as damaging to South Africa’s image. Game farming buffalo and sable is not. I don’t know what the original proposal stated, but making a minimum release time something like 6 month would have no effect on hunting buffalo and antelope species. A 6 month requirement on CBL lions would eliminate most shooting opportunities for them because they are a financial liability on the property.
Interesting......a misconception....but interesting
A farmer is breeding impala, springbok, etc. and/or any other known hunted game species but doesn't allow the hunting of his/her animals is he/she still game farming?
A pasture is still a pasture regardless of size.
These animals are no longer wild free roaming as being able to migrate as they please since they are limited to high fence enclosures doesn't this still fall within the definitions of Captive Breeding?
South Africa isn’t going to stop game breeding because it’s a large part of their economy. CBL is viewed as damaging to South Africa’s image.
Game farming buffalo and sable is not.
And you can add all PG. I agree that all other game farming has Not Yet been brought to the forefront of damaging RSA's image. However, Given the way this MTT study and the terms by which this ban is written all farming of animals that are to be sold as to be hunted animals can easily be written in and all such farming activities banned.
CBL is viewed as damaging to South Africa’s image. Game farming buffalo and sable is not.
A 6 month requirement on CBL lions would eliminate most shooting opportunities for them because they are a financial liability on the property.
Yes and No...."...because they are a financial liability on the property."
If the CBL operation is on a 1 acre to tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands acres of land with a very minimal amount of other game animals and these CBL's are allowed to - required to forage for their subsistence: And such CBL is also operating a domestic animal, ie cattle, goats, sheep, etc., farm or a PG safari operation then Yes this very well could create a financial problem....Because the operator would have to replenish, purchase, additional domestic livestock or PG animals from a PG breeding farm.
If on the other hand the CBL operation has a considerable amount of self sustainable herds of PG then No the CBL operation can be more prosperous by adding DG hunting to the operation.
To put what I'm saying into better perspective. Regardless of what livestock a farmer chooses to raise or breeds those animals have to be fed and watered. The bigger the livestock the more area (land) is required if the farmer's intent is to develop a sustainable (parakeets to elephants) marketable livestock.
Case In Point: There are how many wild free roaming lions in Kruger National Park, and yet they haven't decimated any of the various populations of animals in that area.
As a former cattle and horse rancher I know I can't raise a sustainable profitable herd of either of the for mentioned on 1 acre or even 20 acres of decent quality east of the Mississippi River land. But I can raise enough animals to justify my expenses and still make a very small profit. However by increasing the amount of land to 500 acres and upgrading to better quality grass land I can raise a bigger herd of cattle which will substantially increase my annual profit margin.
Now to reference this to "Captive Bred _____(pick any animal"
How I can personally relate to this as a former cattle and horse ranger.
My primary source of income came from selling my beef livestock at the local stockyard.
My very limited secondary source of income was selling 4 or 5 head of beef livestock to people who wanted to save money by purchasing a beef animal on the hoof vs paying for the pre packaged beef from the grocery store or butcher shop.
Ok, I'm talking about domestic livestock not meant for hunting. BUT IF...[this has never happened to me, can't speak for anyone else]....IF someone was to come to me and offer a smart amount of money to shoot a bull of my choosing and I label that bull as a trophy class animal, at a price 5, 10, 20, times the price I would get at the livestock sale. Well Damn straight I'm going to guide him, let him shoot it with any caliber of rifle over 338, back him up with my 458WM, give him: a photo op, the head, and a steak dinner, and then send him on his way. After that I'll process the rest of the meat and hide for my own use while LMAO all the way to the bank.
Rhetorical Questions:
Multiply this scenario by 5,10, 20, times in a year. How long would it take before I would have competition from other cattle ranchers?
Has this suddenly damaged the beef industry or shined a "bad" light on hunters and/or hunting?
In perspective this started out on 500 acres, other ranchers are advertising 1000, 1500, 2000, 10,000 acres of hunting land.
Then a few smaller operations start popping up on 5, 10, 20 acres of land looking to cash in on this new industry and these smaller operations operate in a lesser ethical business scheme. Should all cattle ranchers be condemned, forced out of business because the government failed to put any oversight or controlled regulations in place?
Let's further relate this to the more familiar animals here in the USA, exchanging the words:
CBL- Lion to CBE - Elk
Elephant to Bison
Leopard to Whitetail Deer
Rhinoceros to Hogs.
For those hunters that are cheering with the antis on the abolishment of CBL; Would you still be cheering with the antis on the abolishment of CBE?
'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'.
It is one thing as hunters to debate the CBL matter amongst ourselves. It is quite another matter when hunters join our common adversaries the antis in cheering of their victory against other hunters, the greatest competition against poachers and the more costly wild free roaming lion hunting outfitters that can double, triple, quadruple, their lion trophy and cull fees once these CBL operations are totally out of business.
