tap
AH enthusiast
I've been watching an awful lot of leopard videos in the past few weeks. To say I'm excited to be touching down in Johannesburg is an understatement.
Whats really is disturbing to me is the current conservation efforts I see playing out in the world scene.
Please correct me if I am wrong but conservation is no longer a scientific tool. It is more a way of life, from what I see, and someones way of forcing their views on everyone else.
Yes I know the government officials base their quota on current populations etc. but how far the government can go is limited. I keep watching these documentaries and these guys watching, wolves, lions, leopards, etc..... are doing so in the wilderness! These people then form models based on wilderness activities and force quotas on the government based on their worthless studies. South african leopard hunting has a lot of nay sayers because quite frankly you guys have a lot of activists who don't understand leopards at all. They think they are endangered because national geographic said so. they then scream loud enough to the government until tags are cut.
What is wrong with this? Whats wrong with this is that these animals no longer live in the wilderness. they now live amongst us. I Keep watching these documentaries telling everyone how endangered the big cats are. They keep saying that we are destroying the ecosystem by hunting these cats. these guys and their documentaries are persuading everyone to quit hunting cats because we are supposedly killing them all.
What good are these peoples studies when they are performed in the wilderness. These studies need to be conducted near poaching camps, near cattle farms, near cities.
For the last 10 years I have been visiting africa regularly. I have hunted many different areas and one thing that is common to me is that when a cat track is spotted drastic measures are instantly taken. Mainly south africa but im sure other areas of africa are the same. In south africa one leopard in an area could mean tens of thousands of dollars worth of huntable wildlife is lost. Well, if the outfitter cant hunt that cat the landowner is obviously going to deal away with the cat in the name of monetary return. Its simple ecomonics. If you allow a cites permit for the cat then the animals he eats are worth it because you can get your money back via a leopard hunt. Hence the leopards wont be shot behind the scenes and the populations will expand in those areas. I know most of you on this site are probably those ethical people who never admit wrong doing but I'm sure most of you cant argue with me on this point either because you know that in the cattle farming industry and other areas where wild game is a primary source of income that this is all too common. I for one don't condone it, however; If a leopard or a wolf is severly hurting your well being then by all means remove him.
Now for the poachers there is a much simpler solution. Instead of national geographic fighting court battles in europe to restrict permits via cites, why not use the money to send the areas with the highest concentrations of poaching some free food. There must be some form of compensation that would keep poaching to a minimum.
My question to you africa guys, and the point of this entire post is to ask one question. Is anyone using common sense game management to solve the current issues or are you guys just like the americans where biology is determined by green peace activists attempting to push their 17th century model of the wild earth in its wilderness state on everyone.
I usually see the south africans as a more sensible group than the americans but then I watch another nat geo video and cant help but wonder.
So what are your views? Are you guys able to get it right. I'm not asking just anyone, I'm wanting to know from guys who live in the area and experience the politics. Does this whole ponderance in my mind make any differnce? No, but this is a public forum and it doesn't hurt to know the political situation in an area I love to hunt and for a species I wish to hunt more of in the future.
thanks in advance for any comments
Whats really is disturbing to me is the current conservation efforts I see playing out in the world scene.
Please correct me if I am wrong but conservation is no longer a scientific tool. It is more a way of life, from what I see, and someones way of forcing their views on everyone else.
Yes I know the government officials base their quota on current populations etc. but how far the government can go is limited. I keep watching these documentaries and these guys watching, wolves, lions, leopards, etc..... are doing so in the wilderness! These people then form models based on wilderness activities and force quotas on the government based on their worthless studies. South african leopard hunting has a lot of nay sayers because quite frankly you guys have a lot of activists who don't understand leopards at all. They think they are endangered because national geographic said so. they then scream loud enough to the government until tags are cut.
What is wrong with this? Whats wrong with this is that these animals no longer live in the wilderness. they now live amongst us. I Keep watching these documentaries telling everyone how endangered the big cats are. They keep saying that we are destroying the ecosystem by hunting these cats. these guys and their documentaries are persuading everyone to quit hunting cats because we are supposedly killing them all.
What good are these peoples studies when they are performed in the wilderness. These studies need to be conducted near poaching camps, near cattle farms, near cities.
For the last 10 years I have been visiting africa regularly. I have hunted many different areas and one thing that is common to me is that when a cat track is spotted drastic measures are instantly taken. Mainly south africa but im sure other areas of africa are the same. In south africa one leopard in an area could mean tens of thousands of dollars worth of huntable wildlife is lost. Well, if the outfitter cant hunt that cat the landowner is obviously going to deal away with the cat in the name of monetary return. Its simple ecomonics. If you allow a cites permit for the cat then the animals he eats are worth it because you can get your money back via a leopard hunt. Hence the leopards wont be shot behind the scenes and the populations will expand in those areas. I know most of you on this site are probably those ethical people who never admit wrong doing but I'm sure most of you cant argue with me on this point either because you know that in the cattle farming industry and other areas where wild game is a primary source of income that this is all too common. I for one don't condone it, however; If a leopard or a wolf is severly hurting your well being then by all means remove him.
Now for the poachers there is a much simpler solution. Instead of national geographic fighting court battles in europe to restrict permits via cites, why not use the money to send the areas with the highest concentrations of poaching some free food. There must be some form of compensation that would keep poaching to a minimum.
My question to you africa guys, and the point of this entire post is to ask one question. Is anyone using common sense game management to solve the current issues or are you guys just like the americans where biology is determined by green peace activists attempting to push their 17th century model of the wild earth in its wilderness state on everyone.
I usually see the south africans as a more sensible group than the americans but then I watch another nat geo video and cant help but wonder.
So what are your views? Are you guys able to get it right. I'm not asking just anyone, I'm wanting to know from guys who live in the area and experience the politics. Does this whole ponderance in my mind make any differnce? No, but this is a public forum and it doesn't hurt to know the political situation in an area I love to hunt and for a species I wish to hunt more of in the future.
thanks in advance for any comments