MISSED TARGET: DUTCH PROPOSAL FOR GLOBAL BAN ON TROPHY HUNTING

[BRICKBURN]

CIC HUNTING LAWS AND POLICIES, LATEST NEWS »
MISSED TARGET: DUTCH PROPOSAL FOR GLOBAL BAN ON TROPHY HUNTING – A SHINING EXAMPLE OF DISINFORMATION
2 NOVEMBER 2015
The Dutch Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, Ms. Sharon Dijksma, recently called for an international ban on trophy hunting of, for example, lions and elephants. She informed the Parliament in a letter dated 26th October that she has initiated the investigation on the feasibility of such a global ban. Ms. Dijksma would also look for the United Nations to recognize the poaching and the illegal trade of wildlife as an international crime.

The CIC is of the strong opinion that while the idea of reducing poaching might be well-intended, her proposal is seriously flawed and creates confusion and misunderstanding. First of all, it has not been made clear whether the proposed ban is to be applied to all wild animals, or only to threatened species. Her reference to saving ‘iconic’ animals from extinction is simply a tactic to gain public support, however, lacks any scientific foundation and is simply uncalled for. There is a multitude of non-iconic species that need much more attention.

Secondly, to place legal trophy hunting in the same negative category as poaching and illegal trade of wildlife seems to be an intentional defamation of legal trophy hunting. The United Nations and the CITES Convention are in the forefront to prohibit and fight poaching and illegal trade of wildlife, and hunting organisations are active and efficient allies of the UN and CITES in this battle.

Ms. Dijksma’s statement that agriculture as a land-use option might be a solution to stop poaching is deeply flawed. A major consequence of implementing these intentions would be that primarily developing countries would be denied their right to decide how they want to manage their wildlife populations. Poor rural communities would suffer from loss of necessary income through the utilisation of wildlife and the livelihood of countless rural families would be destroyed. Furthermore, it has been recognized by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN – of which the Netherlands is a State Member) and many other organizations involved in nature conservation that if wildlife loses its economic value gained through hunting, animals would destroy crops, possibly kill people, and poaching would even increase, as hunters would have no reason to invest any further in anti-poaching measures. Trade bans cause in Zimbabwe and South Africa increased poaching of elephants and rhinos, because the demand for ivory and rhino horn remains the same.

The CIC advises all politicians to seek balanced and science-based information to gain a deeper understanding of the global implications of such a ban on hunting. The CIC is ready to assist in providing information and expresses its hope that the feasibility study will be prepared with the assistance of IUCN, the recognised, global authority in nature conservation.

Source: www.tweedekamer.nl

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

She puts the Dijk in Dijksma.

 

[BRICKBURN]

About says it.

 

[spike.t]

her brain is fkd from eating too many cookies from her local "coffee shop"

 

[gvincent]

Initially, I chuckled when I read the above post regarding the Dutch Secretary of State's ongoing efforts to implement a global ban on trophy hunting. Believing that the Netherlands was nothing more than a very small and insignificant county in Europe, I googled the Netherlands and encountered this headline "The Netherlands will hold the Presidency of the Council of the European Union from 1 January to 30 June 2016". Ouch! Needless to say, I ain't chuckling now!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[spike.t]

@gvincent the eu parliament is on par with the sa govnt and a few others when it comes to corruption. the auditors have never ever been able to sign off the annual eu gravy train accounts due to so much money being unaccounted for...............

 

[johnnyblues]

Man it gets better and better. Someone or some organization had better get to work to protect us from this worldwide liberal carp!

 

[spike.t]

@johnnyblues find a country...i am totally willing to be a benevolent dictator for life....

 

[johnnyblues]

You bet!

 

[Wheels]

Prince Bernhard was a champion of conservation and hunting. He was instrumental in helping to establish multiple National Parks in Africa. Most of his work was behind the scenes. Amazing how much ground has been lost in the Netherlands in the eleven years since his passing.

 

[gvincent]

Unfortunately, hunters and our various hunting organizations are doing a very poor job of sharing our successful wildlife conservation stories with non-hunters.

For example, the following verbiage was excerpted from the Bubye Valley Conservancy's website. The BVC is one of many private conservancies that derive most (if not all) of their revenue from legal, ethical, and sustainable big game hunting. So, with all due respect Ms. Sharon Dijksma, what is your strategy to (1) replace the revenue that is currently generated by big game hunting, and (2) protect Southern Africa's wildlife from organized poaching activities?

As per the BVC website:

- The conversion from cattle ranching back to a wildlife area was neither straightforward nor cheap, requiring a huge investment and significant annual running costs. But this was all worth it, because today the Bubye Valley Conservancy boasts the world’s third largest black rhino population, Zimbabwe’s largest lion population, a flourishing elephant population, and abundant game; an impressive accomplishment given just 20 years of operation.

- Sustainable trophy hunting, based on an old fashioned respect for ethics, provides the incentive and revenue to achieve this amazing conservation success – and for that the Bubye Valley Conservancy makes no apology because without this then none of those animals would even be there.

- Approximately 1.4 million square kilometers in Africa is protected for hunting (that’s an area 67 times larger than the country of Wales – to use the standard unit of measure in ecology!), which is over 20% more land than all of the national parks in Africa combined. That is a huge area of land on which endemic geckos, butterflies, eagles, flowers and trees etc. are completely protected because of the ability to sustainable harvest a few animals… There are more lions in Zimbabwean hunting areas than there are in its national parks. There are also more rhinos in these areas. These are not co-incidents.

- The Bubye Valley Conservancy invests over US$ 300,000 of the proceeds generated from hunting safaris into anti-poaching efforts, not to mention conservation research projects. This is on-top of the several million dollars it costs to run the Conservancy each year. And it is not even enough! Thankfully many of the hunting clients step-up and donate thousands of dollars of their own money to cover the short-fall. With the click of a button a million people might sign a sensationalized anti-hunting petition on social media – but how much do they actually invest in conservation?

- Consider the plant and animal diversity currently protected in hunting areas, as well as the function of this wilderness as genetic corridors between national parks. Contemplate also what would happen to these areas, and the biodiversity they contain, if there was no more hunting… No one can be naive enough to believe that they would remain wild.

- If lion hunting was suddenly banned, what do you think would be the fate of the 500+ lions that roam the Bubye Valley Conservancy and prey on other animals, competing with the hunters? And if all hunting was banned over night, do you think that the wildlife would just be left alone? Africa is not the wild continent it once was and still portrayed as by the romantics. There is not one square inch of Africa that is not owned by either governments or individuals, and all of it needs to generate income. Without the ability to sustainbly utilize the wildlife resource, said wildlife would either be ranched for meat production (those species that have no value to the butcheries would simply be eradicated) or completely removed and replaced with cattle or some other form of industry. As harsh as that may sound, that is the truth of the matter.

- Poaching is another scourge that is prevented by the investment of the hunting industry in boots-on-the-ground protection of their resource. Without being valued by the good guys, wildlife is doomed by the bad guys. There are two main types of poaching that happen on a daily basis in Africa; indiscriminate bush-meat poaching using wire snares, and highly organized criminal syndicates targeting rhino and elephant. Poaching has a devastating effect on the wildlife (and human morale), and it is only in the relatively well-funded hunting areas that both of these types of poaching can be actively combated.

- The conception of the Bubye Valley Conservancy required an incredible amount of foresight, but also the wisdom to realize that in the business of wildlife conservation there is no success unless you have the support of the surrounding communities. The Conservancy donates over 45 tonnes of meat to the local communities each year, which effectively removes the incentive for meat poaching. In addition to this, the Conservancy also supports several schools, clinics, and community projects in the three surrounding districts of Mwenezi, Maranda and Jopempe. This costs the Conservancy over US$ 100,000 per year, but is worth every cent in ensuring community support and tolerance for the wildlife. Indeed, the support of the local communities can prove invaluable in thwarting the ruthless efforts of poachers.

 

[BRICKBURN]

............. So, with all due respect Ms. Sharon Dijksma, what is your strategy to (1) replace the revenue that is currently generated by big game hunting, and (2) protect Southern Africa's wildlife from organized poaching activities? ..............

By asking the questions, the onus is placed back on to the ranting Anti's.

They can then attempt to defend their indefensible position and the ranting will be shown for what it truly is.

 

[Pheroze]

Unfortunately, hunters and our various hunting organizations are doing a very poor job of sharing our successful wildlife conservation stories with non-hunters.

For example, the following verbiage was excerpted from the Bubye Valley Conservancy's website. The BVC is one of many private conservancies that derive most (if not all) of their revenue from legal, ethical, and sustainable big game hunting. So, with all due respect Ms. Sharon Dijksma, what is your strategy to (1) replace the revenue that is currently generated by big game hunting, and (2) protect Southern Africa's wildlife from organized poaching activities?

As per the BVC website:

- The conversion from cattle ranching back to a wildlife area was neither straightforward nor cheap, requiring a huge investment and significant annual running costs. But this was all worth it, because today the Bubye Valley Conservancy boasts the world’s third largest black rhino population, Zimbabwe’s largest lion population, a flourishing elephant population, and abundant game; an impressive accomplishment given just 20 years of operation.

- Sustainable trophy hunting, based on an old fashioned respect for ethics, provides the incentive and revenue to achieve this amazing conservation success – and for that the Bubye Valley Conservancy makes no apology because without this then none of those animals would even be there.

- Approximately 1.4 million square kilometers in Africa is protected for hunting (that’s an area 67 times larger than the country of Wales – to use the standard unit of measure in ecology!), which is over 20% more land than all of the national parks in Africa combined. That is a huge area of land on which endemic geckos, butterflies, eagles, flowers and trees etc. are completely protected because of the ability to sustainable harvest a few animals… There are more lions in Zimbabwean hunting areas than there are in its national parks. There are also more rhinos in these areas. These are not co-incidents.

- The Bubye Valley Conservancy invests over US$ 300,000 of the proceeds generated from hunting safaris into anti-poaching efforts, not to mention conservation research projects. This is on-top of the several million dollars it costs to run the Conservancy each year. And it is not even enough! Thankfully many of the hunting clients step-up and donate thousands of dollars of their own money to cover the short-fall. With the click of a button a million people might sign a sensationalized anti-hunting petition on social media – but how much do they actually invest in conservation?

- Consider the plant and animal diversity currently protected in hunting areas, as well as the function of this wilderness as genetic corridors between national parks. Contemplate also what would happen to these areas, and the biodiversity they contain, if there was no more hunting… No one can be naive enough to believe that they would remain wild.

- If lion hunting was suddenly banned, what do you think would be the fate of the 500+ lions that roam the Bubye Valley Conservancy and prey on other animals, competing with the hunters? And if all hunting was banned over night, do you think that the wildlife would just be left alone? Africa is not the wild continent it once was and still portrayed as by the romantics. There is not one square inch of Africa that is not owned by either governments or individuals, and all of it needs to generate income. Without the ability to sustainbly utilize the wildlife resource, said wildlife would either be ranched for meat production (those species that have no value to the butcheries would simply be eradicated) or completely removed and replaced with cattle or some other form of industry. As harsh as that may sound, that is the truth of the matter.

- Poaching is another scourge that is prevented by the investment of the hunting industry in boots-on-the-ground protection of their resource. Without being valued by the good guys, wildlife is doomed by the bad guys. There are two main types of poaching that happen on a daily basis in Africa; indiscriminate bush-meat poaching using wire snares, and highly organized criminal syndicates targeting rhino and elephant. Poaching has a devastating effect on the wildlife (and human morale), and it is only in the relatively well-funded hunting areas that both of these types of poaching can be actively combated.

- The conception of the Bubye Valley Conservancy required an incredible amount of foresight, but also the wisdom to realize that in the business of wildlife conservation there is no success unless you have the support of the surrounding communities. The Conservancy donates over 45 tonnes of meat to the local communities each year, which effectively removes the incentive for meat poaching. In addition to this, the Conservancy also supports several schools, clinics, and community projects in the three surrounding districts of Mwenezi, Maranda and Jopempe. This costs the Conservancy over US$ 100,000 per year, but is worth every cent in ensuring community support and tolerance for the wildlife. Indeed, the support of the local communities can prove invaluable in thwarting the ruthless efforts of poachers.

Can I like something more than once? This essay needs to be posted on every anti website and copied to Ricky Gervais et al.

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

What is not done for a political career.
Witold

 

[gvincent]

Can I like something more than once? This essay needs to be posted on every anti website and copied to Ricky Gervais et al.

Obviously, there are many success stories similar to the Bubye Valley Conservancy (for example: the Save Valley Conservancy in Zimbabwe, the Nuanetsi Ranch in Zimbabwe, the Royal Kafue in Zambia, etc.). Both the Save and Nuanetsi are former cattle ranches that have recently transitioned to successful wildlife ranching; whereas, the Royal Kafue is communal land that was totally poached out but now has a thriving population of wildlife (including the major carnivores) thanks to ethical and sustainable hunting. Perhaps one day very soon, one of the major international hunting organizations will fund an effort to collect and summarize the "real benefits" (in lieu of quoting outdated stats from a 2006 study conducted by researcher Peter A. Lindsey of Kenya's Mpala Research Centre) provided by sustainable hunting including, but not limited to, anti-poaching initiatives, local employment, wild-game meat donations to adjacent villages, funding of schools, drilling of boreholes, etc. Although I have visited the great country of Zimbabwe on several occasions, I was not aware that the Zimbabwe based BVC boasted the world's third largest black rhino population and Zimbabwe's largest lion population and that their ongoing wildlife management efforts are funded entirely by revenue derived from sustainable hunting. If a frequent visitor to Zimbabwe is unaware of the BVC's contributions to wildlife conservation, how can we expect the typical non-hunter to be aware of these conservation related facts as well. In the meantime, Pieter Kat with Lion Aid, Johnny Rodriguez with the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force, and their ilk will continue to successfully advance their anti-hunting agendas via the various social medias.