SCI Adopts Policy On Captive Bred Lions

[johnnyblues]

Yip there are. I hunt an area that is about 50 000 acres that has a healthy population of released lions that have been roaming there for many years. Population is of such a nature that lion hunting is permitted. They breed, are self sustaining and are hunted. Periodically new blood is introduced. All the big six are available on this property.

No put and take hunting here, no minimum release period as it is not applicable here.

The ranch is not a member of SAPA.

That’s great. I have to remember you when I’m ready to hunt lion. It’s on my hit list and I’m know when it comes to hunting to try really hard to complete my hit list. My main reason for not hunting now is importation, I know many disagree with my stance but for me I want to be able to import it.

 

[Mike70560]

Remember this is not law. If you want to sell a pen raised lion to be shot a day after its release go right ahead, same if you want to hunt it. Nobody is trying to stop you. So the “anti-hunters win” argument is not valid, you can still go. Just don’t expect these organizations to support it.

 

[lcq]

Part of the problem for those who support this practice, is someone like me. I am a life member of both DSC and SCI - I strongly support both organizations' position with regard to this practice - and I am very confident there are quite a few of us with a similar view. Rather than bowing to outside pressure, I am certain the respective positions reflect the views of most of the membership. I truly, really, absolutely believe that hunting captive bred lions undermines the important conservation argument we are trying to make every single day to preserve our hunting heritage. By supporting this practice, I would be equating it to a whitetail hunt on my ranch here in Texas. That is nonsensical, and I am absolutely convinced trying to equate it to generally accepted fair chase hunting is hugely detrimental to our efforts to make the case of hunter as conservationist. Everything involving an animal, a human, and a gun is not the same thing. And I am one of those who is proud that both of my hunting communities (DSC and SCI) have reached this conclusion as well.

While we have our differences of opinion I truly respect your polite and reasoned defence of your position. If only more would take that approach we would all be better off

 

[IvW]

Remember this is not law. If you want to sell a pen raised lion to be shot a day after its release go right ahead, same if you want to hunt it. Nobody is trying to stop you. So the “anti-hunters win” argument is not valid, you can still go. Just don’t expect these organizations to support it.

Agreed and please do not condemn or condone hunters who do not agree with or who do not practice CBL hunting.

 

[Royal27]

Remember this is not law. If you want to sell a pen raised lion to be shot a day after its release go right ahead, same if you want to hunt it. Nobody is trying to stop you. So the “anti-hunters win” argument is not valid, you can still go. Just don’t expect these organizations to support it.

+100!

Under the "we should support all hunting" argument I guess we should also support bushmeat hunting. It's hunting after all.

Those who support SCI, should. And those who don't, shouldn't. We don't all have to agree. Vote with your pocketbook.

Those who say we have to support everything are just as hypocritical as those who say that their one way is the only way.

 

[Hank2211]

I will start by saying that I want to be clear that I am not against any type of hunting which is legal and which is within the individual hunter's definition of ethical. If that happens not to meet my definition of ethical, well, I won't be copying it, but I also won't get on a high horse and criticize it. I think I've said that enough on various threads, but you can't be too careful.

Note that SCI's definition of estate hunted requires that the animal be given food and water. Also note that there is no prohibition on using the food as bait to draw the animal to the hunter. So the only relevant factor is, in reality, the fences and the six months. It's pretty easy to buy monster deer or elk (or any other African plains game) and let them loose on a fenced property, and to have them come to the same place every day for their daily ration. And then to shoot them at that place. This does nothing for conservation, as far as I can see - certainly no more than CBL.

And SCI finds this both ethical and acceptable, while tracking a lion on foot and without the help of bait is neither?

Hunters will be the authors of their own demise with distinctions which have no logical basis and cannot be sustained.

We know that captive bred animal hunting has been challenged in the courts in the US. Surely we haven't forgotten the "Three Amigos" case? Estate hunting - which provides a viable option for many hunters - will be under threat, and SCI (and DSC) will be ill-positioned to support it, given the stand they have taken on CBL.

The only argument SCI can make is that they've banned CBL hunting because the public doesn't like it. If the public "doesn't like" some other hunting practice - grizzly bears in British Columbia - spear hunting for bears in Alberta - mountain lion with hounds -- baited hunting of anything anywhere - will they ban the advertising and sale of those hunts as well?

 

[billc]

No bushmeat poachers would be poaching unless they have the permit to hunt what they kill. Also to be honest if it is someone hunting something to feed there family over dying I would not be stopping them. Poaching to sell it is a different thing all together.

Your not a hypocrite when you can support all hunting even if it is one you may not do. It is called putting others before yourself just because you do not like it or you think your ethics are better then others plan and simple.

I have no desire to hunt an elephant and know if we stopped it would have the same affect making people happy. But I sure hell will not throw others under the bus to make non hunters happy even though it could help my hunting rights down the road.

 

[Royal27]

So the only relevant factor is, in reality, the fences and the six months

You left out breeding herd. Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, but this makes it a pretty major difference between deer and lion and at least gives a semblance of normalcy. Now are the rules abused and bent? Absolutely.

I would assume that if you took a deer to SCI and told them you shot it in a 10,000 acre high fence area, with bucks only and no breeding that it would not qualify. Point being, it's so much easier to hide with deer than lions due to the overall way both industries are run.

 

[billc]

Yes I am smart enough to still know I can go hunt one if I want. It is just time people start realize what all the bans are doing.

One of the big arguements we use all the time is the money that goes back in from hunting. Lets see if people understand simple math. Ban equals cheaper ele hunts. So know you hunt an ele for 16,000.00 instead of 40,000.00. So which number do you think helps ele more. So one way or another the antis are winning to stop hunting. How long do you think these outfitters will keep sticking there necks out and there money to just be good guys. Lets face it outfitter do it to make money in the end plain and simple. When the US money starts drying up it will slowly be not worth it.

Then another effect that will happen is locals don't make the same money anymore. You think there going to put up with crop damage and everything else that comes there way. Hell no they will start killing animals again because there way of life will be affected badly again.

Now we have the few that once again because it benefits them they see the lower prices as ok because now they can hunt animals they could not before. Then they say we are not stopping anyone for doing what they like you still can do it. You just don't get to bring your animal home but you will show them by still hunting it. Yup we will all show them as they keep winning and we fight over ethics.

 

[IvW]

No bushmeat poachers would be poaching unless they have the permit to hunt what they kill. Also to be honest if it is someone hunting something to feed there family over dying I would not be stopping them. Poaching to sell it is a different thing all together.

Your not a hypocrite when you can support all hunting even if it is one you may not do. It is called putting others before yourself just because you do not like it or you think your ethics are better then others plan and simple.

I have no desire to hunt an elephant and know if we stopped it would have the same affect making people happy. But I sure hell will not throw others under the bus to make non hunters happy even though it could help my hunting rights down the road.

Most poaching, never mind the species has nothing to do with feeding hungry people but rather for financial gain.

The first two definitions of Hypocrisy when googled:

"the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case"
or
“a situation in which someone pretends to believe something that they do not really believe, or that is the opposite of what they do or say at another time”

Neither are applicable to me so I guess I am not a Hypocrite.

As for putting others or their practices ahead of my own practices and what I personally believe in, why should I do that if I do not agree with it?

As for elephant hunting, you should really consider it as many areas in Africa are way over populated with elephant and hunting them is much more satisfying than any CBL hunt, in my opinion. You will most certainly not find tracks at a convenient waterhole, start tracking and then shoot your elephant the same morning that I can guarantee you.

Let whoever has no issues with and want to do CBL hunting do so if they are ok with it but at the same time let's not bash hunters who are opposed to CBL hunting and try and force them to follow the CBL crowd and hunting practices that they do not believe in.

To each there own.

 

[IvW]

Lets face it outfitter do it to make money in the end plain and simple. .

For sure.....

 

[billc]

I am not saying everyone need to support it more like don't take the anti's side because you don't like it. After all they want hunting stopped because they don't like it. See the difference there. As I have said more then once I don't make people or ask people to support it or to get out say how great it is. I believe more in not bashing it or talking down because you don't like it.

AS for the ele hunt not sure how they go but I have talked to people who have hunt them and more then once have I heard how they shot one on day one and others passed first day. I guess though you could stay away from them to not take one on the first day.

As far as the waterhole comment don't act like waterholes are not used to hunt the so called wild animals either. I guess though the man made water hole with the pump is different because it is wild Africa not fenced Africa. I know all the waterholes in zim or moz are only because the good people want to help animals. Nothing to do with keeping more animals in the area or because of hunting.

Yes your right each there own but I like it better my way. That is stick together pick how you want to hunt but support all hunters by either backing them or not bashing them at least.

 

[Royal27]

I am not saying everyone need to support it more like don't take the anti's side because you don't like it. After all they want hunting stopped because they don't like it. See the difference there.

No, I don't see the difference. I don't like poaching, or even unsustainable use where legal. Anti-hunters don't like it either. So am I supposed to support it because it's the "anti side"? Sometimes, my beliefs happen to be the same as people I don't usually agree with. But they are my beliefs. I don't make them based on what another group thinks.

Market/bushmeat hunting was once legal. I wonder how it became illegal? Perhaps because hunters saw the damage it was doing and were willing to change? So is that the true original downfall of hunting, any regulation at all? Were those hunters who wanted change wrong based solely on the fact that they didn't support what was at the time legal to do?

Yes your right each there own but I like it better my way.

The folks who only believe in one way like their way better too.

 

[IvW]

I am not saying everyone need to support it more like don't take the anti's side because you don't like it. After all they want hunting stopped because they don't like it. See the difference there. As I have said more then once I don't make people or ask people to support it or to get out say how great it is. I believe more in not bashing it or talking down because you don't like it.

AS for the ele hunt not sure how they go but I have talked to people who have hunt them and more then once have I heard how they shot one on day one and others passed first day. I guess though you could stay away from them to not take one on the first day.

As far as the waterhole comment don't act like waterholes are not used to hunt the so called wild animals either. I guess though the man made water hole with the pump is different because it is wild Africa not fenced Africa. I know all the waterholes in zim or moz are only because the good people want to help animals. Nothing to do with keeping more animals in the area or because of hunting.

Yes your right each there own but I like it better my way. That is stick together pick how you want to hunt but support all hunters by either backing them or not bashing them at least.

Hunters, PH's, conservationists and outfitters who do not agree with certain practices in the industry and anybody who is a regular on this site will in no way support the anti's and if that message has come across in any way or is the perception due to some of us not agreeing with CBL hunting then I missed the point somewhere.

How does any hunter because he does not agree with certain practices in the industry suddenly become a "take the anti's side because you don't like it", candidate?

I think you missed the point regarding the waterholes...

 

[billc]

No, I don't see the difference. I don't like poaching, or even unsubstainable use where legal. Anti-hunters don't like it either. So am I supposed to support it because it's the "anti side"? Sometimes, my beliefs happen to be the same as people I don't usually agree with. But they are my beliefs. I don't make them based on what another group thinks.

Market/bushmeat hunting was once legal. I wonder how it became illegal? Perhaps because hunters saw the damage it was doing and were willing to change? So is that the true original downfall of hunting, any regulation at all? Were those hunters who wanted change wrong based solely on the fact that they didn't support what was at the time legal to do?



The folks who only believe in one way like their way better too.

Yup but my way is right. support all not just some.

You should not have seen a difference really they want something stopped just because they don't like it just like someone trying to stop cbl because they don't like it. Plus I never heard any anti group talking about poaching they try and tie us all together and that is some of the problem also.

As for how bushmeat hunting became illegal. Sure most will not like my answer but to me it was when someone realize they could make money bringing in hunters. A new market was made so someone had to give in or be made to. Just think of how many years people hunted to survive then people found a way to make money and things changed. How many outfitters do you think would be hunting with clients if they did not make money doing so. How many people would be going to Africa if there was not outfitters to take them? How may people would care about Africa if we did not hunt there?

Raised game is a way to fill the need to supply hunters with what they want and support the money needed for certain areas. Hunting has turned into a business and sad to say if money was not involved we would not be hunting Africa now. Now because some others want to make money with raising animals to fill the gap wild Africa can not handle we decide to apply ethics or are own belief in front of others.

 

[billc]

Hunters, PH's, conservationists and outfitters who do not agree with certain practices in the industry and anybody who is a regular on this site will in no way support the anti's and if that message has come across in any way or is the perception due to some of us not agreeing with CBL hunting then I missed the point somewhere.

How does any hunter because he does not agree with certain practices in the industry suddenly become a "take the anti's side because you don't like it", candidate?

I think you missed the point regarding the waterholes...

I am not saying anyone here is on the anti's side but rather saying some want cbl stopped for the same reason. That is they don't like it for some reason. Anti's don't like hunting and want it stopped and cbl is not liked by some and they want it stopped. So both are trying to stop something based on a dislike they have.

I got your point on waterholes and I am saying there is no difference. wild or raised they want water and a lot of hunts start there. You try and make one right and the other wrong based on what you like and I see no difference but I am ok with both.

 

[Graham Hunter]

I think it would have been better for both DSC & SCI to make the statement that CBL's could not be entered into the record books. Simple and leave it at that!

 

[Hank2211]

You left out breeding herd. Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, but this makes it a pretty major difference between deer and lion and at least gives a semblance of normalcy. Now are the rules abused and bent? Absolutely.

I would assume that if you took a deer to SCI and told them you shot it in a 10,000 acre high fence area, with bucks only and no breeding that it would not qualify. Point being, it's so much easier to hide with deer than lions due to the overall way both industries are run.

Royal, I left out the breeding herd because with ungulates (unlike lions) breeding is at a specific time of year, and unless the animal is introduced within that window, it’s effectively irrelevant. In fact, if you put a lion and lioness in an area, it won’t be long before breeding takes place. That’s not necessarily the case with deer and elk.

 

[Scott Slough]

...

I am glad to see SCI and DSC take a stand on these issues. Surprisingly it is SCI that went a step further than DSC and could possibly take a hit in their pocket book. Now SCI should adopt the criteria for a shootable male lion similar to DSC. Paul Babaz are you listening???

I feel it is ridiculous to compare hunting behind a high fence for any game to shooting a pen raised animal that was released just a day or two prior to being shot. Very few outfitters will allow lions to roam their property for six months eating their prize plainsgame and buffalo. And I agree it should apply to more than lion but at at least it is a step in the right direction.

For me none of this has anything to do with appeasing anti-hunters. It is about organizations setting standards. If you don’t like it, don’t join or work to change it. Personally I applaud the decision.

EXACTLY!!!!! The history of hunting and conservation is self-regulation/policing. The notions about game management and laws that we take for granted today came from hunters...NOT governments! U. S. hunters pushed for funding government policy and enforcement bodies through the selling of licenses, stamps, leases on public land etc. The idea of daily and season limits, seasons that protected pregnant females and off-spring, protection of migratory patterns, shooting hours (for some species), and MANY others originated with hunters!

I too do not see how this is appeasing anti-hunters...if we do not self-regulate, the right to do so will be taken away from us!

 

[Royal27]

Royal, I left out the breeding herd because with ungulates (unlike lions) breeding is at a specific time of year, and unless the animal is introduced within that window, it’s effectively irrelevant. In fact, if you put a lion and lioness in an area, it won’t be long before breeding takes place. That’s not necessarily the case with deer and elk.

Fair point, except they are never left long enough for that to occur.

My point is, if outfitters would allow breeding and sustainable hunting at least part of the time that CBL might just be viewed differently.