Zimbabwe collared Elephant

[Crazycanuck grizman]

Hey guys, c'mon fight nice!. The only thing that should be recognized about Martin's post is the beauty and splender of such a magnificent animal and no matter were he lived his life in Zim. the fact he had a collar around his neck is all just politics. Thanks.

 

[Brent in Az]

This Bull was shot 5 weeks ago. Nobody said boo about it until Martin posted a photo. 99% of us didn't even know about it until now, or do we know all the facts.

Seems like some unnecessary axe grinding too me.

 

[Brent in Az]

I'm all for truth and disclosure. Sometimes a certain amount of discretion is prudent

Publicly shaming, and embarrassing someone, right off the bat, only puts that individual into defense mode, and quickly turns the thread into what it is.

Ask nicely. Maybe the answers you seek, will be forthcoming.?

 

[Wheels]

This Bull was shot 5 weeks ago. Nobody said boo about it until Martin posted a photo. 99% of us didn't even know about it until now, or do we know all the facts.

Seems like some unnecessary axe grinding too me.

The photos, details and information about this elephant shot through the African hunting community within 2-4 days of the bull being down. Many of us here on AH communicated about it through pm, email, whats-app, etc. Many of us followed events as they unfolded with Parks, ZPHGA and FZS. Evidently AH members chose not to make an issue or a thread about the event, until MP made this post and chose to promote his business.

If MP doesn't start this thread then there may have been no story here on AH. Since he started this thread to market himself and this bull, then it only seems fair that he disclose the situation surrounding the hunt.

 

[Brent in Az]

The photos, details and information about this elephant shot through the African hunting community within 2-4 days of the bull being down. Many of us here on AH communicated about it through pm, email, whats-app, etc. Many of us followed events as they unfolded with Parks, ZPHGA and FZS. Evidently AH members chose not to make an issue or a thread about the event, until MP made this post and chose to promote his business.

If MP doesn't start this thread then there may have been no story here on AH. Since he started this thread to market himself and this bull, then it only seems fair that he disclose the situation surrounding the hunt.

I wouldn't know about the private conversations. I'm not part of that loop.

 

[Tasos]

Full disclosure is always best. Bull is awesome. Collar or not it's a legal hunt.

 

[K-man]

Have hunted several times with a Parks scout in Zim. They and the P.H. are in charge, hard to do something illegal when they are arms length away. Especially if both are in agreement. Unsure why any controversy should arise because of the collar. Disclosure after people question the story always looks bad, make me wonder what we haven't learned YET. Beautiful tusks. Congratulations to the hunter.

 

[thi9elsp]

I'm really confused by the discussion. It appears to me that the Outfitter / PH / Hunter conducted a legal hunt and shot a legal animal. A collar was discovered and properly turned in. The government agency confirmed that everything was done legally. Why the need for more information about the aftermath when it has nothing to do with the legality of the hunt nor the services rendered by the PH?

Also, this stuff about iconic animals, etc. Really? Wouldn't an animal with ivory of this size be an older bull? And, aren't we as hunters seeking to shoot the older animals to maintain the age structure, past prime, etc... As far as suspension from ZPHA - is there a published document on the suspension? It feels a lot like SCI distancing itself from Dr. Palmer. And, that I don't care for.

 

[Stoat]

thi9elsp said all that needs to be said. "Outfitter / PH / Hunter conducted a legal hunt and shot a legal animal. A collar was discovered and properly turned in. The government agency confirmed that everything was done legally. Why the need for more information about the aftermath when it has nothing to do with the legality of the hunt nor the services rendered by the PH?"

 

[LivingTheDream]

Anti's are wising up and will start to collar everything, give it a name, and the researchers will not tell the PHs with the purpose of causing a shit storm to fundraise. It was a legal hunt, I think MP has killed 2 collared elephants in a long hunting career. I don't think a suspension is justified as everyone concluded it was legal. It was a great bull who has probably breed many times over. Lots of good info has been collected and if hunting is part of conservation and part of the circle of life this is a possible outcome.

I'm afraid these collars will lead to corruption where the last big tuskers are possibly pinpointed for a poachers by someone with the knowledge and need for money.

 

[IdaRam]

Consider this:

As members of AH we enjoy quite a number of benefits this site provides. It is arguable THE BEST resource available for anyone who is dreaming of, or planning a Safari. Whether you are a first timer just dreaming about “someday” or planning your next of many trips to Africa, this site provides an incomparable opportunity to have direct access to reviews and reports, an extensive database of Outfitters you can contact at the click of a mouse, other members who happily give advice. The list goes on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As an AH Sponsor Outfitter there is also a long list of benefits to being a Sponsor of this site. This is why outfitters devote resources of time, money, free advice, etc, etc.

My position is simply that with that opportunity also come responsibility and accountability.

In my opinion, there is a difference between a hunter posting a report and an outfitter posting a report. The hunter hopefully had the trip of a lifetime and is excited to share stories, photos and memories. Some of the enjoyment is in the telling. Getting to relive the experiences with your buddies.

Without a doubt, there is also much enjoyment for an outfitter posting a report. If these guys didn’t love what they do, I suspect they might be doing something else. But there is also a business motivation there as well. And there is MOST CERTAINLY nothing wrong with that! These outfitters pay for the opportunity AH provides. And we as AH members reap the rewards. Quite often for free. We owe these outfitters our gratitude and appreciation as well as consideration of their services when we’re thinking about booking a hunt. But, once again in my opinion, it is not carte blanch and a free pass. We all have a vested interest in the quality and accuracy of the information provided here. The more we as members set the expectation that nothing short of reliable and complete information is acceptable, the more value this resource has. For both MEMBERS and OUTFITTERS.

There is a reason why people come here for information and book with AH Outfitters. Because they have been vetted and proven to be the cream of the crop! If you book with these guys, you know what you are getting and can book with confidence.

If that bar is lowered and we simply take what anyone is offering, in my opinion, the value of this resource is diminished and then what’s the point!?

There are a number of other issues in play here, but I will leave it at that. Agree or disagree, that is everyone’s choice. If we all agreed this would be a pretty boring place to hang out. I don’t want or expect y’all to agree. Hell, we can’t even agree on how we like our eggs!

Call me a pot stirrer if you like. I assure you my pillow will get no less of a workout. But before you do, just maybe take a moment to think this through.

 

[gillettehunter]

Here is the issue as I see it. The Frankfurt Zoological society has not been anti-hunting. Research minded and generally helpful. Note this in their statement: " There is no law that protects a collared animal from being hunted in Zimbabwe, but there is general acceptance that the ethical position is that a hunter will avoid shooting an animal with a collar."
We were not there and will never know the full truth of whether anyone had a glimpse of a collar and could of suggested not shooting that bull.
This has created a shitstorm elsewhere. It did not need to happen here. All Martin needed to do was explain his side in the initial post. Pretty simple. To think that nobody here knew or would comment on the controversy is naive. If you want to use it to help your reputation which took a bit of a beating here, so be it. Just be a bit more upfront and informative. Likely would of passed through with a minimum of conflict. The way it was done and the reply didn't do anyones reputation any favors.
Martin was cleared of any wrong doing. We should keep that part in mind too.
Bruce

 

[Rick Cox]

@IdaRam, the hunt was legal and ethical! I do not have to defend myself against fake social media outbursts, perhaps you should go sit at the coffee shop and read Facebook!
The only shit storm came from anti hunters and biased uneducated emotional attacks on myself. I was suspended from ZPHGA and in turn decided to terminate my membership based on their unfortunate decision to side with pressure from antis.

https://www.zimeye.net/2018/04/02/zimparks-defends-russian-who-shot-an-elephant/

I don't know you Martin, but I would suggest that your impeccable reputation speaks for itself. I hope this BS doesn't impact your livelihood. I have to say, if I was faced with a fantastic legal trophy I would not hesitate to pull the trigger, collar or not.
The antis can't be reasoned with, and unfortunately have increasing influence in the modern world. Look at what has happened to the grizzly hunt here in BC. A very regulated, sustainable hunt shut down because of public pressure. The government didn't even try to make excuses for it stating "it was no longer socially acceptable".

 

[Rick Cox]

Consider this:

As members of AH we enjoy quite a number of benefits this site provides. It is arguable THE BEST resource available for anyone who is dreaming of, or planning a Safari. Whether you are a first timer just dreaming about “someday” or planning your next of many trips to Africa, this site provides an incomparable opportunity to have direct access to reviews and reports, an extensive database of Outfitters you can contact at the click of a mouse, other members who happily give advice. The list goes on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As an AH Sponsor Outfitter there is also a long list of benefits to being a Sponsor of this site. This is why outfitters devote resources of time, money, free advice, etc, etc.

My position is simply that with that opportunity also come responsibility and accountability.

In my opinion, there is a difference between a hunter posting a report and an outfitter posting a report. The hunter hopefully had the trip of a lifetime and is excited to share stories, photos and memories. Some of the enjoyment is in the telling. Getting to relive the experiences with your buddies.

Without a doubt, there is also much enjoyment for an outfitter posting a report. If these guys didn’t love what they do, I suspect they might be doing something else. But there is also a business motivation there as well. And there is MOST CERTAINLY nothing wrong with that! These outfitters pay for the opportunity AH provides. And we as AH members reap the rewards. Quite often for free. We owe these outfitters our gratitude and appreciation as well as consideration of their services when we’re thinking about booking a hunt. But, once again in my opinion, it is not carte blanch and a free pass. We all have a vested interest in the quality and accuracy of the information provided here. The more we as members set the expectation that nothing short of reliable and complete information is acceptable, the more value this resource has. For both MEMBERS and OUTFITTERS.

There is a reason why people come here for information and book with AH Outfitters. Because they have been vetted and proven to be the cream of the crop! If you book with these guys, you know what you are getting and can book with confidence.

If that bar is lowered and we simply take what anyone is offering, in my opinion, the value of this resource is diminished and then what’s the point!?

There are a number of other issues in play here, but I will leave it at that. Agree or disagree, that is everyone’s choice. If we all agreed this would be a pretty boring place to hang out. I don’t want or expect y’all to agree. Hell, we can’t even agree on how we like our eggs!

Call me a pot stirrer if you like. I assure you my pillow will get no less of a workout. But before you do, just maybe take a moment to think this through.

Well said. I will say that I am the sort of person who feels a reputation earned over time based on multiple sources is worth considering...

 

[enysse]

I was unaware of this news story until reading on 4/16/18. I must admit I'm not following the news closely but to me any of the animals outside of the park are fair game. I personally think the antis love these collared animal stories. I continue to hear about these poor endangered animals at the hospital daily and how I'm a murderer for hunting in Africa. I assure people that all the delusional stories told by the media are not 100% true! The numbers have been manipulated and the stories by the media have a lot of "magical thinking" tied to them!
I think, it would have been best to post that this the elephant causing controversy in the media. I also know it was very green in the hunting area and mistakes happen. Martin turned the collar into the authorities. No need to crucify Martin anymore, I'm sure he's getting enough pressure. The elephants are over populated and social pressure I'm sure causes a lot of these bull elephants to wonder outside of the park.

 

[Wheels]

FZS released this news drop today.

https://fzs.org/en/news/joint-press-statement-gct/

" Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS), is saddened to announce the shooting of another one of its collared elephant bull by a professional hunter and his client in an area adjacent to the National Park on the afternoon of 11 April 2018."

This is a different elephant than the one in this thread that was shot March 7th, by MPS.



The following is information taken from the statement:

...alerted to the shooting of one of the Park’s collared elephant bulls in a hunt conducted by a professional hunter and his client outside the Gonarezhou in the Gonakudzingwa area. Whilst it is not illegal for a hunter to shoot a collared elephant, the general position taken by the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters and Guides Association (ZHPGA) is that it is unethical and should be avoided wherever possible. In his statement recorded after the hunt, the operator was well aware of the ethical stance and, as a result of previous similar incidences, was aware of the potential for collared individuals to roam into hunting areas outside of the Park. Thus, as a precautionary measure, GCT has taken to suspend the ranger assigned to monitor the hunt and, as per recommendation, has confiscated the ivory pending the outcome of an investigation.

If FZS is to be believed, it is the position of ZPHGA that it is unethical to shoot a collard elephant. I'm not sure if this is correct or not, but if it isn't, why did ZPHGA suspend MP's membership.

The Parks Ranger assigned to the hunt was suspended. If it is ethical to shoot a collard bull in Zimbabwe, why is the Ranger suspended.

Yes, there may be no laws against shooting a collard elephant in Zimbabwe, but evidently both ZPHGA and Parks feel it is unethical since they both suspended members.



" has confiscated the ivory pending the outcome of an investigation."

What will happen with the ivory? We will see. How would you like to pay X for a hunt, only to have the ivory confiscated. Perhaps permanently, due to an "unethical" hunt as determined by the governing bodies of the country you are hunting in.




Yes there is a difference between legal and ethical. Each of us have our own individual parameters. The general public also has it's own parameters. Legal or not, we are loosing the publicity war. Yes we can push the envelope and a PH and hunter can shoot another collard elephant next month. Will that improve our standing in the court of world opinion. Could the taking of another collared elephant be another nail in the coffin of the sport we love.

Again, I have no problem shooting a collared elephant as long as it is legal, and considered ethical by the country I am hunting in. Regardless of the legality however, we will not win the war of public perception if this continues to happen.

 

[LivingTheDream]

Well they are framing it so that shooting collared animals is unethical. They aren't telling the game scouts or the outfitters or the PHs that the elephants are moving into their area. They have started the discussion that shooting collared animals is unethical, the ZPHA is agreeing with them to minimize the uproar and bowing to pressure.

As we know these are old bulls that have been pushed out of the parks. It is a constant theme, old males that are pushed out. The researches could tout this as a success and a partnership with the concession holders. The collars returned to put on a younger bull to start the research over again. However, they can get their end goal, a slow death to hunting and a gift wrap opportunity for publicity and fundraising.

 

[K-man]

Especially if as they said, "no notification of any collared elephant was in the area". If it is collared, they knew it was out of the park and should/could have told the Ranger and the P.H. Something smells in these releases. Confiscation of the Ivory?? Wow!!

 

[thi9elsp]

I don't get the if ethical comment @Wheels . It's not like the PH is got a tracking device and is going after the collared elephant.

Next we are going to have wolves hunted in Wyoming. I can see this scenario playing out. A guy is elk hunting, has a wolf tag along just in case. He's hunting with a guide up in the Thoroughfare or Two Oceans Pass a few miles from the Yellowstone park boundary. A wolf moves through the dark timber. Then stops. Guy shoots it and discovers a collar. He and the guide turn the collar in and everything is legal. USFWS and Wyoming Fish and Game state that it's legal. Then the antis start a campaign against the outfitter, guide and the hunter for killing the collared wolf. Where are we as a hunting community going to stand with that hunter?

 

[Boyd Brooks]

It really seems the only reason for these collared animals is to cause some kind of conflict. Its a GPS thats all. It give no info on food consumed, females mated, parasites carried, just location! What the researchers need to do is get away from the computer screen and go into the bush and study the animals they might actually learn something useful.