African conservation in the Guardian

[Irrelevant]

On the trail with the hunters who believe shooting big game can save Africa’s wildlife

The long read: One way to pay for wildlife conservation is to allow the rich to bag a few animals for high prices. But is it just an exercise in colonialism?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Irrelevant]

I find the lack of comments odd. The author paints a pretty hypocritical view of "hunting is conservation", yet provides zero alternatives, and appears forced to conclude that it's possible that "it" works. Hard for me to conceive of a better management strategy.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

Not sure what you expected. Seemed like a typical anti "African trophy hunting" article to me. Hard to argue that their system doesn't work, even though it doesn't set well with a lot of people.

 

[Irrelevant]

Not sure what you expected. Seemed like a typical anti "African trophy hunting" article to me. Hard to argue that their system doesn't work, even though it doesn't set well with a lot of people.

1. Hunting is conservation as a topic isn't really mainstreamed very often.
2. The author, despite their best attempts, still concludes it's an effective strategy.
3. None of their points against hunting are wrong. It is entirely racist and feudal, and in many ways straight up represents the worst parts of hunting and hunters.
4. It sure as hell is a more worthwhile discussion than what's the best scope/caliber/bullet for a deer rifle or where can I find a 30" mule deer on public land in Montana.

 

[Salmonchaser]

I found the article interesting in that knowing your enemy, or competition, is always a good idea. That the writers lack of objectivity prevented a more favorable analysis is not surprising. Still, despite the denigrating description of hunters and Professional Hunters, the author takes us through a very narrow window for a view of African hunting, which is massive industry catering much more to middle class than the high and mighty. After reading the article I could see where many here would base a decision to not hunt Africa as they don’t want to be held in the same light as those hunters. That is unfortunate. Certainly there are canned hunts in Africa, particularly South Africa. I’ve seen those on tv as well. The constant struggle to keep the fence or residential housing out of view. There are very large high fence operations where you may never see the fence and there are free range operations that simply have cattle fencing. Pick your poison.
What is absolutely certain is most of the wild game was eliminated by the 60s and 70s through poaching and efforts to limit grazing competition. Somebody figured out there was money to be made grazing kudu along with cattle and the rest is history. You can have a canned hunts if you like where you will know for certain you will have a chance at a Kudu or Roan. You an also go free range and figure you’re luck is just like Hemmingways until it isn’t.
Having spent 20 years guiding in Alaska and Oregon I’ve met a lot of guides, none had the depth and breadth of knowledge the African PH has regarding the environment they operate in. Myself included. Really was quite impressive what they need to learn to get licensed. The wife was thrilled to have in depth conversations with our PHs on the ecology of each area we hunted. I couldn’t tell you have many times we stopped and examined a plant community instead of a Kudu’s horns.
We spent a month in South Africa a couple of years ago. The wife’s resume got us visiting a number of hunting/ag operations and they are quite impressive. We hunted 10 days with an outfit that has three ranches totaling 1 million acres, all free range. Almost every day we chased game that got over fences where we could not follow, just like here.
I did get a Kudu after five days, passed dozens. We head back in three weeks to hunt the same place.
I wish I had more time to write a short concise response.