# Cecil The Lion



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

You have all likely seen where the internets have exploded because some American Dentist paid $50,000 to hunt and kill a lion in African and ended up killing a Lion with a name. The facts seem to point to illegal actions of the PH and land owner who were hired to hunt the lion and the Dentist may or may not have known that the "hunt" was illegal. What sickens me is what most of the armchair warriors are saying about the Dentist. Some of the more benign posts just want him to have his livelihood taken from him and his family and that they live the rest of their lives in poverty. Some of the worst, quite literally, want him thrown to the lions. 

Personally, I don't believe in hunting apex predators, unless there is a good reason (the animal is injured, starving, man eater, etc.), but, I will not wish harm upon those who would.


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

I think it's sad that a lion was lured from a protected habitat for hunting purposes by unscrupulous hunters. They tied meat to the back of a vehicle to get the lion to leave the reserve. Also, from what I've read the guy (dentist) was such a poor shot it took the lion 40 hours to die. That is cruel. 

I don't wish bodily harm on him, but I do think he should be fined heavily enough that it hurts. Slapping someone who is obviously wealthy enough to pay $50,000. to kill a lion with a few hundred or even thousands of dollars fine is not enough. It should be triple or quadruple the hunting fee to make any impact.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

The thing that gets me is the $50,000 price tag? A legal, ethical lion hunt costs less than half that.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I'm a hunter. 
But what this guy did was so bad on so many levels that I see nothing wiring with some jail time and fining him into poverty. 

He didn't even eat the thing.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

How many right to chose people are trashing the dentist and see nothing wrong with abortion? There is a connection their if you think it is bad to kill a cat then you should be outrage at the abortion of a child?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

I'm not against hunting at all, but there were so many things wrong with this kill
Luring the lion out of a game preserve and then letting it suffer 40 hours before killing it. - thats just wrong.
If you're hunting something, you have an obligation to not let it suffer more than necessary. I felt really bad that it took me almost 30 minutes once to find and finish a deer I did not get a clean kill on - and that one I was hunting for food.
I don't kill any game my family is not going to eat, never understood trophy hunters- killing something just to kill it, never thrilled me.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Old Vet said:


> How many right to chose people are trashing the dentist and see nothing wrong with abortion? There is a connection their if you think it is bad to kill a cat then you should be outrage at the abortion of a child?


Why do you feel the need to bring up that subject in a discussion that has absolutely no connection to it. Are you a bit obsessed?

What this guy did was awful. But people calling for his head are no better


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Farmerga said:


> The thing that gets me is the $50,000 price tag? A legal, ethical lion hunt costs less than half that.


That would be a pretty good clue that the dentist knew it was going to be an illegal kill, then.

It just made me sick that he used a bow, didn't make a good shot and the animal had to suffer so long. 

I don't understand trophy hunters, but if they play by the rules, fine, do your thing. Go kill something just to hang on your wall as long as it's done legally and ethically. But this incident was just wrong a lot of ways.

The guide and the dentist were stupid and deserve what they get. A popular, well known lion wearing a tracking collar. Duh! They might as well have went hunting at the zoo.


----------



## FutureFarm (Mar 1, 2013)

I don't know if they're all that different. Most of the people I've heard complain about the lion's death say that he was innocent, defenseless, and unaware of his impending destruction. They say the dentist has no respect for life, and is cruel and heartless. 
Seems to be what a lot of pro-life people say about soon to be killed babies and abortionists.
It is a bit odd to me how people seem to care a lot more about animals than humans. Watch any movie where both a human and animal die. In most movies the animal is grieved more than the human.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

As with a gun, not every bow shot is perfect. Light level, a twig in the way, nerves, judging the distance wrong, whatever - lots of things can go wrong with a bow and arrow.

And you have to be very careful following up a wounded animal that easily has the ability to kill you.

Nope, I can't pass judgement on this one until we hear a few more facts.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

I'm guessing we aren't hearing the full story and the "do gooders" are using this as an opportunity to give sport hunting a black eye.

Making a big deal about some lion getting shot over there and meanwhile the local children probably don't even have clean water, adequate food, clothing, etc. 

Don't know the details of this particular case, but I do know that sport hunting in Africa brings a whole lot of badly needed money into desperately poor villages and communities that would struggle to survive without it.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Fishindude said:


> I'm guessing we aren't hearing the full story and the "do gooders" are using this as an opportunity to give sport hunting a black eye.
> 
> Making a big deal about some lion getting shot over there and meanwhile the local children probably don't even have clean water, adequate food, clothing, etc.
> 
> Don't know the details of this particular case, but I do know that sport hunting in Africa brings a whole lot of badly needed money into desperately poor villages and communities that would struggle to survive without it.



First you admit you don't know the whole story and then you attack us "do gooders" I am wondering how much of the money he paid trickled down to the poor villages? Any idea with proof. 

I believe there have been instances where this sport hunting has been run like criminal organizations and very little going anywhere but into the pockets of a few.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

So this incredibly stupid man thought the hunt was legal? he shot the animal with a bow and arrow, hunted him when he was weak and dying, and then shot him..40 hours later, and beheaded him and skinned him. 

I hope he is fined to the max....


----------



## Bellyman (Jul 6, 2013)

I don't care much for the idea of killing for sport. If there were a reason it needed to be done (sickness, starvation, killing people), it's understandable. To stuff and put on display just isn't that kind of reason.

The thing that bothered me the most was that the lion was wearing a collar. I have a hard time thinking that if a hunter were close enough to shoot it with an arrow, he was close enough to realize that the collar was on there. To me, that would have implied that this lion was their version of a family pet.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

The media is reporting that Cecil the lion was a large tourist draw , bring in money to a lot of people verses a kill that brought in money to one person.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

From what I've read: he accompanied his paid guides to go into the park, lured Cecil off the park grounds by dragging a dead animal behind their vehicle, spotlighted the lion and the dentist shot it with his crossbow. Wasn't a clean kill so they had to track it for 40 hours to finish it. How could this guy not have known what they were doing was illegal? 

From other news coming out, he had run-ins with the law before over hunting and was accused of sexual harassment.



I'm pro hunting for food as well. But I don't at all understand the "sport" of trophy hunting. Stalk the animal and get a great picture. That would be a hell of a lot more "sporting" than killing it from a safe distance, wasting the meat and hanging a dead dead on your wall.

Also, the local poor benefitted a great deal from Cecil's fame and the resulting tourism he inspired.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

He was legally hunting in a legal area. At night you can't see a collar with that mane. Is it sad? Yes. I'm a hunter and people who pay these crazy funds to hunt predators are only in it for the thrill and trophy. Which I'm against. Elk bear ect...is fine. But an African lion? Not for me. But to each his own. It was a legal kill. End of story.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

All any of us know is what we've seen in a couple articles flying around the web, and anyone with a lick of sense knows that this stuff often gets embellished, blown out of proportion, etc. by those generating the stories and passing them on, depending upon what their particular agenda is.

I do know this. Lions can be hunted 100% legally for sport in Africa. It's expensive, but you can do it cheaper than $50,000. You can shoot elephants too, if that's your thing.

The reason I'm not throwing this dentist under the bus is because I don't think we are getting the full story. Why in the heck would someone that can afford to do something like this perfectly above board, and probably cheaper willingly violate the law in a foreign country? That's a huge risk, and no American wants to get locked up in an African jail. This guy isn't stupid, he was smart enough to get through dental school.

My guess, and only a guess, is that the $50,000 figure being thrown around was the cost of his entire safari, not for that one lion. Further, my second guess is that he had a shady outfitter that couldn't produce a legal lion, so they used shady techniques to bait this lion to a location where it could be legally taken. Only a guess?

I didn't see any radio collar on the facebook photos that were posted, maybe someone else did? Might be pretty tough to see a collar on a heavily maned lion in the field? Also, in many cases it's legal to kill collared animals. In the US; sheep, elk, bears, lions, etc. are commonly collared, fish are tagged, ducks banded, etc. for DNR research.

Regarding the time it took to recover the critter. It is not unusual when bow hunting game to leave an animal overnight, and follow it up in the morning if you are unsure of the shot placement. It is particularly prudent to do so when hunting dangerous game like lions or bears, and somebody usually has a gun for backup in the event of problems.

As a guy that does a lot of hunting (no I don't shoot lions and elephants), this is my take on the story for what it's worth. An anti-hunter, animal lover won't understand it or agree with any of it, and I wouldn't expect them to.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Vahomesteaders said:


> He was legally hunting in a legal area. At night you can't see a collar with that mane. Is it sad? Yes. I'm a hunter and people who pay these crazy funds to hunt predators are only in it for the thrill and trophy. Which I'm against. Elk bear ect...is fine. But an African lion? Not for me. But to each his own. It was a legal kill. End of story.


So you say. The Zimbabwe authorities say differently. I wonder which of you carries more weight. Hmmmm.....


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

If you do something wrong, like shoot an animal with a collar, then come forward and admit it. The fact that they tried to destroy the collar says VOLUMES about their character. They lured the lion away, which was ethically wrong. 

This guy is a pig and has poached before. He deserves the maximum penalty.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Deleted.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

After some research, I learned it is legal to bait animals, shoot animals with collars and hunt lions with bows in Africa. 

The problem seems to be that landowners are eligible to kill a single lion within a specified period of time and the landowner where the hunt took place did not have a permit. I'm guessing that it is legal to transfer or sell those permits to hunters. 

I've recently read that the hunter was actually intending to shoot a leopard and when the lion appeared, the guide indicated he should shoot it. Certainly, if you've paid and are permitted to shoot a leopard, you likely don't have a permit to shoot a lion and should know better but the primary reason to hire a guide is to avoid situations like this.


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

I don't hunt at all. It is a shame that a known, studied animal was shot. What is sickening is that a man will lose his practice and his family will suffer over this. This whole situation is a classic example of the pure ignorance, stupidity and emotional retardation of the general public, who is so far removed from the natural world. The irresponsible media sensationalizes a story about a named animal (and so a pet in the public's mind) and the fools believe every word of it without wanting to hear any facts of the case. The guy claims that everything he did was above board. No one wants to hear that because doesn't fulfill their infantile need to be outraged about the death of a kitty. Now his past is brought up as proof of him being a SOB. A claim of sexual harrassment can be made by anyone no matter how delicate, on hearing the slightest off color joke. Of course no employee has ever lied and made a false claim against the boss, simply because he's the boss and the employee didn't like being told what to do. The same mentality which enables those types of claims also fuels this anti-hunting outrage. Maybe he shot a bear illegally. Maybe there were other circumstances. Has no one ever heard of an overzealous game warden looking to make an example of a high profile scapegoat? Maybe he had some or a lot of guilt in some or all of these situations, but I'd like to see something meaningless like a few facts before calling for him to be hanged, literally, or hoping that his family suffers in poverty. And the morons in our society who believe everything that they're told by the media think that people who kill animals are the ones who are cruel.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

keenataz said:


> Why do you feel the need to bring up that subject in a discussion that has absolutely no connection to it. Are you a bit obsessed?
> 
> What this guy did was awful. But people calling for his head are no better


It has a connection. You don't want it see that. If you want to trash the dentist you should be against killing a child. Oh I guess Planed Parenthood is a good thing in your mind. After all it was a cat that was killed instead of a child.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

Have all the facts been aired and the investigations by Zim officials completed?

No sense me bashing this guy for what I think he might have done...until we know all the facts.

Tim


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

It's just the same old ridiculous nonsense, of selfish humans.

Should people be able to hunt? Of course they should.

Do people really need to hunt lions? No they do not.

If one's manhood, or womanhood, is dependent on how many dead animals are attached to your wall, maybe a trip to the therapist, instead of the field, is on order.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

basketti said:


> So you say. The Zimbabwe authorities say differently. I wonder which of you carries more weight. Hmmmm.....


Me. You cant trust any govt. End of story. Lol


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> It's just the same old ridiculous nonsense, of selfish humans.
> 
> Should people be able to hunt? Of course they should.
> 
> ...


Or as Jimmy Kimmel suggested, get some Viagra


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

basketti said:


> Or as Jimmy Kimmel suggested, get some Viagra


maybe it was a matter of size(or lack thereof), as well.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

Agriculture said:


> The guy claims that everything he did was above board.


 Of course he does. Most accused criminals plead not guilty.




> Now his past is brought up as proof of him being a SOB. Maybe he shot a bear illegally. Maybe there were other circumstances. Has no one ever heard of an overzealous game warden looking to make an example of a high profile scapegoat?


It is normal to look at (criminal) history when talking about accused criminals. He already served a year probation, so obviously a judge somewhere believed there was enough evidence to warrant that.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wr said:


> After some research, I learned it is legal to bait animals, shoot animals with collars and hunt lions with bows in Africa.
> 
> The problem seems to be that landowners are eligible to kill a single lion within a specified period of time and the landowner where the hunt took place did not have a permit. I'm guessing that it is legal to transfer or sell those permits to hunters.
> 
> I've recently read that the hunter was actually intending to shoot a leopard and when the lion appeared, the guide indicated he should shoot it. Certainly, if you've paid and are permitted to shoot a leopard, you likely don't have a permit to shoot a lion and should know better but the primary reason to hire a guide is to avoid situations like this.


Don't know about Tanzania, but I did hunt with a guy who had bagged an elephant in South Africa.

In South Africa, elephants are a hunt of opportunity. IOW, you're most likely on a hunt for something else, when the tag becomes available. Tags are issued by the government to landowners, usually in relation to an animal that is tearing up crops and won't be scared off, or in the case of the big cats, one who has taken a liking to farm animals or human meat.

Minimum caliber for elephants was .375, I don't know about whether they could be hunted with a bow, or not. You had to employ a licensed guide and the government was notified immediately after the kill. Tusks were the property of the hunter, and the government got the meat and the hide. The meat was distributed to local charity kitchens and the hide and feet were auctioned. At the time this hunt occurred (over ten years ago), the elephant hunt cost about $20K, in addition to his regular hunt. Because of international treaty, he had to smuggle his ivory in through Mexico.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Agriculture said:


> Maybe he shot a bear illegally. Maybe there were other circumstances. Has no one ever heard of an overzealous game warden looking to make an example of a high profile scapegoat? Maybe he had some or a lot of guilt in some or all of these situations, but I'd like to see something meaningless like a few facts before calling for him to be hanged, literally, or hoping that his family suffers in poverty. And the morons in our society who believe everything that they're told by the media think that people who kill animals are the ones who are cruel.


I'm no moron but I was raised in a hunting camp and I can tell you that a killing an animal outside the area you're permitted to hunt is not an issue of an overzealous game warden. 

Hunters know the rules and regulations, they know where they're allowed to hunt and if they don't, they shouldn't be hunting. 

I don't think he should be hanged but I also don't think he should fly back to the US to avoid facing charges either. If he's as innocent as he claims, I can see no reason why he wouldn't retain the services of a good lawyer and simply fly back and proves his innocence. 

His own statement indicates there was a time when he realized that a mistake was made and that would have been a great time to address the matter with the authorities.

Now that the guide and landowner have been released on bail, I have a feeling we might be hearing a whole other side to the story.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Many US Citizens travel to other countries to shoot exotic animals. I personally do not call this hunting. So this dude hired a guide, paid what they said they wanted, stayed in a legal area to shoot. Got a chance to shoot. It was a poor shot. Members of the guide party located the lion, shot it with a rifle, got the head and hide, hid the tracking collar. 

This wasn't different because it was lured away from a protected area. It was different because it had a name.

Every year millions of hunters head to the woods to shoot deer. No one complains about the evil deer hunters. But no one would shoot Bambi.

Where is the outrage for the so called hunters that shoot wildlife from a platform at a hunting preserve?

The whole industry is dirty, IMHO. But the only thing this dude did that was wrong was that he took a poor shot. The folks that arranged the hunt are the ones he depended upon each step of the way. IMHO, the blame rests with them.


----------



## cfuhrer (Jun 11, 2013)

plowjockey said:


> It's just the same old ridiculous nonsense, of selfish humans.
> 
> Should people be able to hunt? Of course they should.
> 
> ...





basketti said:


> Or as Jimmy Kimmel suggested, get some Viagra





plowjockey said:


> maybe it was a matter of size(or lack thereof), as well.


Why go "below the belt" like that?
Says more about you than the hunters.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Old Vet said:


> It has a connection. You don't want it see that. If you want to trash the dentist you should be against killing a child. Oh I guess Planed Parenthood is a good thing in your mind. After all it was a cat that was killed instead of a child.


Actually I didn't trash him. I said I thought his killing the lion was awful and ALSO the treatment he was getting was wrong too. 

Killing a lion in Aftica and abortion in Morth America have absolutely no connection in any reality


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> It's just the same old ridiculous nonsense, of selfish humans.
> 
> Should people be able to hunt? Of course they should.
> 
> ...


I hear that same sentiment over Brown bears.... but I have had one run in with a brown bear, I have know two folks killed by Browne bears, one teacher mauled by a brown bear, one pastor mauled by a brown bear... and others too that I did not know personally.... so when you have to deal with the reality of these animals your views and position as to persons needing to hunt large prey animals will then be valued by me..... plus the income from these hunts to our state is nice... imagine if new York city had hunts for cockroaches..and outsides coughed up big bucks to solve your issues.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

. . . . . .


Some miss a line


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

wr said:


> I'm no moron but I was raised in a hunting camp and I can tell you that a killing an animal outside the area you're permitted to hunt is not an issue of an overzealous game warden.
> 
> Hunters know the rules and regulations, they know where they're allowed to hunt and if they don't, they shouldn't be hunting.
> 
> ...


Look let's pc this.... maybe it was not illegal hunt but a deviation from regulations hunt...


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

I never understood why people get the warm fuzzies over an animal given a name. This was a lion. Naming it Cecil does not make it a pet. Since there is no mention of a fence being torn down, I assume Cecil could have wandered off the reservation any time and probably just hung around for the free meals. This was clearly a liberal lion, which explains why liberals are upset.:thumb: Seriously, if it turns out hunting laws were broken, fine him accordingly. Otherwise, quit bashing the guy. I'm another one who never understood the idea of a trophy hanging on the wall, but to each his own.


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

Hunting is one of the few activities where your personal moral compass gets a workout. Most of the time there is not anyone to observe your actions, there are no referees in the wild. It's up to you to follow the legal and moral rules when hunting. 

There is a wide range of activities that people call hunting. I don't agree with some of them. I like to walk through the woods hunting grouse, sit in a stand and wait for a deer to happen by, or beat the tall grass in hopes a roster will flush. In all these cases you won't have success unless you are knowledgeable about the target species habitat needs, daily and seasonal movements, and behavior during the season. The concept is known as fair chase. The animal has to have a good chance of outwitting you and getting away. 

This is where this twit fails. Shooting a lion that is semi-tame and has been lured out of a protected area is not fair chase. It seems that he just wants to hang a head on his wall for bragging rights. 

I'd be more likely to believe that he didn't know the lion was semi-tame if he hadn't had a conviction for a game violation before. I would like to see him lose his hunting privileges for several years, both here and abroad too. 

The anti-hunters, that have come out of the woodwork over this issue, don't realize all the good reasons hunting exists. They have a knee jerk reaction to something being killed. The reality is that the wild is a cruel place and most animals don't die of old age.


----------



## LonelyNorthwind (Mar 6, 2010)

Fishindude said:


> I'm guessing we aren't hearing the full story and the.
> "do gooders" are using this as an opportunity to give sport hunting a black eye
> Making a big deal about some lion getting shot over there and meanwhile the local children probably don't even have clean water, adequate food, clothing, etc.
> 
> Don't know the details of this particular case, but I do know that sport hunting in Africa brings a whole lot of badly needed money into desperately poor villages and communities that would struggle to survive without it.


*"do gooders" are using this as an opportunity to give sport hunting a black eye*

In my opinion sport hunting IS a black eye. The puffed up idiots who crawl out from behind their high-rise desks and show up here in Alaska to kill bears so they can hang the hide on their wall make me want to scream. Nothing to be done about it, it's legal but that don't make it right!

*brings a whole lot of badly needed money into desperately poor villages and communities that would struggle to survive without it.*

And that idiotic commonly used excuse for senseless killing makes me sick. Care to show me how killing this lion benefited that community?


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Personally, I only hunt what I eat. I think the hunter was more the victim of unscrupulous guides then a willing participant.

Critics have to remember that many of the conservation projects in Africa are funded by the fees paid by sport hunters. I suggest that if someone really wants to stop it they shut their mouth and open their checkbook.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

The guys black bear charge was trumped up charges as well. For those of you who don't know. Game wardens look for a reason to make examples of folks in many places. Not all. But many. One innocent mistake can get you a charge. Take va. If I go to our little Creek to fish for bass but catch a trout without a stamp, it's a felony. If I'm deer hunting in March, which we can do here, and I shoot a buck that's dropped is antlers thinking is a doe, i can be charged. If this dentist who has tons of money and been hunting his entire life and only has one charge of a game violation, then he is not a criminal and does not purposely break the law. His past speaks to his character in the woods and I believe he is 100% on the up and up.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> This wasn't different because it was lured away from a protected area. It was different because it had a name.
> 
> Every year millions of hunters head to the woods to shoot deer. No one complains about the evil deer hunters. But no one would shoot Bambi.


Shooting a deer is not at all the same as shooting a lion. Deer are prey animals, they multiply quickly, and are (usually) eaten after being killed. Lions are apex predators. Killing apex predators can really screw with an ecosystem. 


Some people think we humans should be allowed to kill whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want. We've already caused several species of animals to go extinct. People are greedy, and don't know when to stop. There need to be rules put in place to preserve the species, and make sure they're around for EVERYONE to enjoy.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Mia Farrow gave out his address on Twitter.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/mia-farrow-tweets-lion-dentists-812061


There is a big brooha over it. It was his business address though. Most people who were upset that she published his address thought that it was his home address.

The poor lion had a GPS around his neck. I think it was the guide's fault even though I don't believe in killing these kinds of beautiful wild animals for sport.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Just a general observation...This is a homesteading board. Don't many, if not most of you, kill some of your own meat?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

I don't see the distinction between trophy hunting and hunting for food. If I shoot a large buck, take him to the processor to be processed for food and keep his head/antlers and hang it from my wall, is that a "trophy hunt" or hunting for food? 

With ethical/legal African hunts, hunters carefully choose the animals that are taken. Most Predator hunters try to pick older animals that are beyond their breeding years. I find this honorable as the alternative is usually a slow death by starvation, or, disease. Prey species are usually the older specimens as well. Most of the meat is used by someone. It feeds the hunters while hunting and local villagers. With LEGAL African hunting, a large portion of trophy fees goes towards conservation. It has been said that the quickest way to remove a species from a country, in Africa, is to outlaw the hunting of that species. Without trophy fee money, game wardens cannot be paid and the animals are left to poachers. Also, without the economic gains for the locals, they see the animals as a burden (eating crops, damage homes, danger to children etc.) instead of an economic benefit. 

Again, I do not wish to kill any apex predator, but, at times, it is a good thing, for the species to take out the older/problem predators so that the species can be protected.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Bellyman said:


> The thing that bothered me the most was that the lion was wearing a collar. I have a hard time thinking that if a hunter were close enough to shoot it with an arrow, he was close enough to realize that the collar was on there. To me, that would have implied that this lion was their version of a family pet.


I thought this, too.....until I looked at pictures of the lion. I can't see a collar in any of the pictures and am guessing that it must have been hidden by his mane.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Cecil having a name isn't the point the point is Cecil is important enough to have a name. 
Well known WITHIN a protected area. Drawing in lots of tourists and their bucks. 
There are reasons Cecil had a name.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

One of the most important parts of a ethical hunt is knowing and abiding by local customs. 
This guy didn't do that. 
Fly in hunters that don't have time for a real hunt are just killers with cash.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> One of the most important parts of a ethical hunt is knowing and abiding by local customs.
> This guy didn't do that.
> Fly in hunters that don't have time for a real hunt are just killers with cash.


I tend to agree.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Killers with cash are important to the local economy.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Jolly said:


> Just a general observation...This is a homesteading board. Don't many, if not most of you, kill some of your own meat?


The difference is, they don't name them first. Once named, an animal earns protected status in the mind of many. It's not uncommon for someone with a few chickens, cows, hogs, etc. to name one or two and then have a hard time butchering them.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Jolly said:


> Just a general observation...This is a homesteading board. Don't many, if not most of you, kill some of your own meat?



I do but that kinda contradicts the idea of skinning, cutting off the head and leaving the meat for the buzzards.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

I hate things that cause unnecessary suffering and believe that we humans have a duty to dispatch our livestock and our hunted game humanely. I don't like what this guy did. On the other hand, this scenario probably has happened countless times in game hunting all over the US when novice hunters take a bad shot. Things happen...nobody wants them to happen, but they probably still do. I would not personally hunt an animal that wasn't going to be food or was not harming my property, but that's apersonal choice.

I see the whole riot it's casing as something that was hyped up to sway public opinion of hunting and probably meat eating in general. We're incrementally becoming this weird earth worshiping society where animal life trumps human life and humans are regarded as parasites of the planet. I don't think many people appreciate where that kind of thought eventually takes us.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Meanwhile, five elephants were killed in Kenya on Monday and their tusks hacked off. Don't see any outrage about that. It's easier to express outrage about a more photogenic animal with a human name than five unknown elephants, who are apparently far more endangered than the lions. I don't condone what this guy has allegedly done and he should be subject to whatever legal consequences he is due but lets get some perspective here.

Where is the same moral internet outrage against China for it's useless consumption of elephant and rhino horns that have a real chance of driving some species to actual extinction?

It's the politically correct squeaky wheel that gets the grease.

The internet monster is a scary beast indeed. Be very careful not to draw it's attention for even the most trivial discretion because it will mercilessly ravage you and those around you. Soon some other issue will draw it's attention away and give it another victim to spew it's venom on until it gets distracted yet again. It sits anonymously behind it's collective computers, it's beady little eyes searching the net for it's next prey then pounces, hissing and spitting, ferociously attacking until it's target is destroyed. It's the Roman mob sitting in the arena with it's thumbs down, reveling in the blood and death, then going home for dinner wrapped in their own tattered moral superiority, desperately hoping that feeding others to the Beast will distract it from noticing their own aroma of guilt.

I don't agree with trophy hunting and this guys seems to have crossed some legal and moral boundaries but it seems we're going around killing ants with a sledgehammer here.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Truckinguy said:


> Meanwhile, five elephants were killed in Kenya on Monday and their tusks hacked off. Don't see any outrage about that. It's easier to express outrage about a more photogenic animal with a human name than five unknown elephants, who are apparently far more endangered than the lions. I don't condone what this guy has allegedly done and he should be subject to whatever legal consequences he is due but lets get some perspective here.
> 
> Where is the same moral internet outrage against China for it's useless consumption of elephant and rhino horns that have a real chance of driving some species to actual extinction?
> 
> ...


I never saw that reported but it is just as bad as what happened to the lion and even worse because there were 5 of them. I read where Cecil had brought in money for locals by charging for his appearances.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

I wonder if the African locals eat lions?
Have heard North American mountain lion is fine eating.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

.............I'd like to see him extradited to S. Africa to stand trial for his crime(s) ! A year or so in prison might give him an attitude adjustment . 
.............Long term , this is going to cost his dental practice lots more than the $50,000 he paid to murder Cecil ! , fordy


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Vahomesteaders said:


> The guys black bear charge was trumped up charges as well. For those of you who don't know. Game wardens look for a reason to make examples of folks in many places. Not all. But many. One innocent mistake can get you a charge. Take va. If I go to our little Creek to fish for bass but catch a trout without a stamp, it's a felony. If I'm deer hunting in March, which we can do here, and I shoot a buck that's dropped is antlers thinking is a doe, i can be charged. If this dentist who has tons of money and been hunting his entire life and only has one charge of a game violation, then he is not a criminal and does not purposely break the law. His past speaks to his character in the woods and I believe he is 100% on the up and up.




Whoa... va that rulings to change period.

If that happens please inform fish and game that it no one's place to determine gender, only one he individual holds the authority to claim gender.

That equality of gender is the law of the land...tell the fact she and game person of the supreme court ruling.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wr said:


> I do but that kinda contradicts the idea of skinning, cutting off the head and leaving the meat for the buzzards.


True, but how many of y'all will eat the meat of a big cat?

:cowboy:

Yep, if you consider a bobcat or a cougar a big cat, I have and still do. I don't know about lion meat, never had it.

How about meat off a wild boar hog? Some tell me the Russian boar meat is good, but I've never had meat off a mature wild boar down here, I could eat.

Next time I shoot one, what should I do with it?


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

gapeach said:


> I never saw that reported but it is just as bad as what happened to the lion and even worse because there were 5 of them. I read where Cecil had brought in money for locals by charging for his appearances.


There was an article in The Washington Post about the elephants. 

It's just upsetting that this incident, as bad as it is, draws so much anger when, in the bigger picture, just happens to be the one that pops up into public view. It would be interesting to see if the people who are spitting on this guy have any more knowledge about it other than what the headlines have been reporting. Are they aware of how many other hunters are out there doing the same thing? Have they done anything before this came to light to improve the situation ie, donate to conservation groups, or did they just see the headlines and jump on the bandwagon? Where will they be when the furor over this dies down and the public moves on to the next thing that captures their attention?

It's not enough to be outraged in the moment and then go back to our business. We have to be engaged in efforts to improve things we feel are wrong before and after something happens.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Jolly said:


> True, but how many of y'all will eat the meat of a big cat?
> 
> :cowboy:
> 
> ...


 A few years ago there was a big stink about some place in New Mexico ( I think) that was going to offer big cat tacos (not sure if it was Lion or Tiger). People, for some reason, were livid about the idea of eating a big cat.


----------



## hippygirl (Apr 3, 2010)

I have NO problem with anyone hunting for food or killing an animal that has caused injury, but for those who hunt purely for "the thrill of the kill"...HUGE problem!

To me, that says a LOT about the character of the man...he simply wants to kill something and I do not want to know him...ever.

This dentist falls squarely into that category, IMO, and he paid $50K JUST so he could do it, so, regardless of whether he knew the lion was protected or not, he's scum in my book.

While I don't think his family should live in squalor because of it, I do think his punishment should have meaning to HIM...and that's his big, fat wallet.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Truckinguy said:


> Meanwhile, five elephants were killed in Kenya on Monday and their tusks hacked off. Don't see any outrage about that. It's easier to express outrage about a more photogenic animal with a human name than five unknown elephants, who are apparently far more endangered than the lions. I don't condone what this guy has allegedly done and he should be subject to whatever legal consequences he is due but lets get some perspective here.
> 
> Where is the same moral internet outrage against China for it's useless consumption of elephant and rhino horns that have a real chance of driving some species to actual extinction?
> 
> ...


I can only speak for myself but I'm pretty vocal about trophy hunting and illegal hunting. 

Folks might also not be aware of a Rhino, who has been named hope. She was tranquilized, her horn and most of her face removed and found near death, although she does seem to be recovering quite nicely now but will have to live her life in a sanctuary. 

Oddly enough, part of the reason the Big 5 Five hunt packages have been allowed is because there was some mistaken notion that if locals could receive payment, it may cut down on poaching but when I researched African hunting guides, I found that none were what I would consider local and locals are typically used for spotters, baiters and camp staff. 

There are international laws in place for importing elephant tusks, rhino horns and gorilla hand ashtrays, which is a beginning but certainly not foolproof but the end result, illegally poaching a lion is not any less illegal than poaching an elephant, rhino or gorilla. 

Having been a guide for years, I remain convinced that guides and hunters who feel it's okay to thumb their nose at rules because it's a little rule or they're special, leave an ugly stain on the industry and to me, one lion represents the very ugly side of that industry that's fueled by egos and cash. 

I can understand not seeing the collar, I can understand making a bad shot, although this is a man who spoke to the press about another hunt and boldly claimed he can 'split a playing card with an arrow at 100 yds and I can understand mistakes were made but if he's prepared to make a statement that he knew a mistake happened, a respectable hunter should have been prepared to take appropriate action. 

I don't condone threatening this man or his family in any way nor do I approve of the PETA spectacle on his front lawn but do believe that he should be charged and tried in court because I do believe that poaching an endangered species is something that should be taken seriously.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Through the years of living on the coast of Ga and being in a boating club, we have been to cook-outs where we did not know that the pork barbeque was wild boar until we tried to eat it. It is awful, stringy, wild tasting and tough and had a weird smell. 

We also went to a cookout one night down close to the FL line and black bear was served. It was killed illegally in another state. Some people ate it and raved over it. We didn't. I could not stand the thought of eating Smokey.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Bellyman said:


> I don't care much for the idea of killing for sport. If there were a reason it needed to be done (sickness, starvation, killing people), it's understandable. To stuff and put on display just isn't that kind of reason.
> 
> The thing that bothered me the most was that the lion was wearing a collar. I have a hard time thinking that if a hunter were close enough to shoot it with an arrow, he was close enough to realize that the collar was on there. To me, that would have implied that this lion was their version of a family pet.


I'm sure you've seen lots of pictures of Cecil by now.

Have you seen a collar under all that mane?

Let's try to be realistic


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

basketti said:


> So you say. The Zimbabwe authorities say differently. I wonder which of you carries more weight. Hmmmm.....


All the reports I've heard say they have filed no charges against the dentist, and the area he hunted was a legal hunting area.

I've seen no reports that said he took part in luring the lion from the preserve


----------



## newfieannie (Dec 24, 2006)

I thought I heard my son say last night he has had to go into hiding. the great hunter has become the hunted. ~Georgia


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I have NO problem with anyone hunting for food or killing an animal that has caused injury, but for those who hunt purely for "the thrill of the kill"...HUGE problem!


If there is a hunting season for a species, it's because the populations need to be controlled. It's not done "for a thrill" and someone needs to do it. If it can also bring in some income, that's a fringe benefit.

Those license fees are what pay for the wildlife management that benefits every person and every species

Who do you think bought and paid for all the wildlife refuges in the US?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Was this a famous lion?
Lions get shot all the time, what's special about this one?
Honestly, I've never heard of Cecil the Lion


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Jolly said:


> True, but how many of y'all will eat the meat of a big cat?
> 
> :cowboy:
> 
> ...


I can't speak for lion either but I can say that I have eaten cougar and it was pretty darned tasty. 

Outside of humane reasons, I strongly believe that if someone is prepared to kill an animal, they'd best be prepared to eat it. I personally find that moose meat is either quite nice or has an odd pine needle taste and since I can't tell before it's in my freezer, I error on the side of caution and just don't hunt moose anymore.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If there is a hunting season for a species, it's because the populations need to be controlled. It's not done "for a thrill" and someone needs to do it. If it can also bring in some income, that's a fringe benefit.
> 
> Those license fees are what pay for the wildlife management that benefits every person and every species
> 
> Who do you think bought and paid for all the wildlife refuges in the US?


Exactly
Hunters do more good, and environmentalists bathed in ignorance do the most harm it seems.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> All the reports I've heard say they have filed no charges against the dentist, and the area he hunted was a legal hunting area.
> 
> I've seen no reports that said he took part in luring the lion from the preserve


I may be just as misinformed as everyone else but it is my understanding that the landowner where the lion was killed did not have a legal permit for lion. 

I did read that Zimbabwe officials were trying to locate the hunter but that could be because they'd like to charge him or it could be because they'd like a statement that may affect the charges they have laid against the guide and the landowner.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

QUOTE "I don't condone threatening this man or his family in any way nor do I approve of the PETA spectacle on his front lawn but do believe that he should be charged and tried in court because I do believe that poaching an endangered species is something that should be taken seriously."

I want to know if you condone the legal shooting of a Lion that he had a permit to shoot in an area where hunting is legal? Secondly, how does poaching an endangered species get drug into this conversation, since it was neither?

If a land owner grants hunting permission to a hunter, then later it is discovered that the land owner lied, is it the hunter's fault? (if infact the land owner didn't have a permit).

We are so wrapped up in emotion over Cecil, we forget there isn't any well defined laws or regulations in many third world countries. More kickback than justice.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

In most African countries, tags for predators are issued to landowners who can then sell them to hunters. I don't know if the Dentist was aware of the poor sportsmanship of luring the lion off of the reserve. (baiting is legal in most areas of Africa, but, my understanding is that they drove onto the reserve and led the lion out. That is a no-no.) Hunting lions is legal in many parts of Africa, they are not endangered. The jobs produced by these "evil rich hunters" is a boon for the locals. You have cooks, trackers, and other service personnel who rely on hunting for their livelihood. That doesn't even count the hotel industry, local craftsmen etc. who depend on those rich Dentists for their paychecks. Government coffers are also aided by the hunting industry. The fees for gun imports, game tags, hotel taxes, etc. are not cheap and go towards needed infrastructure for poor countries and the hiring of game wardens to protect the resource.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wr said:


> I can't speak for lion either but I can say that I have eaten cougar and it was pretty darned tasty.
> 
> Outside of humane reasons, I strongly believe that if someone is prepared to kill an animal, they'd best be prepared to eat it. I personally find that moose meat is either quite nice or has an odd pine needle taste and since I can't tell before it's in my freezer, I error on the side of caution and just don't hunt moose anymore.


Well, now I'll have to scratch moose off my list, unless I can hunt where there are very few pine trees...


----------



## Bellyman (Jul 6, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I'm sure you've seen lots of pictures of Cecil by now.
> 
> Have you seen a collar under all that mane?
> 
> Let's try to be realistic


Sorry, Bearfootfarm,

When I posted the earlier post, I had not seen much in the way of pictures. EXCUSE ME!! There have been details that have come more to light since then. So the hunter was not able to see the collar. I'd bet a box of doughnuts the guide knew full well that collar was on there before anyone took the first shot.

I still don't like killing purely for sport and I'm not going to apologize for that.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

haypoint said:


> QUOTE "I don't condone threatening this man or his family in any way nor do I approve of the PETA spectacle on his front lawn but do believe that he should be charged and tried in court because I do believe that poaching an endangered species is something that should be taken seriously."
> 
> I want to know if you condone the legal shooting of a Lion that he had a permit to shoot in an area where hunting is legal? Secondly, how does poaching an endangered species get drug into this conversation, since it was neither?
> 
> ...


If one lacks the proper permits the industry itself considers it poaching and I believe the law does as well but if a guide is involved, the responsibility lies with them.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

gapeach said:


> Through the years of living on the coast of Ga and being in a boating club, we have been to cook-outs where we did not know that the pork barbeque was wild boar until we tried to eat it. It is awful, stringy, wild tasting and tough and had a weird smell.
> 
> We also went to a cookout one night down close to the FL line and black bear was served. It was killed illegally in another state. Some people ate it and raved over it. We didn't. I could not stand the thought of eating Smokey.


Weird smell huh. That's a nice way of putting it. I think I would rather eat a skunk than a Russian boar. Once when I was hungry I took one a man gave me. When I started skinning it out the smell was awful. I almost went vegan. now a sow is another story.

With hogs being cheap I'll just buy one that's tame.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> Killers with cash are important to the local economy.


Take a look at this site. "All told, Walter Palmer allegedly paid $50,000 to hunt the lion, according to Zimbabwean conservationists. But that pales in comparison to the $1 million each animal could potentially be worth over their lifespan if tourism were expanded, Rodrigues added."

That $50,000 went to the landowner and the operator. If the animals are kept around for tourists, it's much more stimulating to the local economy.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

gapeach said:


> Through the years of living on the coast of Ga and being in a boating club, we have been to cook-outs where we did not know that the pork barbeque was wild boar until we tried to eat it. It is awful, stringy, wild tasting and tough and had a weird smell.
> 
> We also went to a cookout one night down close to the FL line and black bear was served. It was killed illegally in another state. Some people ate it and raved over it. We didn't. I could not stand the thought of eating Smokey.


 
Be glad you didn't see it after it was skinned 
A skinned bear looks like a huge baby.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

This is not the last lion on earth..... check out the zoos...

What is it about cats big or small that gets folks so emotional.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If there is a hunting season for a species, it's because the populations need to be controlled. It's not done "for a thrill" and someone needs to do it. If it can also bring in some income, that's a fringe benefit.
> 
> Those license fees are what pay for the wildlife management that benefits every person and every species
> 
> Who do you think bought and paid for all the wildlife refuges in the US?



NO

Yes 

NO. 
Often a kind of rare species has hunts available as a income item. 

Most of the land in wildlife refuges came out of the general fund. 
Just look up the Louisiana and Alaska purchases to learn more.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Cornhusker said:


> Was this a famous lion?
> 
> Lions get shot all the time, what's special about this one?
> 
> Honestly, I've never heard of Cecil the Lion



Yes , perhaps the most photographed wild lion. 
Although wild is a bit iffy cause he has been described as the nations pet.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

AmericanStand said:


> Yes , perhaps the most photographed wild lion.
> Although wild is a bit iffy cause he has been did robed as the nations pet.


That makes it even worse. 

Thinking of a skinned bear looking like a big baby is just pitiful.

I am too much of an animal lover to ever hunt but I don't begrudge others if you eat your kill just like we eat the fish,crabs,shrimp that we catch.
My husband, thankfully, is just like me and could never kill an animal for sport. He never hunted in his life.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

kasilofhome said:


> This is not the last lion on earth..... check out the zoos...
> 
> What is it about cats big or small that gets folks so emotional.


In this case I don't think it's about it being a cat. I think it's all about how underhanded and illegal it was, all for the sake of money being paid out to people who had no right to it, and paid by somebody with a blood lust. And very importantly, maybe most importantly, it's because so many people disapprove of other people who kill animals just for fun and they disapprove of the agencies that promote killing animals for fun. People who kill animals for fun are sick with a mental illness and their actions and motivation for it is just one step down from people killing other people for fun. People who promote and profit from that kind of behaviour (killing for fun) have something wrong with them too.

You say he's not the last lion on earth and that's true. However, in this case there is also the fact that Cecil is dead and his cubs who carry his genes will now all be killed by other nomadic male lions who come in to take over Cecil's pride of lionesses. Other male lions won't permit Cecil's male progeny to exist and they might also kill juvenile females of his line in order to exterminate the line. That is what lions do. So although he wasn't the last lion on earth this event now puts an end to Cecil's unique line. Nobody can say that Cecil and his line was not unique.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I do not know the future... I do see that you see potential of what may...might happen as reality.

Perhaps.... Cecil as the king lion you state he was..... killed off other offspring of his rivals...so we're there too many lions in the territory?

Could this be a blessing.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

kasilofhome said:


> I do not know the future... I do see that you see potential of what may...might happen as reality.
> 
> *Perhaps.... Cecil as the king lion you state he was..... killed off other offspring of his rivals...so we're there too many lions in the territory?*
> 
> Could this be a blessing.


No.

Cecil was the only king and protector of his own pride and territory. That means he stopped other male rivals from invading his territory and attempting to steal or impregnate his females. That means that none of the babies of his female pride would have been offspring of any other males. They would all have been Cecil's progeny. 

However, if per chance another rival male did somehow manage to sneak past Cecil and impregnate one of Cecil's females, Cecil definitely would have killed the rival's cubs once they were born.

There were not too many rivals in Cecil's own territory and Cecil would not have had a need to invade the territories of other prides to kill rival's offspring. He already had a pride and territory of his own to protect and would not leave them alone to go killing other lion's offspring.

Now Cecil's pride is left undefended and open for other male lions (nomadic bachelors) to take over his territory and kill all of Cecil's young progeny.


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

I read a little while ago that the US Fish and Wildlife have opened a case but are unable to find Dr. Palmer. He's apparently in hiding. 

I do believe this has been blown out of proportion by social media, but I also believe whoever is responsible for this crime needs to be held accountable.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

cfuhrer said:


> Why go "below the belt" like that?
> Says more about you than the hunters.


Why not and I don't really care, if you are impressed with me or not.

If one feels compelled to be photographed with various animals, ones killed with relative ease - some endangered, presumably to impress others, I really don't know what else to think. Am I supposed to be impressed, or honor him as a "Sportsman"? Didn't it take two days to actually kill the wounded Lion?

It may or may not be legal, but it's totally lame, IMO. A lot of people do things just for the bravado. Maybe you do.

It guess I could brag if I were to beat up an 85 year old man, in a MMA style fist-fight. ( I didn't actually do this)

I'm sure someone would be impressed with my fighting skills.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Meanwhile back at the ranch...

What lion?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/30/us-zimbabwe-wildlife-lion-idUSKCN0Q41VB20150730


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Just a distraction...media might not want too many political or ppl stories even dt news stories are not making them happy.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> This is not the last lion on earth..... check out the zoos...
> 
> What is it about cats big or small that gets folks so emotional.


The number of lions in the wild have apparently fallen from about 260,000 to approximately 30,000 in the past 30 years or so. Although they're not in immediate danger of extinction the numbers are very concerning.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Txsteader said:


> I thought this, too.....until I looked at pictures of the lion. I can't see a collar in any of the pictures and am guessing that it must have been hidden by his mane.


Certainly, the collar would have been difficult or nearly impossible to see in daylight and it is my understanding that lions are hunted at dusk or at dark so it would have been less visible but those involved in baiting him off the preserve would have known that there was a good chance it was a collared animal. 

I researched the guide's company and it's interesting to note that they do specialize in bow hunts, they do not promote any of the big 5 hunts and seem to equally promote photography tours so it would seem odd to me to request a guide who's specialty is outside the realm of your desired hunt. 

If the guide is to be believed, the hunter wanted him to find an extremely large elephant (63+ lbs of ivory each side) to hunt after killing the lion but he declined.


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

Apparently Zimbabwe wants him extradited to stand charges. And, according to the link below, hunting lions with a bow and arrow is illegal there. It's beginning to look like he knew what he did was illegal -- he wasn't just duped by the guides.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...abwe-wants-cecil-the-lions-killer-extradited/


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

I am sitting here wondering what REAL NEWS has happened during the past week that the media/gubbermint doesn't want us to focus on....


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Cabin Fever said:


> I am sitting here wondering what REAL NEWS has happened during the past week that the media/gubbermint doesn't want us to focus on....


It is real news. The fact that you are disinterested in it doesn't mean that others aren't interested. There are plenty of other news items being discussed on GC and elsewhere. Maybe you could start a new thread.

Why try to stifle a thread because the subject bores you?


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

Cabin Fever said:


> I am sitting here wondering what REAL NEWS has happened during the past week that the media/gubbermint doesn't want us to focus on....


This comment seems to get trotted out every time anything happens that captures the public's interest.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> Just a distraction...media might not want too many political or ppl stories even dt news stories are not making them happy.


For real?

Mike Vic was involved in _dog fighting_, something done nearly everywhere on earth.

The public - Right and left, flipped out for weeks.

We argued about shooting a dying white rhino, under similar circumstances, here not that long ago.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Just read a news clip that Jericho, the new dominant lion in Cecil's pride has been shot and killed also by an illegal hunter.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

basketti said:


> Just read a news clip that Jericho, the new dominant lion in Cecil's pride has been shot and killed.


Jericho was Cecil's brother. Yesterday Jericho was reported to have been protecting Cecil's cubs from other males. Now just today Jericho has been illegally shot and killed by poachers. So that's Cecil and his brother Jericho killed now, and likely Cecil's cubs have no other protectors now.

The entire story, all the circumstances and all actors involved in it, reads like a dramatic, bloody, gory, conspiratorial soap opera on TV. It would be entertaining if it weren't so tragic and so true.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/01/world/cecil-the-lion-brother-jericho-illegally-killed/


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

It's just so sad. Apparently Jericho was killed on the nature preserve. You'd think the Zimbabwe officials would have been monitoring the pride a bit better than this. Especially since the fate of Cecil's cubs was in jeopardy. Jericho was apparently protecting Cecil's cubs. Now two lines of cubs are at risk. There are times I really get disgusted about the human race.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Jericho..... collar is on the move... 

Story highlights
A researcher says Jericho seems alive based on movements of lion's GPS collar
But a park official earlier told CNN that a hunter illegally killed Jericho
Jericho was considered to be caring for the cubs of Cecil, also killed illegally in a hunt

Copies from Fenwick link post 102.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

The same problem is occurring right here in North America with grizzlies. There are now only the same amount of grizzlies left in North America as there are lions in Africa.

Greed, blood lust and a desire to keep pushing nature out of the way is big business.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Please define what a grizzly is.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

Why ..... ?


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Because.... people confuse brown bears with grizzly bears.... I have more fill of brown bears.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Cornhusker said:


> Was this a famous lion?
> *Lions get shot all the time*, *what's special about this one?*
> Honestly, I've never heard of Cecil the Lion


They sure do! That's the problem here.

People are upset because they can't understand why someone, has to have their picture taken with a rare wild animal, they just had to kill (or in this case wound, not even mortally) , so they could brag to their friends, cut off its head and put it on their wall.

and _they_ are out of touch with reality. 





> In 1975 there was an estimated 250,000 lions in Africa, yet today the continent wide population stands at a mere 25 &#8211; 30,000 individuals. This staggering *80-90% decline* combines with the fragmentation and isolation of those remaining sub-populations with little long-term viability.
> Recent studies have shown lions exist in 67 areas across the continent; but only 9 countries have at least 1000 individuals and 5 countries are thought to have lost their populations entirely since 2002


http://worldlionday.com/african-lion/


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Jolly said:


> Just a general observation...This is a homesteading board. Don't many, if not most of you, kill some of your own meat?


I hunt and eat deer, but IMO, "hunting" lions (which means a guide, takes you right to one, for you to kill), is just ridiculous.

And yes, the "culling out the old ones" excuse is just as silly, IMO. 90% of the lions are gone.

Are there "too many" of them still walking around, that we can't just let die of old age?


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

kasilofhome said:


> Please define what a grizzly is.


With you living in Alaska, I'm surprised you don't know as that is a primary habitat for them. They are a subspecies of brown bear, and only about 1000 of them left in the wild in the lower 48, but are apparently more plentiful in Alaska and Canada. 

Here's a decent explanation from National Geographic:



> The grizzly bear is a North American subspecies of the brown bear.
> These awe-inspiring giants tend to be solitary animals&#8212;with the exception of females and their cubs&#8212;but at times they do congregate. Dramatic gatherings of grizzly bears can be seen at prime Alaskan fishing spots when the salmon run upstream for summer spawning. In this season, dozens of bears may gather to feast on the fish, craving fats that will sustain them through the long winter ahead.
> Brown bears dig dens for winter hibernation, often holing up in a suitable-looking hillside. Females give birth during this winter rest and their offspring are often twins.
> Grizzly bears are powerful, top-of-the-food-chain predators, yet much of their diet consists of nuts, berries, fruit, leaves, and roots. Bears also eat other animals, from rodents to moose.
> ...


http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/grizzly-bear/


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

There is no difference between a brown and a grizzly. 
A grizzly IS a brown.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

AmericanStand said:


> There is no difference between a brown and a grizzly.
> A grizzly IS a brown.


All Grizzlies are Browns, but not all Browns are Grizzlies.
They are the same species, but Grizzlies are currently considered to be a subspecies of Browns. Like Kodiaks are.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

kasilofhome said:


> Because.... people confuse brown bears with grizzly bears.... I have more fill of brown bears.


Okay that's a good point, a lot of people don't realize that there are *10* types of brown bear/grizzly in North America. In Alaska, BC and Yukon there are 5 species or sub-species of brown bear/grizzly but in most places except Alaska they are all commonly called grizzly because they are all still members of the one species of bear known overall as the grizzly bear. There is a subspecies of grizzly/brown bear in Siberia too. 

Where you are on the coast of Alaska you have the coastal fish eating brown grizzly bears officially called Ursus arctos and the Alaskan locals just call them 'brown bears'. Also in Alaska and other parts of North America the inland and alpine mountain foraging grizzly bears are officially Ursus horribilis and they're a bit smaller because of the more restricted diet and from having less protein in their diet. The isolated Kodiak grizzly, Ursus middendorffi, is restricted to the Kodiak islands and they are the largest and longest bodied of all grizzlies because they have so much meat protein in their diet. Then there's a couple of other northern grizzlies in Alaska that are sub-species because of their locations. There are 10 brown bear/grizzly species and sub-species in North America all the way from the Arctic down to Mexico, mostly found in the more western regions of the continent. With all of them their numbers are limited.

Anyway I don't want to list them all and their habitats and dietary habits but this site lists all bears of the world and if you scroll down to where it says Brown Bear it has the names and information about all the brown bear/grizzly species and sub-species in North America as well as other parts of the world.

http://www.bearsoftheworld.net/bear_classification.asp

PS - not all grizzlies are brown. Depending on their location and diet they range in colours, including white, blonde, silver, gold, amber, dark brown, black and brown, etc.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Actually there are about 21,000 lions in Africa and only about 1,800 grizzlys in the continental 48 states. 
http://www.defenders.org/african-lion/basic-facts
http://www.defenders.org/grizzly-bear/basic-facts

Both very sad since many are killed simply for sport or trophies.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Fennick said:


> Okay that's a good point, a lot of people don't realize that there are *10* types of brown bear/grizzly in North America. In Alaska, BC and Yukon there are 5 species or sub-species of brown bear/grizzly but in most places except Alaska they are all commonly called grizzly because they are all still members of the one species of bear known overall as the grizzly bear. There is a subspecies of grizzly/brown bear in Siberia too.
> 
> Where you are on the coast of Alaska you have the coastal fish eating brown grizzly bears officially called Ursus arctos and the Alaskan locals just call them 'brown bears'. Also in Alaska and other parts of North America the inland and alpine mountain foraging grizzly bears are officially Ursus horribilis and they're a bit smaller because of the more restricted diet and from having less protein in their diet. The isolated Kodiak grizzly, Ursus middendorffi, is restricted to the Kodiak islands and they are the largest and longest bodied of all grizzlies because they have so much meat protein in their diet. Then there's a couple of other northern grizzlies in Alaska that are sub-species because of their locations. There are 10 brown bear/grizzly species and sub-species in North America all the way from the Arctic down to Mexico, mostly found in the more western regions of the continent. With all of them their numbers are limited.
> 
> ...



We even have Blue bears that are black bears.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

kasilofhome said:


> We even have Blue bears that are black bears.


Yes, they are beautiful. I've seen the silver tipped and blue black bears in Alaska and northern British Columbia, and also seen pictures of the white tundra grizzlies that are on the Alaskan North Slope in the Arctic. 

Here is a picture of a long haired white and blonde tundra grizzly. Very attractive.

http://tolweb.org/onlinecontributors/app?service=external/ViewImageData&sp=29362


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

Danaus29 said:


> Actually there are about 21,000 lions in Africa and only about 1,800 grizzlys in the continental 48 states.
> http://www.defenders.org/african-lion/basic-facts
> http://www.defenders.org/grizzly-bear/basic-facts
> 
> Both very sad since many are killed simply for sport or trophies.


I believe in Alaska there's an estimated 30,000 grizzlies. In Canada there are 20,000 of which 15,000 are in British Columbia, 1,500 in southern Alberta and 3,500 in Yukon.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

There are a lot more bear in remote areas than the lower 48 US. Alaska allows hunting to keep the populations manageable. Sometimes recreation areas have to be closed because of bear activity. 

All I could find listed brown and grizzly populations together, Alaska has about 32,000 bear. About 1,400 are taken by hunters each year. I did find a Defenders of Wildlife site that said about 50,000 brown/grizzly bears live in North America. They don't distinguish between the different subspecies. Pretty good numbers still, but eliminated totally and rarely seen in some areas. Probably the more populated ones.


----------



## newfieannie (Dec 24, 2006)

last I heard Jericho was still alive and well. ~Georgia


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

I read that too. Now there's concern over whether he can adequately defend both prides against other lions wanting to take over Cecil and his territory.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

Zimbabwe is lead by one of the world's worst dictators. The people of Zimbabwe live in abject poverty without clean water, electricity, sewage treatment , medicene, and are starving. 35 quadtrillion Zimbabwe dollars equals one US dollar. But what do Americans focus on? Not the real problems this country is facing. But, the killing on a single Zimbabwe lion that had lived well past its expected lifetime. Shame on us!


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Cabin Fever said:


> Zimbabwe is lead by one of the world's worst dictators. The people of Zimbabwe live in abject poverty without clean water, electricity, sewage treatment , medicene, and are starving. 35 quadtrillion Zimbabwe dollars equals one US dollar. But what do Americans focus on? Not the real problems this country is facing. But, the killing on a single Zimbabwe lion that had lived well past its expected lifetime. Shame on us!


Do you have a link to the threads you've started raising awareness about the terrible conditions in Zimbabwe?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Cabin Fever said:


> Zimbabwe is lead by one of the world's worst dictators. The people of Zimbabwe live in abject poverty without clean water, electricity, sewage treatment , medicene, and are starving. 35 quadtrillion Zimbabwe dollars equals one US dollar. But what do Americans focus on? Not the real problems this country is facing. But, the killing on a single Zimbabwe lion that had lived well past its expected lifetime. Shame on us!



There sure is poverty and the poaching of a lion that injected a great deal of tourism revenue is not going to help the citizens or local economy. 

I'm uncertain why certain members concerns about trophy hunting and illegal poaching leaves you to assume nobody cares about people. 

Trophy hunts have been suspended pending further investigation so perhaps you can explain how poaching this animal has helped the Zimbabwe economy.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

These are some of the facts:

1) The lion was killed illegally.

2) It would seem that the PH and land owner knowingly poached the lion

3) Illegal acts should be punished according to law. 

4) Social media has been shown to be a dangerous beast that can do much damage. 

Something we don't know:

1) Did the dentist know he was poaching? 

That is the question that must be answered. These calls for his head on a pike, or, the destruction of his livelihood are insane. If he knowingly killed this lion illegally, punish him within the law. It is simple.


----------



## Tobster (Feb 24, 2009)

Cabin Fever said:


> Zimbabwe is lead by one of the world's worst dictators. The people of Zimbabwe live in abject poverty without clean water, electricity, sewage treatment , medicene, and are starving. 35 quadtrillion Zimbabwe dollars equals one US dollar. But what do Americans focus on? Not the real problems this country is facing. But, the killing on a single Zimbabwe lion that had lived well past its expected lifetime. Shame on us!


A few more days of the Cecil news cycle is all that remains. By the end of the week, Cecil and the dentist will be relegated to the same level of interest as other news from Zimbabwe.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Well, the Knee jerkers and PETA freaks won a victory. Delta says it will stop shipping "trophies" to the U.S. from Africa. Other major airlines are mulling it over. I weep for the thousands of animals put into danger, from poachers, by this emotion filled, knee jerk reaction.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

Farmerga said:


> Well, the Knee jerkers and PETA freaks won a victory. Delta says it will stop shipping "trophies" to the U.S. from Africa. Other major airlines are mulling it over. *I weep for the thousands of animals put into danger, from poachers, by this emotion filled, knee jerk reaction*.


I don't understand your reasoning, perhaps you can explain it. 

It was announced today that several Airlines have now decided they will no longer be shipping trophies from Africa to several other countries. The airlines are complying with requests and new regulations from African authorities, they are not doing it because of what PETA is demanding. 

What I don't understand is how do you figure the airlines decisions to not ship trophies will now put thousands of animals into danger from poachers? What's the connection?

By the way, just in case you weren't aware of it, multiple thousands of animals in Africa are already in danger from poachers and have been in danger from them for more than 150 years.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Fennick said:


> I don't understand your reasoning, perhaps you can explain it.
> 
> It was announced today that several Airlines have now decided they will no longer be shipping trophies from Africa to several other countries. The airlines are complying with requests and new regulations from African authorities, they are not doing it because of what PETA is demanding.
> 
> ...


I don't believe African authorities are behind the airlines thing unless the U.S. is putting up something the politics's over there want and then it won't abide by it.

The animals over there and anywhere have a value, if the cash from legal hunting stops, and it's large, poaching will have to make up the short fall.

Just in case you were unaware, here's how it works. Lets say you have a cow your going to eat and lets say you here someone who doesn't have cows wants to pay you to come and hunt it with the understanding that they can only take the parts of the animal you can't eat back with them and they are willing to pay you just about as much as you will ever make in 2 life times.

When they leave your belly is full, your pantry is full and you have enough money to treat your family well, all off of the cow you were already going to eat and they killed it for you, which is a big deal.

That's how things work over there. Nothing is wasted and many people employed.

This being the Homesteading forum and that should attract people like a Tom Sawyer or Huck Finn, a deal like described above should be right up our alley. 

You want to pay me how much? Well fine but I get to keep all the eatables. Spit and a hand shake.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

beenaround said:


> I don't believe African authorities are behind the airlines thing unless the U.S. is putting up something the politics's over there want and then it won't abide by it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If an animal has been legally hunted, there should be no reason for airlines to refused to transport trophies but they may have to come up with a way to prove it was legally hunted (perhaps a government seal on shipping container).

Trophy hunting is legal and I have no problem with that but both lions recently killed seemed to lack proper permits and in the case of the latter, the carcass was left to rot. 

As a guide and outfitter, who's friend facilitates African hunts, I also know just how little of that money makes it to the village. Certainly more than the villager had before but they're hired as scouts and the pay is pennies out of that $50,000 payment. The trophy fee goes toward conservation and the greater portion goes to wealthy white African guiding companies.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> If an animal has been legally hunted, there should be no reason for airlines to refused to transport trophies but they may have to come up with a way to prove it was legally hunted (perhaps a government seal on shipping container)


I'm pretty sure there is already extensive documentation required to ship any sort of wild animal parts, and especially those from another country.

I think the airlines are reacting to public pressure more than anything else


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Fennick said:


> I don't understand your reasoning, perhaps you can explain it.
> 
> It was announced today that several Airlines have now decided they will no longer be shipping trophies from Africa to several other countries. The airlines are complying with requests and new regulations from African authorities, they are not doing it because of what PETA is demanding.
> 
> ...


 Trophy fees pay for protection from poachers. If those "evil" rich hunters can't import their legal trophies (The African nations that allow hunting of the Big 5 had nothing to do with this ban) They will not pay the 10's of thousands in trophy fees, which will reduce the amount of money used for game wardens to protect animals from poachers, which will mean death to many more animals.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

wr said:


> There sure is poverty and the poaching of a lion that injected a great deal of tourism revenue is not going to help the citizens or local economy.
> 
> I'm uncertain why certain members concerns about trophy hunting and illegal poaching leaves you to assume nobody cares about people.
> 
> Trophy hunts have been suspended pending further investigation so perhaps you can explain how poaching this animal has helped the Zimbabwe economy.


I think he was commenting on the focus of the gullible American public.
So many nasty things happening in this world and the media is awash in lion murder while ignoring more important stories.
But then, distraction has been the name of the game in recent years.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Cornhusker said:


> I think he was commenting on the focus of the gullible American public.
> So many nasty things happening in this world and the media is awash in lion murder while ignoring more important stories.
> But then, distraction has been the name of the game in recent years.


We all have our interests and while yours may be different than mine, wildlife conservation, including my own continent is mine and perhaps it interests others.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

wr said:


> We all have our interests and while yours may be different than mine, wildlife conservation, including my own continent is mine and perhaps it interests others.


I'm all for wildlife conservation.
Preserving a healthy, sustainable population, including hunting, managing the habitat, etc is all part of that.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

Cornhusker said:


> I think he was commenting on the focus of the gullible American public.
> *So many nasty things happening in this world and the media is awash in lion murder while ignoring more important stories.*
> But then, distraction has been the name of the game in recent years.


I understand your point but there is this too: the media already is awash 24/7 with all the many nasty things happening in the world. There's no escaping from the nastiness and it's never ending, the public is drowning in nasty news. 

It's all important, all that nasty stuff, but sometimes everyone needs a break from it and something different to focus on just for a little while. Even if this distraction is really no less nasty than all the other nasty stuff it is still something different for a change of pace. 

If some individuals want to focus on all the other daily horrible stuff that's their perogative and they should do that but it's not those individuals' perogative to try to control or condemn what captures other peoples' interests for _their_ change of pace.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Just don't forget that wildlife conservation and wildlife habitat creation is funded, mostly, by hunters in this country. Also, in many rural areas of this country, just as in Africa, hunters pour money into the local economies and therefore reduce poaching as a necessity.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> Just don't forget that wildlife conservation and wildlife habitat creation is funded, mostly, by hunters in this country. Also, in many rural areas of this country, just as in Africa, hunters pour money into the local economies and therefore reduce poaching as a necessity.


It's already been stated before that fees hunters pay (in Cecil's case, and likely with others) go to the landowner and the hunting guide. Fees from expanding tourism for others to view those animals would be exponentially more beneficial for the local economy.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

wr said:


> If an animal has been legally hunted, there should be no reason for airlines to refused to transport trophies but they may have to come up with a way to prove it was legally hunted (perhaps a government seal on shipping container).
> 
> Trophy hunting is legal and I have no problem with that but both lions recently killed seemed to lack proper permits and in the case of the latter, the carcass was left to rot.
> 
> As a guide and outfitter, who's friend facilitates African hunts, I also know just how little of that money makes it to the village. Certainly more than the villager had before but they're hired as scouts and the pay is pennies out of that $50,000 payment. The trophy fee goes toward conservation and the greater portion goes to wealthy white African guiding companies.


There is also gratuities to everyone involved, each a kind of set amount. 

I didn't make any racial claims, an African is an African. The money goes to Africans doesn't it? Your envy and hatred is evident.

Baby brother made several trips, his buddy many more. I know what goes on and what the costs are. Both have some very impressive mounts. Last visit with baby brother we ate at his buddies 10 million dollar home. After dinner we went up to the third floor game room where I saw his just finished full male lion mount with a full zebra mount in it's mouth. As we talked in the wing with cape buffalo running down each side he showed me his recent bow kill over there, a 14' long 4' wide crocodile. We had a little fun deciding how it should be mounted, I said it should be a coffee table in front of his big leather sofa.

Later in the week as we sat at a tailgate party while hunting deer his buddy called all excited about some doe he'd just taken and recounted the whole hunt over the phone. 

Trophy hunting is in the eye of the beholder. People here get all lovey over animals till those animals destroy their trophy's/land then they must go and none of them even keep the head much less eat the meat.

Something you don't know about African hunting is the firearm restrictions ON AIRLINES AND IN AFRICA. Restriction are nothing new between us and them when it comes to hunting.

Things are precious over there, if it was left it was left for a purpose. When you hunt game like lions of there you first hunt the bait for the lions.

First time sis inlaw went with baby brother she couldn't sleep a wink, a pride outside the camp make quit a racket. Baby brother laughed as he told the story.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

beenaround said:


> There is also gratuities to everyone involved, each a kind of set amount.
> 
> I didn't make any racial claims, an African is an African. The money goes to Africans doesn't it? Your envy and hatred is evident.


And where, pray tell are you seeing "hatred and envy" in the quoted post? 

If anything, you seem boastful and overly impressed by those with money and your limited association with them.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

http://radiokenai.net/cooper-landing-bear-mauling-victim-identified/

http://radiokenai.net/skilak-bear-mauling-victim-received-non-life-threatening-injuries/


We who live here understand quite well that bears are grossly under counted....


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Tobster said:


> A few more days of the Cecil news cycle is all that remains. By the end of the week, Cecil and the dentist will be relegated to the same level of interest as other news from Zimbabwe.


"Cecil and the Dentist" The next Disney movie.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

The vast majority of animals on the African continent are not celebrities like "Cecil".

The only people, day in and day out, who care enough to protect these nameless critters are the folks who find some economic benefit in doing so, whether that be a non-hunting car-safari operation or a hunting operation (to name the two more common). We can try to force our sense of right and wrong on these people, but their culture and priorities are different from ours and they should be able to run their own lives?

My wife and I recently made a trip to Africa. Aside from the donations to a local school and the $1,500 or so in tips to the various folks involved in the safari, we spend several 10's of thousands of dollars that became a significant source of income for several dozen people, all told.

You don't think those folks will all guard their resource carefully, knowing what revenue it will bring in?

Take away the hunting and people, habitat and the game will suffer.

Yes, there will always be a few idiots who will take the short view (poachers). But they are in the minority and the law will eventually take care of them.


Tim


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

MDKatie said:


> It's already been stated before that fees hunters pay (in Cecil's case, and likely with others) go to the landowner and the hunting guide. Fees from expanding tourism for others to view those animals would be exponentially more beneficial for the local economy.


You are right, if the tourists are paying tens of thousands of dollars and the tourist tours can expand endlessly.:whistlin:

Seems the locals could best judge if there was more money in tours than hunts and act accordingly.
If hunting fees only went to the land owner and guide, the whole community still reaps the benefits. Not like they have off-shore savings accounts like US businessmen.:nono:

Things get pretty wacked out when we try to assign human emotions to animals and apply our moral code to a third world tribe.:shrug:


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Goodwell Nzou N.C.

google this guy and his take on it. When I first saw the guys name I immediately thought of Benjamin Franklin who used to publish articles in his paper under assumed names, one being a Goodwell of sorts, but it looks like the guy is real.

All the help used on the hunts of those I know who have been there were very happy to see them. Some of all the animals taken were eaten by the hunters, prepared by the locals. 

Baby brother was an excellent tracker, he was amazed at how poor he was compared to the trackers there. All the trophy parts are prepared and shipped back by the locals, some finished, some to be finished here. One of the things they did for him was to take the ear of an elephant and paint the big 5 on it, incredible. 

He died a few years ago hunting in Va. We had planned on building his retirement home in Idaho. The home was to be built on the side of a mountain with a large game room sunken. As you entered the home you would walk up to the room down below. A large full mount giraffe was to have it's head reaching over the balcony eating some kind of plant. The year he died we'd gone out to Idaho and purchased 120 acres right next to a 100,000 acre wildlife area on Craig mountain. 

No reason to shoot a giraffe, I think not. 

If you're getting your take on hunting from the media... I don't know what to do for you short of a dope slap.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

There is no reason why regulated hunting AND eco-tourism cannot co-exist and bring in needed money that can be used for local livelihoods and conservation.


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

Farmerga said:


> There is no reason why regulated hunting AND eco-tourism cannot co-exist and bring in needed money that can be used for local livelihoods and conservation.


I agree. The problem with Cecil is he was lured off the preserve and shot illegally, and apparently 20 or so lions have been illegally shot either on the preserve or right next to it over the past several years. I strongly object to poaching. And in this particular case, besides killing an icon, it will negatively affect eco-tourism in this area. That is why I believe the dentist and the so-called guides should fork over a substantial amount of $$. Much more than the $50,000.00 the hunt cost.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by MDKatie View Post
> It's already been stated before that fees hunters pay (in Cecil's case, and likely with others) go to the landowner and the hunting guide. Fees from expanding tourism for others to view those animals would be exponentially more beneficial for the local economy.


Portions of those fees go to the Govt for all the required permits, to the hotels for food and lodging, and to cover the expense of export fees and taxidermist preparations that are included as a part of the hunt.

The hunter only has to worry about showing up and making the kill.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Belfrybat said:


> I agree. The problem with Cecil is he was lured off the preserve and shot illegally, and apparently 20 or so lions have been illegally shot either on the preserve or right next to it over the past several years. I strongly object to poaching. And in this particular case, besides killing an icon, it will negatively affect eco-tourism in this area. That is why I believe the dentist and the so-called guides should fork over a substantial amount of $$. Much more than the $50,000.00 the hunt cost.


Not to split hairs, but if the dentist shot a lion on land where he thought the land owner held a permit, wasn't Cecil shot legally. 

If you have a pet deer eating shelled corn in your back yard and I bring my boss out to my woods, near your property, and I set out a salt block. When my boss shoots the deer you've been feeding, you'll be upset. My baiting the deer onto my property will strain our relationship as neighbors, but I still don't see my boss being guilty of anything.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

:l33t:


Bearfootfarm said:


> Portions of those fees go to the Govt for all the required permits, to the hotels for food and lodging, and to cover the expense of export fees and taxidermist preparations that are included as a part of the hunt.
> 
> The hunter only has to worry about showing up and making the kill.


It's a third world country, bribes are a big part of getting things done. There's no place like home.

Since people are making a big deal over this some people over there who can be in on the take are lining up. If it happens for them they'll take it, if not they'll wait for the next opportunity/ sorry sob. That's all this is, if they can get the states to pony up something, they'll take that too. Really is simple in third world countries, nobodies pretending to be good and everybody knows it. They have "poaching" the people down.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

haypoint said:


> Not to split hairs, but if the dentist shot a lion on land where he thought the land owner held a permit, wasn't Cecil shot legally.
> 
> If you have a pet deer eating shelled corn in your back yard and I bring my boss out to my woods, near your property, and I set out a salt block. When my boss shoots the deer you've been feeding, you'll be upset. My baiting the deer onto my property will strain our relationship as neighbors, but I still don't see my boss being guilty of anything.


If someone is hunting with a guide, the guide would technically be responsible for ensuring the hunt is legal. A competent guide will ensure the weapon is legal and suitable, the required permits are in place and the hunt itself is compliant so I would think it would be very difficult to find the hunter liable for any laws that may have been broken.

I doubt if the hunter will be returned to face charges but I have a funny feeling that if the hunt is found to be illegal, he's likely not going to receive his trophy, which has been confiscated as evidence.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I doubt if the hunter will be returned to face charges but I have a funny feeling that if the hunt is found to be illegal, he's likely not going to receive his trophy, which has been confiscated as evidence.


You're correct that he will never have that trophy, no matter how the case turns out


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

haypoint said:


> Not to split hairs, but if the dentist shot a lion on land where he thought the land owner held a permit, wasn't Cecil shot legally.
> 
> If you have a pet deer eating shelled corn in your back yard and I bring my boss out to my woods, near your property, and I set out a salt block. When my boss shoots the deer you've been feeding, you'll be upset. My baiting the deer onto my property will strain our relationship as neighbors, but I still don't see my boss being guilty of anything.


But you are splitting hairs, as well as comparing apples to oranges because you forgot about something in your imaginary scenario. Paying tourist attraction. Tracking collars.

Make things equal to the real situation (apples to apples) then ask your question.

Your neighbour has a paying tourist attraction with deer wearing collars with tracking devices on them. You bait your neighbour's biggest paying attraction, a big antlered buck wearing a collar, onto your property and your boss kills it. If your boss is complicit with you (the guide) in removing the collar and hiding it then he is just as guilty as you are of committing a crime. And you both have worse troubles than just a _strained relationship_ with your neighbour, you have a law suit on your hands.

There is no way the dentist can say he didn't discover the lion had a collar on it. When the lion was finally dispatched 40 hours later he would have wanted to have his picture taken of him with his mighty black maned kill intact BEFORE it was skinned and decapitated. He'd have to have seen the lion and the collar upon inspection when he went to pose for his photographs before he had his guides do the rest of the dirty work. He can't even say he didn't want to inspect it and have a photograph taken as that would be out of character to his ego and his previous habits. He has posed with all his other big game kills and posted them online, there's no way he'd want to pass up the opportunity to post photos of him and his intact kill of something as unique as a huge, mature black maned lion unless he knew it was an illegal kill.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Fennick said:


> But you are splitting hairs, as well as comparing apples to oranges because you forgot about something in your imaginary scenario. Paying tourist attraction. Tracking collars.
> 
> Make things equal to the real situation (apples to apples) then ask your question.
> 
> Your neighbour has a paying tourist attraction with deer wearing collars with tracking devices on them. You bait your neighbour's collared deer onto your property and your boss kills it. If your boss is complicit with you (the guide) in removing the collar and hiding it then he is just as guilty as you are of committing a crime. And you both have worse troubles than just a _strained relationship_ with your neighbour, you have a law suit on your hands.


I think we are getting closer. Because Cecil's collar was unseen under his beautiful mane, my neighbor's collar has to be unseen, maybe it is a microchip? They aren't my neighbor's collared deer, they are wild deer my neighbor has placed identification on. Big difference. 
My boss shoots the deer, 40 hours later, I find the gut shot mess and finish it off with a bullet in the head. In the process of gutting it out, I discover a microchip and throw it in the gut pile. Not sure if there has been any proof the hunter was aware of the collar after the fact. Sort of too late then anyway, don't you think?

Maybe you and I don't know if the research scientists that placed the tracking collar on Cecil automatically make Cecil off limits to hunting off the Preserve? If you put a pink bow around the deer that come to your feeder, does that make it illegal to shoot a deer with a pink bow, even if I know you put the bow on, when it is on my property? 

You can micro chip deer on your property, you can put bows on deer on your property, you can watch deer on your property, you can sell viewing seats in your back yard, but you don't actually own them. Seems to be the way it is set up in Africa, too. Animals on the preserve are protected from hunters. Animals on adjacent property are fair game. Same as the bison of Yellowstone. When they migrate outside of the national park, they are fair game.

Hey, I'm not in favor of big game hunting. I think it is stupid. I know a family that own a lumber yard and the building has dozens of exotic game mounted. For me, it is just a display that they charge too much for a 2 by 4. But if someone paid for a hunt, hired experts from that area, waited for the guide to get the trophy to them, tracked it down after a faulty shot, it looks like he followed the law. Heartbreaking? Yes. Immoral? Maybe. Illegal? I'm not sure.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

haypoint said:


> ...... You can micro chip deer on your property, you can put bows on deer on your property, you can watch deer on your property, you can sell viewing seats in your back yard, *but you don't actually own them*. ....


Do a search on deer farms and deer farming associations in North America. Lots of people have deer farms, elk farms, bison farms, etc. and there are several associations. The farmers do actually own them. They breed them, brand them, raise them, sell them for meat or sell them to other breeders, charge money for tourists to come see them.

Also, read the last paragraph of my last post - you responded before I finished posting.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Fennick said:


> Do a search on deer farms and deer farming associations in North America. Lots of people have deer farms, elk farms, bison farms, etc. and there are several associations. The farmers do actually own them. They breed them, brand them, raise them, sell them for meat or sell them to other breeders, charge money for tourists to come see them.
> 
> Also, read the last paragraph of my last post - you responded before I finished posting.


Now instead of apples and oranges we get a fruit basket. Fences. Deer farms are fenced. Requirements for Michigan captive deer is 10 feet. Was 8 feet a few years ago. People buy and sell them. They escape, go under, over, through the fence and I can hunt them. They all are required, in Michigan, to have ear tag identification. Cecil was not owned by anyone and was not inside a fence, as far as I can tell.

You are assuming a lot, filling in the blanks that make the hunter guilty. I'm filling in the blanks that make the hunter not guilty of any crime.

I believe he had no part in luring the lion away from the preserve. I believe the hunter, just like 99.9% of the US population, had never heard of Cecil. I believe the guide and perhaps some helpers, tracked down the lion and shot it, without the hunter present. Sure there could have been a photo op with the hunter pretending to have killed this lion. But I didn't read anywhere that the hunter was around when the collar was located or took part in hiding the collar. Besides, the collar isn't proof of ownership. I have not seen that the Conservation Group owns the wildlife. It would have been better that the guide turn over the collar to the research scientists that bought it. 
I guess we need to know if the Conservation Group that makes their money from tours and donations owns the wildlife. I think they don't.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> Not to split hairs, but if the dentist shot a lion on land where he thought the land owner held a permit, wasn't Cecil shot legally.


Is that a question? Will a cop still give you a ticket for speeding if you "thought" the speed limit was higher than it actually was?


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

haypoint said:


> Now instead of apples and oranges we get a fruit basket. Fences. Deer farms are fenced. Requirements for Michigan captive deer is 10 feet. Was 8 feet a few years ago. People buy and sell them. They escape, go under, over, through the fence and I can hunt them. They all are required, in Michigan, to have ear tag identification. Cecil was not owned by anyone and was not inside a fence, as far as I can tell.
> 
> .


 right. If he was all that and more he should've been protected better. I wonder if any reparations were ever awarded for any damages these free roaming pets committed. If it means that much, treat it that way.

Very tired of the one way street people believe exists. I have every intention of doing what I can to make those who released and support the wolf reintroduction pay in court for the blatant disregard for public safety. When that animal depletes it's food source it will move on to cities and towns which it has already begun. This was well known from the beginning and I for one will not spend penny one hunting them till the people offer up a bounty, which they will, again. I some what believe the wolf was reintroduce out of hatred for hunters. These same people who decry man as a hunter have zero problem with the wolf ripping apart other animals and leaving them alive with the guts hanging out to die a slow death. If that isn't blind hate I don't know what it is.

The last wolf killed here in Ohio was documented in Henry Howes history of Ohio (1869), I have the set. The story goes as a man was riding cross a field he saw the wolf, turned his horse round, ran down the wolf and beat it dead against a tree. Why the hate if there was no reason? That's just one story of volumes on the wolf and it character.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

MDKatie said:


> Is that a question? Will a cop still give you a ticket for speeding if you "thought" the speed limit was higher than it actually was?


can you fight it in court if it wasn't a POSTED speed limit? You bet you can and even though the local court may side with the local law we have higher courts that will most likely not. I defended my daughter in something like that. Not only did the higher court over turn it they wrote a scathing letter to the lower court AND rewrote the law the local courts were forced to comply with.

Your stretching them spandex britches pretty tight, it's not the states, it's a third world country. 

Were there even any posted signs there, anything that would tell someone, keep out? I doubt it.

Someone will pay someone and it will be done. That's how things work in third world countries. That's what they care about and would do it again and again if they could, obviously, if things are as close to extinction over there as they say. How do you think the poachers over there get away with it? "Speed" over there and exchange some coin, done deal.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Belfrybat said:


> I agree. The problem with Cecil is he was lured off the preserve and shot illegally, and apparently 20 or so lions have been illegally shot either on the preserve or right next to it over the past several years. I strongly object to poaching. And in this particular case, besides killing an icon, it will negatively affect eco-tourism in this area. That is why I believe the dentist and the so-called guides should fork over a substantial amount of $$. Much more than the $50,000.00 the hunt cost.


 And I agree with that as well. At least with the land owner and PH, they certainly knew better. I am not sure about the Dentist, but, if it is found that he knowingly poached the lion, he should face hefty fines.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

MDKatie said:


> Is that a question? Will a cop still give you a ticket for speeding if you "thought" the speed limit was higher than it actually was?


Yes, a question. "Thought" was in the context of being told something by the land owner that he believed. But it is an interesting distinction. If I thought a girl was past the age of legal consent, but it turns out she wasn't, I'm guilty. If she showed me a drivers license that I thought was real, maybe I'm guilty, maybe not. 

The hunter had every reason to believe everything he paid to do was legal. 

To use your speeding analogy, if someone put up 70 MPH speed limit signs, over top of a 55 MPH sign, would you still get a ticket for driving 70 in a 55, since the legal speed limit was still 55? Seems if you had every reason to believe the speed limit was 70, you wouldn't get a ticket. Right?
I guess the question is how much do diligence does it take to shift responsibility of your actions to those that misled you? If the 70 MPH sign was spray paint on brown cardboard, you'd likely get a ticket. If it closely resembled a real speed limit sign, maybe not. 

I'm thinking that you believe the Cop should still issue the speeding ticket, without regard to the misleading sign. 

I'm sticking with my belief that the guy followed the law, depended upon his guide and the guide broke the law to get paid. The whole trophy hunting thing is a disgusting business that most people didn't give a thought about, until last week.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> To use your speeding analogy, if someone put up 70 MPH speed limit signs, over top of a 55 MPH sign, would you still get a ticket for driving 70 in a 55, since the legal speed limit was still 55? Seems if you had every reason to believe the speed limit was 70, you wouldn't get a ticket. Right?
> I guess the question is how much do diligence does it take to shift responsibility of your actions to those that misled you? If the 70 MPH sign was spray paint on brown cardboard, you'd likely get a ticket. If it closely resembled a real speed limit sign, maybe not.


It'd be more like your passenger saying, "The speed limit is 70", when it actually is 55. Driver gets a ticket. 

Any parties involved in the hunt should be fined, especially the landowner (if he knew they were hunting a lion) and the guides. It's going to be hard to prove if the dentist was told it was legal, or if he knew it wasn't. How do you prove that? I know if I spent $50,000, I'd want to SEE the permit/paperwork before I killed something. Due diligence, and all that.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Let's see if I get this right the hunter claims he didn't know the game preserve was close ?
I have hunted a lot of big game and know a lot of others that do too. 
None of us would consider hunting with in miles of a closed area unless we intended to get those semi tame critters that wander off. 
But to take a top level trophy close to the edge ? We would be looking over our shoulders and. Knowing it wasn't right.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Let's see if I get this right the hunter claims he didn't know the game preserve was close ?
> I have hunted a lot of big game and know a lot of others that do too.
> None of us would consider hunting with in miles of a closed area unless we intended to get those semi tame critters that wander off.
> But to take a top level trophy close to the edge ? We would be looking over our shoulders and. Knowing it wasn't right.


I once owned 400 acres of crop land. I have many friends that own large tracts of land. We all post no trespassing signs. We all have experienced hunters and deer blinds set up 10 feet outside of our property lines. It isn't illegal. It is common.
Thousands of hunters dump apples/carrots/sugar beets in piles to lure deer from their habitat to the tiny parcel these so called hunters have permission to hunt. Multi-million dollar industry. That his bait pile was a dead animal strapped to the back of a Jeep changes the process only a fraction.
You and I have no idea if the animals in the Preserve are tame.
Common to fish down stream from a fish hatchery. People go where they can have success. 
I can't think of one part of Big Game hunting that encourages anything close to sportsmanship. The outrage has been about law breaking and I just don't see it. 
Unless you were repelled by Cabala's multi-million dollar stuffed animal display in their store, I don't think now is the time for you to take up the cause for Cecil.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Let's see if I get this right the hunter claims he didn't know the game preserve was close ?
> I have hunted a lot of big game and know a lot of others that do too.
> 
> *None of us would consider hunting with in miles of a closed area unless we intended to get those semi tame critters that wander off. *
> ...


You're the only person I've ever heard say any such thing in my entire life.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Lol hay point I have a guy that sets up with his feet propped up on my fence and claims he isn't hunting on me. 
Like the dentist he knows what He is doing.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You're the only person I've ever heard say any such thing in my entire life.



So ? You seem to have a very insulated life.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> So ? You seem to have a very insulated life.


No, not at all.

I've been hunting and shooting all my life, and have never heard anything even remotely similar to what you said.

I don't know of anyone who actively "plans" to lure animals out of restricted areas, or who won't hunt "within miles" of such areas.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol hay point I have a guy that sets up with his feet propped up on my fence and claims he isn't hunting on me.
> Like the dentist he knows what He is doing.


Please make this clearer to me.
You are, by the above statement, aware how common it is for hunters to sit on the property where they are allowed to hunt, but be so close to the area where they are not allowed to hunt, that they could put their boot on the fence. Right?
Wouldn't this be to shoot the game that lived on the property where they couldn't hunt?
But, you also said that you and other hunters wouldn't consider such a thing. While I applaud your strong moral compass, I find it hard to believe that no one ever considered setting up a tree stand just outside the corner of someone else's cornfield, over the path from cornfield to swamp? Never, ever?


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> No, not at all.
> 
> I've been hunting and shooting all my life, and have never heard anything even remotely similar to what you said.
> 
> I don't know of anyone who actively "plans" to lure animals out of restricted areas, or who won't hunt "within miles" of such areas.


Baby brother got in on a lease that bordered the Shenandoah National Forest. No one thought anything about what came out of that very protected area. One guy shot a 560# black bear, his wife shot a big buck. 16 guys, $16,000. Someone offered more the next year for the 800 acres.

No one had a problem.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Hay point the point I was trying to make is on a high dollar hunt you know where that line is. 
Exactly. 
For instance in Alaska there are game units with different rules and tags. 
If you are trying for a record book trophy you wanna be darned sure you do it right for the area you are in. The penalties are so draconian you don't hunt in a iffy area where you could lose a gun , plane, truck and home because you were off by a few feet. 
A preserve would be even worse. 
Heck after blowing fifty grand on a hunt I wouldn't wanna lose just the trophy. 

It's a little different when it's a whitetail shot in IL by a neighbor you don't wanna send to jail.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

You need a social studies education, Alaska is very different from a third world country.

Like I said earlier...did you see what the President of S.A. said about the incident? He said ir was a non issue and the hunter basically did nothing wrong. The article then went on to speak of the billions brought into the country by hunters.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

And some countries don't have a problem basing a tourism industries on poor little girls but we don't accept our citizens taking advantage.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> And some countries don't have a problem basing a tourism industries on poor little girls but we don't accept our citizens taking advantage.


Tell us a country where that is *legal* (along with your evidence of course)

All we know for sure about the dentist is he paid $50,000 for a legal hunt, and had no reason to know about "boundaries" of other areas


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> And some countries don't have a problem basing a tourism industries on poor little girls but we don't accept our citizens taking advantage.


While, I'll freely admit that I have not carefully researched this topic, it is my belief that Bangkok is a popular destination for rich Americans seeking child prostitutes. While clearly an apples/oranges comparison, I don't hear any outrage in this country over those little girls and all of the un-named lions, tigers and giraffes. 

A few years ago, a skinny, dirty, collarless pit bull was reported near a hardware store. Animal Control grabbed the stray and took him to the Animal Shelter. State law requires they hold unidentified strays for 4 days. While the clock was ticking, a woman claimed ownership, but failed to come get the dog. She asked some authority to hold the dog for a few weeks. Because of where the dog was found, he was nicknamed âAceâ. Due to some miscommunications, Ace was euthanized, right along with a dozen or so other stray pit bulls. For the next month, it seemed that was all anyone was talking about. The Ace tragedy.
Awhile after that calmed down, two young women, standing in their own front yard, in broad daylight, were abducted, stuffed into a car and went missing. These women were set to testify in an assault hearing. Their bodies were found two weeks later, gunshot to the head.
When I tell people that the news media and most of us care more about a stray pit bull than a teenager, no one will admit to that disparity. But when I ask the name of the stray pit bull that Animal Control euthanized, everyone was quick with âAce!â. But no one knew the names of the human victims. 
My point is that we all act like Cecil is our murdered cousin, when we must admit weâd never heard of him before he was shot. Do you know the name of any of the cops murdered in the last two months? A few might know the names of victims in the mass family slaying in Texas last week. 
As we elevate Cecil we take time, thought and compassion from all the human victims. 
After all this back and forth, we see that the dentist did what every other big game hunter did and will continue to do, except this animal had a tracking collar and a name.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Hay Point I agree with your points except the last paragraph.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Tell us a country where that is *legal* (along with your evidence of course)
> 
> All we know for sure about the dentist is he paid $50,000 for a legal hunt, and had no reason to know about "boundaries" of other areas



Who said it was legal ?

Lol answers both questions.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Who said it was legal ?
> 
> Lol answers both questions.


You said they "don't have a problem with it" which isn't true if it's illegal



> Originally Posted by AmericanStand
> And some countries don't have a problem basing a tourism industries on poor little girls but we don't accept our citizens taking advantage.


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

haypoint said:


> While, I'll freely admit that I have not carefully researched this topic, it is my belief that Bangkok is a popular destination for rich Americans seeking child prostitutes. While clearly an apples/oranges comparison, I don't hear any outrage in this country over those little girls and all of the un-named lions, tigers and giraffes.
> 
> A few years ago, a skinny, dirty, collarless pit bull was reported near a hardware store. Animal Control grabbed the stray and took him to the Animal Shelter. State law requires they hold unidentified strays for 4 days. While the clock was ticking, a woman claimed ownership, but failed to come get the dog. She asked some authority to hold the dog for a few weeks. Because of where the dog was found, he was nicknamed âAceâ. Due to some miscommunications, Ace was euthanized, right along with a dozen or so other stray pit bulls. For the next month, it seemed that was all anyone was talking about. The Ace tragedy.
> Awhile after that calmed down, two young women, standing in their own front yard, in broad daylight, were abducted, stuffed into a car and went missing. These women were set to testify in an assault hearing. Their bodies were found two weeks later, gunshot to the head.
> ...


This is exactly the kind of absolute truth and common sense that the media ignores because the majority of the intellectually bankrupt and emotion guided public refuses to believe. They want a good sob story and they don't let the facts or the search for the truth get in the way of their ignorance or their feelings.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You said they "don't have a problem with it" which isn't true if it's illegal



That is perhaps the silliest most uninformed , least thought through statement I've ever seen on this forum. 

Including some of mine.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Zimbabwe is prosecuting the land owner And seeking extradition of the dentist.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Zimbabwe is prosecuting the land owner And seeking extradition of the dentist.


Cash strapped corrupt nation seeks to fleece American businessman. World wide, fair trials are not the norm.
Extradition as a witness or has the dentist been charged, too?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AmericanStand said:


> Zimbabwe is prosecuting the land owner And seeking extradition of the dentist.



I really can't see the dentist being extradited. I don't think he's totally innocent in all this, it is still the guide and the outfitters obligation to ensure a hunt is legal. 

Hunters pay huge money to ensure that their hunts are compliant.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Will be interesting to see.


----------

