Hunting is a coward's pastime!

Stubble: While I completely agree with your view on this guy, I doubt that this is going to impact hunting in any serious sort of way. I find that hunters and anti-hunters are very polarized groups and both have tendency to over-exaggerate. The vast majority of people that can make a difference are right in the middle with slight leanings to either end of the spectrum. I doubt that the ambivalent person who doesn't have an opinion is going to be swayed to have a person hanged for poaching a lion because somebody is shrieking that it is the only "justice". Sometimes like with some of our anti-gun control advocates, I wish the pro-hunter crowd would just shut up about the benefits of hunting and weighing in on these types of incidents. The reason why is that we create our own link to this degenerate and it makes it look like we are defending this loser when really poaching and hunting are not related at all. Just my 2 cents...
 
NNsXLVd.jpg

AHAHAHAHA! There's actually an animal communicator?! I though John Edwards was a snake oil salesman but this takes the cake.
 
Of all the news reports I have read, nothing says he was in a no quota area. They do refer to the farmer not having the proper permit and Cecil being lured out of the protected area. (not that they could have reasonably known that only Cecil would go for the bait) I don't believe much of the speculation that's being thrown around as fact in the media anyways. There are people who actually think that Africa is providing accurate details on this. The collar is still a relevant fact as it's part of the investigation.


The collar is irrelevant, there was no lion quota for the area, so killing any lion would have been illegal.

I dislike this poacher, which is what people that illegally kill game animals are, because of all the negative attention that his illegal actions brought upon hunters and hunting in general.
 
I just seen the guide on the news .he says thy have no idea the cat had a collar ,and that the cat was shot just before dark with a arrow so thy left it till morning and then followed up and killed the cat with another arrow the next morning 11 hours after the first shot ..so as we can see more info is coming out slowly and there was nothing said about there being no lion quota ,,,he said thy were both very upset after finding the collar on the cat the next morning after thy had finished the cat ,,,,,Dutch
 
The collar is irrelevant, there was no lion quota for the area, so killing any lion would have been illegal.



I dislike this poacher, which is what people that illegally kill game animals are, because of all the negative attention that his illegal actions brought upon hunters and hunting in general.

While I agree with your sentiments over poaching, for this hunter to be guilty of a crime he would of had to know the area was closed to lion hunting, that the lion was protected, or he would have had to of persuaded his PH to engage in an illegal hunt. During our safari, I had to take the PH's word for it that we were always within our hunting concession, and that I had a license for any of the animals I took. I assumed the licenses were paid for amongst the bewildering variety of fees I paid, but I never saw them until the end of the hunt. If the PH fooled his client into believing he was indeed on a legal hunt, I have no issue with the client or his actions.

Much has been made of the business that the carcass of an animal was dragged around the boundary of the park to lure the lion out. When hunting cats over bait in Africa, creating scent trails from cover to the bait, by dragging a carcass behind a hunting car is a common practice. The bait is checked from time to time, and if activity is detected, the the hunters enter the blind and begin their vigil. The boundaries between countries in SE Africa are poorly marked, nevermind the boundary between a park and hunting concession, and unless that boundary was marked by a major geological feature like a mountain or a river, it would be hard to know where you were.

Finally we come to the character of the hunter. The fact that he stayed on the trail of this lion for 40 hours after it was wounded speaks to me of his character. There are many hunters who'd have thrown up their hands after a few hours and would have gone off to shoot some Egyptian geese. If he's guilty of knowingly poaching, or of enticing his PH to provide him with a protected animal, I say throw the book at him, but that has yet to be proven.

Guilty or not, I would not send him to Zim for trial, Mad Bob would likely tear out his heart and eat it in order to gain his strength. If there is evidence to support that trial should go forward, that trial should be conducted in a US court.
 
I still do not understand where "coward" comes into the anti hunting argument.

Its got zero relevance.

Just like the rest of their argument, it's founded on emotions.

This was an illegal hunt. It's going to be pretty hard to know if Palmer knew there was no quota or not. But that only matters with respect to his credibility. Bronkhorst and the landowner will have a very difficult time proving that they didn't know there was no quota...if they didn't know then I'm a monkey's uncle. At this point it's impossible to say anything with certainty but the hunt makes us all look bad. But we have to take the opportunity to defend hunting.
 
Any hunter worthy of the name would scoff at shooting a giraffe. They are large animals, easy to spot in open areas, are not hard to get close to (I've done it,) typically non aggressive and the meat isn't in demand. Shooting one presents the same challenge as shooting a domestic cow in a field.

Maybe in high-fenced areas with no predators. In reality they're nothing like domestic cattle.

And you just said that Dogleg wasn't worthy of being called a hunter. That's BS.
 
Amazing how this lion, unknown in North America last week, is suddenly the focus of a multitude with nothing better to do.

If laws were broken, the perpetrator will pay. The world has made it's point and should now move along.
 
A portion of the world is war torn.

Many people have no clean water or food.

Many people have no home.

Yet this takes front and center stage in the world.

It is the flavor of the moment that people can go online and comment and feel like they are doing something and their opinion means something.
 
Maybe in high-fenced areas with no predators. In reality they're nothing like domestic cattle.

And you just said that Dogleg wasn't worthy of being called a hunter. That's BS.
You're damn right I did if he shot a giraffe. I believe in a concept called "fair chase."

There's lots of fair chase opportunity in Africa but giraffes aren't it.
 
While I agree with your sentiments over poaching, for this hunter to be guilty of a crime he would of had to know the area was closed to lion hunting, that the lion was protected, or he would have had to of persuaded his PH to engage in an illegal hunt. During our safari, I had to take the PH's word for it that we were always within our hunting concession, and that I had a license for any of the animals I took. I assumed the licenses were paid for amongst the bewildering variety of fees I paid, but I never saw them until the end of the hunt. If the PH fooled his client into believing he was indeed on a legal hunt, I have no issue with the client or his actions.

Much has been made of the business that the carcass of an animal was dragged around the boundary of the park to lure the lion out. When hunting cats over bait in Africa, creating scent trails from cover to the bait, by dragging a carcass behind a hunting car is a common practice. The bait is checked from time to time, and if activity is detected, the the hunters enter the blind and begin their vigil. The boundaries between countries in SE Africa are poorly marked, nevermind the boundary between a park and hunting concession, and unless that boundary was marked by a major geological feature like a mountain or a river, it would be hard to know where you were.

Finally we come to the character of the hunter. The fact that he stayed on the trail of this lion for 40 hours after it was wounded speaks to me of his character. There are many hunters who'd have thrown up their hands after a few hours and would have gone off to shoot some Egyptian geese. If he's guilty of knowingly poaching, or of enticing his PH to provide him with a protected animal, I say throw the book at him, but that has yet to be proven.

Guilty or not, I would not send him to Zim for trial, Mad Bob would likely tear out his heart and eat it in order to gain his strength. If there is evidence to support that trial should go forward, that trial should be conducted in a US court.

Perhaps the hunter was told that there was a lion permit, and perhaps this is all the fault of the PH who had to know that there was no permit for lion, that doesn't change the fact that the lion was poached. As to who is to be held accountable for the poached lion, the courts will have to decide that. I am thinking that Palmer's previous conviction, which was so similar to this situation, just might have an effect on whether the court believes that he is only a victim in this case. As to where the trial should be held, the lion was killed in Zim, so that is where the trial should be held. If you don't want to risk facing a trial in Zim, then stay out of Zim.
 
Amazing how this lion, unknown in North America last week, is suddenly the focus of a multitude with nothing better to do.
If laws were broken, the perpetrator will pay. The world has made it's point and should now move along.

Cecil was a male African lion who primarily lived in the Hwange National Park in Matabeleland North, Zimbabwe. He was a major attraction at the park and was being studied and tracked by Oxford University as part of a larger study... from wiki and yes I agree this topic has been sensationalized for their personal gain.

None the less this African Lion was part of a study for scientific purposes and also for the benefit of the Hwange National Park and likely has a huge base of tourists who spend much more as a whole than the guy who shot this animal and the few people who made money from the act.

Your right it is time for the world to move along and worry about something else like North Korea or what Bruce Jenner is having for dinner tonight.

The Dentist is certainly getting more than his 20 minutes of fame...has anyone heard what the Safari Club thinks of all of this?

Rob
 
Cecil was a male African lion who primarily lived in the Hwange National Park in Matabeleland North, Zimbabwe. He was a major attraction at the park and was being studied and tracked by Oxford University as part of a larger study... from wiki and yes I agree this topic has been sensationalized for their personal gain.

None the less this African Lion was part of a study for scientific purposes and also for the benefit of the Hwange National Park and likely has a huge base of tourists who spend much more as a whole than the guy who shot this animal and the few people who made money from the act.

Your right it is time for the world to move along and worry about something else like North Korea or what Bruce Jenner is having for dinner tonight.

The Dentist is certainly getting more than his 20 minutes of fame...has anyone heard what the Safari Club thinks of all of this?

Rob

SCI has suspended his membership, until this is settled.
 
Say the term "trophy hunting" and people lose their minds.

I like trophy hunters, they do all the work like stalking, skinning; and I get dinners! It's a good deal.
 
In regards to the collar,the thing that strikes me as odd, is that the people after killing the lion and finding the collar, tried to destroy it.If they regarded this as a legal hunt ,in which all laws were obeyed ,why did they no notify the proper authorities about the kill and the collar?

If one of us were out hunting and obeyed all the laws and say bagged a deer with a collar,would we not let the proper authorities know about it and give them as much detail about the animal as we could, to help in the research and return the expensive tracking collar?
 
Perhaps the hunter was told that there was a lion permit, and perhaps this is all the fault of the PH who had to know that there was no permit for lion, that doesn't change the fact that the lion was poached. As to who is to be held accountable for the poached lion, the courts will have to decide that. I am thinking that Palmer's previous conviction, which was so similar to this situation, just might have an effect on whether the court believes that he is only a victim in this case. As to where the trial should be held, the lion was killed in Zim, so that is where the trial should be held. If you don't want to risk facing a trial in Zim, then stay out of Zim.

If in fact the client believed he was participating in a legal hunt, IMHO he is innocent of poaching, although it appears the lion was poached. I don't know the Zimbabwean hunting concessions well enough to know if the area was open for lion or not. If the area was open for lion, and the client had a tag, and the PH was operating in a concession he had rights to, no law was broken, and its lots of fuss about nothing. If however, the client enticed the PH through financial inducements or by other means, to provide him with a lion in a closed area, then certainly he's a poacher and should pay the price. I do know that over the years dishonest PHs would allow clients to shoot juvenile lions that they passed off to their clients as rare maneless lions. Without exception, adult male lions have manes; the point is that as in every area of human endeavor, there are dishonest people in the professional hunting game.

Okay, Palmer had a conviction for shooting a black bear. If shooting a black rhino is as serious as poaching can get, illegally shooting a black bear is jaywalking. It doesn't make it right, but its not as serious as poaching a CITES animal. What we don't know is the circumstances of that conviction. A pal of mine was charged with a wildlife offense for shooting a caribou a quarter mile inside Area 1 which was closed, while Area 2 was open. He claims the caribou was in Area 2 when he shot it, and it made it well into Area 1 before he dropped it. In those days the line between the two areas was the railway tracks, and they subsequently moved the boundary to the river, but he now has a poaching conviction on his record, but he is no poacher. If that sort of thing is what resulted in Palmer's conviction, its a lot different than intentionally poaching a black bear. There's no need to poach them really, as they are widespread and numerous, but then again, some people poach deer. If however the bear was poached to profit from the sale of gallbladder, that to me is a much more serious crime.

But that doesn't seem to be something that a fellow with the earning potential of a dentist would be involved with, unless he poached lots of bears, made a truckload of money from the sale of gallbladder it, but was only convicted on a single count. That would be something else entirely. But, that would be at odds with the character of a hunter who would stay on the trail of a wounded animal for 40 hours before bringing it to bag. That sort of thing requires perseverance and strength of character, which are traits which tend to be lacking in criminals.

African justice is not analogous to North American justice. There was a young South African PH who was working in our hunting camp who had brought charges against certain individuals for poaching. As it turned out, two of the people he fingered were personal friends of the president of Tanzania. He was hiding out at the hunting camp, because he was in fear for his life, and a warrant had been issued for his arrest for poaching. The safari company was waiting for the opportunity to get him out of the country and back to the RSA. By African standards, Tanzania is modern progressive country; who know what might happen in Zimbabwe; a country still in the grip of Robert Mugabe, who ordered the taking over of white farms by means of rape and murder. As they say, "Once you visited Rhodesia to see the ruins of Zimbabwe, now you visit Zimbabwe to see the ruins of Rhodesia."
 
Okay, Palmer had a conviction for shooting a black bear. If shooting a black rhino is as serious as poaching can get, illegally shooting a black bear is jaywalking. It doesn't make it right, but its not as serious as poaching a CITES animal. What we don't know is the circumstances of that conviction. A pal of mine was charged with a wildlife offense for shooting a caribou a quarter mile inside Area 1 which was closed, while Area 2 was open. He claims the caribou was in Area 2 when he shot it, and it made it well into Area 1 before he dropped it. In those days the line between the two areas was the railway tracks, and they subsequently moved the boundary to the river, but he now has a poaching conviction on his record, but he is no poacher. If that sort of thing is what resulted in Palmer's conviction, its a lot different than intentionally poaching a black bear. There's no need to poach them really, as they are widespread and numerous, but then again, some people poach deer. If however the bear was poached to profit from the sale of gallbladder, that to me is a much more serious crime.

Palmer plead guilty to providing false information to the authorities, when he poached the black bear, which to me is more serious than actually poaching a black bear. If he is willing to lie about poaching a black bear, what else is he willing to lie about?

African justice is not analogous to North American justice. There was a young South African PH who was working in our hunting camp who had brought charges against certain individuals for poaching. As it turned out, two of the people he fingered were personal friends of the president of Tanzania. He was hiding out at the hunting camp, because he was in fear for his life, and a warrant had been issued for his arrest for poaching. The safari company was waiting for the opportunity to get him out of the country and back to the RSA. By African standards, Tanzania is modern progressive country; who know what might happen in Zimbabwe; a country still in the grip of Robert Mugabe, who ordered the taking over of white farms by means of rape and murder. As they say, "Once you visited Rhodesia to see the ruins of Zimbabwe, now you visit Zimbabwe to see the ruins of Rhodesia."

If you don't trust the justice system in Africa, the obvious solution is to stay out of Africa. People choose to go to Africa to hunt, and by doing so, they must accept that they will be subject to the African justice system, as corrupt as it may be.
 
Back
Top Bottom