Umbabaat/Ingwelala controversial lion hunt

[Richprins]

More lopsided drivel. Conjecture and witchunt trying to link hunting to illegal trade. It simply isn't, and the bunnyhuggers hardly condescend to mention that hunting leads to conservation and community upliftment and foreign revenue. in this case this one is trying to get round that by suggesting that animals should be photographed instead. Those are two entirely different markets, with different customers.

The proof of the pudding is that the journalists say they know who the hunter is, but don't mention the name. Why not then, if it is such an outrage against humanity?

[Lisbeth]

He is not a journalist, at least I do not think so; he is a blogger. He does present the income from hunting and the one from tourists though The phrase about hunting versus Photographing is rather naiv if not stupid.

The piece is from the 13th June, so rather old.

All voices have the right to be heard

trying to link hunting to illegal trade

In some cases it could be; you cannot know for sure

[Lisbeth]

Umbabat’s beloved lion to become trophy hunters’ targets

BY ADAM CRUISE - 27 JUNE 2018 - IOL NEWS


The possible shooting of a lion, Skye, in the Umbabat reserve in Mpumalanga has caused a furore, with authorities insisting the animal shot wasn’t the much-loved big cat. Picture: Colin Bell/Conservation Action Trust

An extraordinary cat and mouse game is being played out in Mpumalanga over the baiting and shooting of what could be a much-loved Umbabat Reserve pride male lion named Skye.

Since the commercial hunt of the lion on 7 June was discovered, attempts to establish full details from the reserve – which neighbours Kruger National Park – and the Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) has been like squeezing blood out of a stone.

A day after the hunt, an anonymous source disclosed the name of the hunter, the hunt outfitter, the warden who accompanied them and the taxidermist to which the skin was taken. But being a single source without secondary verification, these names are being withheld by journalists.

I was denied permission to view the skin at Life Form Taxidermy in White River by Riaan De Lange of the MTPA which issued the hunting permit. He had instructed the taxidermist not to let anyone see it. His reasoning was that permission to view it was not his or the MTPA’s to give.

“The moment the client pulled the trigger,” he said, “the lion became his property. Consent [to view]can only be given by the client.” But he refused to name the hunter who could give that permission nor explain why MTPA should interfere in a matter between the client and the taxidermist by instructing the taxidermist not to allow sight of the skin.

Journalists have been told that it was ‘an old lion, older that eight years’ but nobody is being allowed to confirm this. Elise Tempelhof of Die Beeld rightly noted that if it was an old, single male, why the secrecy?

De Lange produced a photocopied image of the face of a dead lion that was clearly not Skye, but would not hand it over for further verification. He admitted that he “could show a picture of any dead lion”.

Skye had half the incisors on his lower jaw missing, a scar under his eye and a two very particular scars on his rump, but De Lange said the hunter only had this one picture to go on which did not show the lion’s teeth or the distinctive scars on his rump.

He said the hunting permit included permission to bait the lion, which is not normally allowed, but that it was done to allow the hunter to make sure he and the accompanying professional hunter could identify the correct lion to shoot.

But he added: “It’s pity we didn’t have more pictures,” De Lange told me. “If the hunter had other pictures, then there would be no excuse, but he only had this one, so one can’t blame him if he did shoot Skye.”

This vagueness flies in the face of the Greater Kruger National Park Hunting Protocol which states that ‘reasonable steps should be taken to gain knowledge of the males with pride affiliations and their ages, thereby ensuring that pride males under the age of 8 years are not selected.’ Skye was under eight, so if he was shot it would constitute a permit violation.

De Lange confirmed that the hunting permit was for a single male lion that was not part of a pride, so if the lion was Skye it constitutes another permit violation.

It is completely unclear how baiting and shooting a lion from a hide complies with these Hunting Protocols also state that “hunting should be conducted according to set rules to ensure that the spirit of fair chase is honoured” and “ A fair hunt may be defined as a competition in which the tracking and shooting skills of the hunter are pitched against the evasive abilities of the hunted.”

On the 27th May, before the hunt, the MTPA along with the Brian Haveman, the Umbabat warden, met with the Ingwelala Board to address their concerns that the lion targeted could be Skye. As a pride male, there were fears that his offspring would be killed by a rival male lion should he be killed. The Board was assured they would make every effort not to hunt Skye.

However, the Skye has not been seen since the hunt and one of his cubs was found dead. The Ingwelala Board initially demanded sight of the trophy skin and was refused.

Amid subsequent fall-out over the issue, the chairman and vice-chairman resigned. The new chairman, in a letter to the Ingwelala members, has assured them that the matter will be fully investigated however it is unclear how this is being undertaken, resulting in extreme disatisfaction among members.

In another twist, Umbabat’s warden, Bryan Haveman, as well as the reserve’s vice chairman, Theo Van Wyk, have insisted the lion shot was not Skye but “an elderly male lion that often encroached into the north-eastern section of the Umbabat from the Kruger”.

This means that, even if the dead lion is not Skye, it could be a protected Kruger Park animal. As the senior authority along with the MTPA in the Greater Kruger Hunting Protocol, the Kruger Park has a responsibility to provide a safe haven for South Africa’s iconic wild animals since they are deemed a national heritage.

Dr Paul Funston of the Lion and Cheetah Programme and a director of Panthera, has written that “to be sustainable (achieve stable lion populations and maximum harvests), trophy hunting should harvest lions in southern Africa older than eight years.

The social nature of lions and common use of infanticide means that lion populations are greatly impacted by the loss of males. This may be going on in Umbabat right now.

Read original article: https://www.iol.co.za/news/opinion/umba ... s-15721343

[Lisbeth]

Sheds some light on a few things

[Lisbeth]

KNP Recommendations for hunting in Umbabat PNR, 6 February 2018
BY SANPARKS - 6 FEBRUARY 2018 - LETTER

Animal numbers in APNR reserves, proposed hunting quotas and basis for recommendations with reservations, does not recommend hunting a male lion. Read SANParks-KNP’s letter: KNP Umbabat Comments

[Lisbeth]

Read MTPA’s approval letter for Umbabat PNR hunting proposal, including hunting one male lion:

MTPA approval for Umbabat PNR hunting proposal, 21 February 2018, including one male lion
BY MPUMALANGA TOURISM & PARKS AGENCY - 21 FEBRUARY - LETTER

[Richprins]

Some nice detective work there by Adam!

[Lisbeth]

Skye (Pic: Nadine Dreyer)

Open Letter

Driving nails into the coffin of Safari Club International

By Judy Malone• 28 June 2018

Trophy hunting is not about science, rights or traditions, or about personal choices. It is about right and wrong, good and evil. The self-evident truth is that killing for pleasure and profit is morally wrong.

People around the world are following the search for Skye, the pride male lion who disappeared after a 7 June hunt. There was no such mystery after the killing of Cecil – three years ago next week – in Zimbabwe. We knew the details and identities of those involved immediately, and international headlines appeared within 24 hours. But the hunt industry has since closed ranks, and as journalists beat the bush for information, those who have the answers are withholding them.

The selling of animals to globe-trotting trophy hunters has long been controversial. But Cecil was a turning point, igniting unprecedented outrage.

His killers exposed trophy hunting as the merciless business it has always been and which is now a threat to our planet’s rapidly disappearing wildlife.

Afterwards the hunt industry sought absolution with extravagant conservation claims, including providing an anti-poaching presence, which were not, however, supported by evidence.

These claims began in earnest with a growing need to buy public acceptance. For the first time, professional hunters and their clients were and continue to be under scrutiny. The reality is that wildlife watching has the lion’s share of total tourism revenue in Africa and everywhere else. So it is not only wildlife populations threatened by the killing of the biggest and best, but tourist numbers as well. Many are repelled and angered by the grisly details of hunts circulating in mainstream and social media.

It has been reported that Skye was killed by a Kentucky millionaire. We can guess his identity, but in a way it doesn’t matter. He is a Safari Club International member, and one of a subculture of elites who enjoy killing large numbers of rare big “game” animals.

In one decade, American trophy hunters alone killed 5,552 African lions. From 2005 to 2014, they brought home more than 1.2 million trophies of more than 1,200 different kinds of animals. They compete in killing the most animals for the most rewards, and are avid collectors of victim body parts.

They stage gala award events to celebrate and congratulate. It’s all tax-exemptible guts and glory, and without it does anyone imagine they would be interested in protecting wildlife? If they sincerely want to save species, let them offer the dollars without demanding a life in exchange.

US journalist, author, and prominent Republican Matthew Scully has spent considerable time watching and writing about the SCI, dispelling any idea of it as an environmentally-friendly, conservation-minded organisation. They are coldhearted killers, he tells us, and “respect” means only the courtesy of leaving enough behind for the next hunter. Surveying the stacks of marketing brochures filled with the “pornography of bloodlust” and price lists, he writes:

“You don’t have to be the fainthearted type to take in a scene like Safari Club and feel that something has gone horribly wrong, something involving our own human dignity every bit as much as the animals’.”

Still SCI manages, through intense lobbying and funding, to convince governments everywhere to facilitate what its members do. But it seems lawmakers and even mainstream media are not yet recognising the change in public attitudes towards all nonhuman animals.

We now know much more about the high intelligence and complex social behaviours of lives that parallel our own. Trophy hunting is not about science, rights or traditions, or about personal choices. It is about right and wrong, good and evil. The self-evident truth is that killing for pleasure and profit is morally wrong. It is a crime against nature and opposition across North America is rapidly becoming political.

This week the LA Times editorial read:

“The state of California can’t stop a misguided African government from allowing the hunting of endangered animals in its country. Nor can it stop the US government from permitting the importation of these trophies. But it can discourage such hunting by barring hunters from bringing new trophies to California and keeping them in their homes or elsewhere. This bill would mean no new heads mounted on walls should it be approved.”

In a more direct response to the June hunt, US conservation and welfare groups are now urging the Trump administration to immediately deny import permits for all lion trophies taken near Kruger National Park in the Umbabat Reserve.

Safari Club types largely come from the west; we know them well. Canada is the leading exporter of trophies to the US, ahead of South Africa. We know they are not interested in conserving wildlife except to protect their game. They assuredly do not acknowledge that iconic species are now struggling for survival with intense human-caused pressures on habitat and range movement. But there is no time to wait while we work out our differences. If future generations are ever to live in the same world as wild lions, elephants, giraffes – and all targeted victims the world over – these people must be stopped. Ethics-based approaches to wildlife conservation and co-existence issues must be and are being found.

Tourists Against Trophy Hunting (TATH) is an international lobbying coalition. We are conservationists, journalists, photographers, activists, tourism operators, and tourists, and through member connections reach a global audience in the millions.

We oppose trophy hunting everywhere. One year ago we challenged hunts surrounding Kruger National Park in an Open Letter published in South African media. We now challenge it again. It is appalling that wildlife in a protected park continues to be traumatised by hunting concessions along its boundaries.

The dropping of fences ostensibly to improve both wildlife-watching and offer more room to roam was in reality a cold calculation. SCI hunters in their forums refer glibly to Kruger as the “factory”, reliably turning out their trophies.

Sabi Sands is one model of how to shut these killers out. Umbabat, Timbavati and the other area “game” reserves callously use the fences to profit from both sides. In spite of ongoing challenges to these opportunistic hunts, we see a government that is unresponsive and seemingly indifferent to the fate of African wildlife.

A keynote speaker at the UN World Tourism Organisation recently said it is time for ecotourists to find their voice. We are finding our vice, and our contempt for this pillaging of the world’s wildlife is being heard. TATH joins the urgent call for details and names surrounding the June hunt. We want this killing, along with the murder of Cecil and Xanda and all of the unnamed elephants and lions, bears and wolves, to become another nail in the coffin of Safari Club International.

Judy Malone writes on behalf of Tourists Against Trophy Hunting.

[Richprins]

More hysterical blah blah...

[RogerFraser]

FB Post by john Varty :

John Varty
9 hrs
Open letter to Don Scott: Tanda Tula:
Hello Don, Congratulations on an excellent article, I agree with many of your points.
I am also heavily interested in the Greater Kruger and have a lifetimes work in community and ecotourism.
What your article doesn’t say is what right does Umbabat have to hunt for money a male lion whose territory roams into the Kruger National Park.
This lion is a national asset. It does not belong to Umbabat.
Last year we debated at length whether the Timbavati have the right to shoot a 100 lbs tusk elephant which spends 80% of its time in the Kruger and 20% of its time in Timbavati.
That 100 lbs elephant is a national treasure, the Timbavati has no right to sell it to a professional hunter who is in your park for a week with his American client.
As per your article you live here, the hunter does not. The hunter has no “skin in the game,” so why should he be allowed to destroy a national asset which can be photographed over and over again by the eco tourist guests.
Your article doesn’t say how the money from the death of Skye will benefit the 600 people dependent on Tanda Tula or Motswari.
These employees are dependent on the tourists visiting the lodges where they work. No tourists no jobs.
The eco tourist lodges, to attract the tourist are dependent on the ability to find icon animals for their guests. (I don’t have to tell you; you are the owner of Tanda Tula.)
Therefore, by allowing a hunter, who has no skin in the game, to shoot Skye or a 100 lbs elephant you have removed one of your prime tourist attractions.
Furthermore, you have also broken the agreement with the National Parks Board whose jobs it is to protect these icon animals that are national treasures.
What you have also done is broken the trust that you have built up with your icon animal. For 364 days your guests go out with cameras. Then one day your guest is carrying not a camera but a high powered rifle.
All the trust that has been built up is gone as the wealthy hunter kills for fun your icon animal.
In the early days of Londolozi I tried to run ecotourism and hunting, side by side. They are not compatible.
I suggest that both the Umbabat and Timbavati will learn the hard way that trophy hunting and ecotourism do not mix.
I suggest also that Timbavati and Umbabat who have fine reputations should not engage in the murky world of money, professional hunting and the killing if icon animals by wealthy people for fun. It will catch up with you and taint your reputation.
Rather build your lodges, create jobs, uplift communities and travel the high road.
The world trend is moving steadily against trophy hunting. Visionaries are desperately seeking new ways to partnership with the natural world.
Umbabat and Timbavati try to ride the ecotourist horse which claims to be in a symbiotic relationship with the wildlife but at the same time you ride the trophy hunting horse for profit.
Tread Lightly on the Earth
J.V.
Co-Owner: Londolozi Game reserve
Founder: Londolozi Productions
Founder: Tiger Canyons
Founder: JV Images
Founder: The Campfire Singer