Facts Of Animal Hunting Versus Animal Rights.

Africa needs a more legal and fair hunting of wildlife hunting in its natural environments in a sustainable manner, not least, so that the conservation of wildlife and wildlife habitat has any chance of success. The proven long-term successes of South African and Namibian conservation clearly demonstrate that this is the case.
I read carefully the piece by Ian Michler entitled Opinionist Like the fossil fuel industry, trophy hunting is unsustainable. Like almost all his writings on this important subject, he is practically exempt from relevant facts and, most importantly, a practical, tested and proven alternative to just hunting as a key conservation tool.
7
It is full of its usual half-truths, emotions, sarcastic innuendo and simple misery. These tired views of him have been denied by Dr. John Hanks, a former CEO of WWF-Southern Africa and Peace Parks Foundation, as well as by Dr. John Ledger, a former CEO of the Endangered Wildlife Trust, but this does not stop him repeat them nausea
Let me nail my colors to the mast. I am passionate about wildlife and wildlife habitats. I support what keeps them and I oppose what does not. I have spent most of my life of 70 years and not insignificant amounts of my own money, trying to do just that. While I used to be a hunter and, for 20 years, I owned a commercial game ranch, I no longer hunt for a variety of reasons, that we do not need to stop now.
Allow me to provide some empirically determined and scientifically established facts that de-emphasize Mr. Michler's piece:
1 In 1964 a survey of games was conducted in South Africa, as mentioned in the book, Wilding the Farm or Farming the Wild, by Professor Jane Carruthers. The survey found that there were only 557,000 heads of game in the country. When the survey was repeated in 2005, this number had increased to 18.7 million. How? Why? The answer is to hunt as I will explain.
2 In the 1960s, the blue buck and quagga had already become extinct and four other species were still on their heels, namely black wildebeest, bontebok, Cape mountain zebra and white rhinoceros. None of these species amounted to more than 50 in number. Today, everyone has recovered and those who have been hunted more assiduously have recovered better. How have these species recovered and why? The answer again is hunting.
3 In the 1960s there were three hunting ranches in South Africa. Currently, there are more than 9,000 that provide around 21 million hectares of wildlife habitat for wildlife, whether they are game species or not, including birds, insects, rodents, reptiles and small predators, which represents more three times all the land covered by the country. The parks and provincial reserves come together and it has not cost the government a single penny to establish, manage or maintain. How did this happen and why? Once again, the answer is hunting.
4 When hunting was banned in Kenya in 1977 and temporarily closed in Uganda and Tanzania a little later, the demand moved south and, suddenly, the game that farmers had previously eradicated because it competed with its domestic livestock for food and water and it was thought that it spread the disease, it became more valuable than its sheep, goats and cattle, given the money paid by the hunters to hunt them. These same farmers began to reserve land for wildlife because they generated better incomes than their traditional agriculture and, therefore, began the quiet conservationist revolution in South Africa, which spread throughout the country for the benefit of all: people, living environment wild, wildlife and food security. .
5 On the contrary, in Kenya the opposite occurred. In a report published at the end of 2016 by seven Kenyan scientists, they said that since hunting was abolished in 1977:

"Here, we report extreme declines in wildlife and a contemporary increase in the number of animals in the Kenyan grasslands between 1977 and 2016. Our analysis uses data from systematic aerial monitoring surveys collected in grasslands that collectively cover 88% of the land area of ​​Kenya. Our results show that the numbers of wildlife declined on average by 68% between 1977 and 2016. The magnitude of the decline varied among species, but was more extreme (72 ± 88%) and now seriously threatens the viability of the population and the persistence of the wild boar, juvenile kudu, Thomson gazelle, eland, oryx, topi, hartebeest, impala, Grevy's zebra and waterbuck in the grasslands of Kenya. The declines were widespread and occurred in most of the 21 counties of the pastures. Similarly, in the case of wildlife, the number of cattle decreased (25.2%), but the numbers of sheep and goats (76.3%), camels (13.1%) and donkeys (6, 7%) evidently increased in the same period. As a result, the biomass of cattle was 8.1 times higher than that of wildlife in 2011 ± 2013, compared to 3.5 times in 1977 ± 1980 ".
6 According to these scientists, the solution was: "We suggest ... restore the health of pastures, especially through strengthening and investment in communities and private wildlife conservation areas (in other words, hunting and hunting ranches). * in the pastures.
* The parenthesis of the writer.
7 The latest statistics published by the Department of the Environment at the end of last year showed that 6,539 foreign hunters visited the country in 2016 and spent R1.27 billion on daily rates and trophy fees or an average of R215,000 per hunter. This amounts to more than R140,000 per game and does not include additional amounts spent on things like air fares, car rentals, hotels, tips, taxidermy, gifts and visits before and after the hunt, which would probably double the total expense.
8 Free State University estimates that there are some 300,000 domestic hunters, most of whom are meat hunters. They spend, on average, R34,000 each year on items related to hunting and hunting or another R10.02 billion.
9 According to the Wildlife Ranching of South Africa, hunting ranches provide more than 100 000 jobs, which are more abundant, better paid and more skilled than domestic livestock jobs that, for the most part, they replaced.
10 It is the hunters who have financed, directly and indirectly, these economic and conservation benefits that our country has benefited from.
11 It is a conservation model that has worked manifestly and continues to function. It has been tried and tested and the benefits are visible to everyone, including the main beneficiaries, the wildlife habitat and wildlife that matter so much to us. 12 Despite the hundreds of millions of dollars collected each year by Mr. Michler and his fellow travelers, HUSUSes, Petas, IFAWS and the hundreds of other anti-hunting / animal rights organizations that do little or nothing more than Divert funds from true conservation organizations, why have not they bought a hectare of wildlife habitat, nor an animal about to be hunted in Africa, to practice what they preach, to show how this utopia will work in practice, this fossil-free environment? It's because there is no money left after your seagull trips abroad, you know where they are launched from, they shit on the heads of the workers and they come out immediately afterwards, their publicity and public relations campaigns around the world to raise even more Money, your extended lectures on glamorous destinations and your emotional, self-congratulatory, strident propaganda efforts for your unproven and unproven programs?
13 In fact, Mr. Michler, by his own admission, states that he and his fellow travelers have no idea what to do. Write: "It's time to look for more effective and sustainable alternatives." He has been playing this same drum for years and years and years. How much longer do you need to look before you realize that the answer is before him? And while he is looking for things to raise more and more money for his search, while doing nothing but a great reputation and spreading his politically correct propaganda, what should practical conservationists do among us? Prohibition of hunting, the basis on which the proven long-term conservation successes in this continent have been built. Are you waiting for some unproven and untested experiment to occur to you? Really?
14 It is true that the habitats of wildlife and wildlife are under great threat in the whole of Africa because, as the Kenyan scientists themselves have identified, the increase in population, the destruction of habitat, hunting commercial of bushmeat, which the Michlers of this world combine deliberately and inaccurately. Hunting, poor government policies, planning and management, as well as climate change. It is only in countries like South Africa and Namibia with their well-developed hunting communities that wildlife and wildlife habitats are flourishing.
15.1 Two final points to consider; The interior of South Africa consists of the third region of the largest plateau outside of Asia. It is mainly semi-arid and largely unsuitable for crops or domestic livestock. It is neither suitable nor attractive for photographic safaris and yet it is where most of the hunting ranches of South Africa are carried out and, on the contrary, hunting.
15.2 The fastest-growing segment of hunters in North America, which has around 13.4 million hunters growing at 3.4% per year, are young women and men from urban areas of 20 and 30 years, such as Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook. Those who want to take responsibility for the protein their families eat.
16 In conclusion, Africa needs a more legal and fair hunting of wildlife hunting in its natural environments in a sustainable manner, not least, so that the conservation of wildlife and wildlife habitat has any chance of success. The proven long-term successes of South African and Namibian conservation clearly demonstrate that this is the case.