Contributors to this thread:
HSUS had an operative at SCI
I know some guys that won't be invited back next year!
Be nice the read the article without subscribing.
The HSUS operatives are probably the same guys that bought the hunt with Don Jr.!
You can read the whole thing. Just click the X on the popup and it goes away and the whole article is still there. You can also Google it - the article is in more than one place. I saw it on Yahoo originally.
So, does anyone know if they were actually selling canned lion hunts, despite SCI's stated opposition to it? Or, is this report bogus?
HSCS are bunch of wack jobs, conventions organizers should be on the look out for these things.
That said SCI still doesn't espouse to the tenants of Fair Chase so why is anyone surprised whats at their convention? Hunter support for shooting farmed and pen animals are stain on all of us.
You would think, after getting caught once, sci would have at least prepped their vendors.
I think SCI’s stance on canned hunting doesn’t align with this articles definition. There are dozens and dozens of African hunts that purchase animals for release into bigger enclosures. I’m willing to bet sci statement was in regards to hunting within small enclosures.
Bad publicity but the article was so sensationalized it was cringeworthy. And it kept tying in statements about hunting wild animals with the story of these pen raised lions to blur the lines further.
I am not sure why they felt it was important to state that it was "under cover"...….anybody can walk up to the mounts at these types of shows and take photos. An outfitter displaying any given mount has no way of knowing if the photographer is an animal rights activist or a hardcore hunter....
Hunters don’t need enemies we have each other
Midwest - "The HSUS operatives are probably the same guys that bought the hunt with Don Jr.!"
How timely - on the thread about "Auction for the Hunt with Donald Jr" I mentioned how that hunt might expose them to bad operators trying to trip up the organization or Donald Jr. I was basically told how far fetched of an idea that was. That it basically was a negative position that wouldn't happen. Well, maybe not so far fetched after all. Don't let your guard down, unless you can handle the bad press that goes with it. Bad press costs money to defend; Money that could have gone to an active conservation cause.
What Medicineman said. The doors are open to everybody, it’s a damn convention for Pete’s sake. HSUS is well known among our community to be a bunch of liars who prey on the ignorance of the general public to rake in their money. The word “canned” needs a little more clarification also. If we’re talking about 300 acres, that’s one thing, 30,000 acres is quite another. If you go to Africa to hunt, it’s quite likely that you’re going on a “canned” hunt by HSUS’s definition. It also likely you’ll never see the fence while hunting.
And to Trial’s point, I’ve hunted axis does in a small high fence, (grocery shopping), and javelinas in a 16,000 acre high fence ( saw the fence while coming and going) and never felt “stained” at all. I look at it for what it is: my hunt, my business. IMO, the only time one should feel any shame is if you represent it as something it’s not.
The operatives can probably be linked to BHA as well. The ranks have been infiltrated. Follow the money. Prolly leads back to George Soros to boot........
Is canned hunting and high fenced hunting the same thing?
Myke, my post was alluding to that thread...tongue in cheek. ;-)
HSUS is chasing big money to accomplish their goals. So is the SCI. There are bound to be clashes, but if you focus too much on money, you will compromise your goals somewhere along the line. Too much at stake to be careless. Again, look how far the NRA has fallen chasing money. The non HSUS, non hunting public does not have a positive view of them right now, which threatens their message on the second amendment. SCI needs to be careful to not follow that same path. That is the bottom line.
The story was certainly skewed with "undercover camera" and "critically threatened rhinos" and "polar bear hunt". Each of these parts were sensationalized to catch the reader's attention for 15 seconds.
What the reader won't learn is the mistruths. Undercover camera in a convention open to the public? Come on. The critically threatened rhino is easily explained with an understanding of how the older males that are beyond breeding age are actually a liability to the rhino herds. Polar bears hunts have proven to be sustainable, and don't threaten the species at all. But, it is sad that readers won't learn the truths because most readers won't take the time to research.
Shame on the AP for distributing such a skewed story. That's the core problem is the Associate Press has done such a terrible job in representing the story. The story should have been how SCI screwed up and let in a vendor that they shouldn't have.
AP articles now, in this century, are ALL Op-Eds. They haven't issued an objective story in 20 years, yet the lamestream media continues to publish their articles in the "news" section.
It's a shame the truth does not have the same tactical disposition as deception - particularly on the macro level.
Kind of ironic the HS CEO is named “Kitty” in a lion article :)