J
John-Melb
Guest
On Mar 21, 9:13 pm, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 21, 8:10 am, Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au
wrote:
**Bollocks. I don't support vicious dictators, like Mugabbe, nor do I
support the shooting of endangered animals, like African elephants.
Borsak does both. And, people like you are just as guilty, because you
support arseholes like Borsak.
Cite these 'double standard', you speak of.
--
Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au
We've had this discussion previously Trevor, and it was demonstrated
then that you're a total tosser who has no bloody idea what you're
waffling about.
Why is it, when it is demonstrated that what you're waffling is
bullshit, do you let it lie for a little while before making the same
irrelevant and totally foolish claims.
Doing so simply demonstrates that not are you completely ignorant
about what your waffling about, but are a complete fool as well.
OH well, I guess there's nothing quite as entertaining as a persistent
idiot.
--------------------------------------
Previously posted -
One of our resident antigun idiots had some rather strong things to
say about the involvement of a certain politician in the CAMPFIRES
Program.
Here is some information I received on the Program.
It's here to serve two purposes to tell people about the CAMPFIRES
Program, and to demonstrate how little Trevor Tosspot actually knows
about what he pontificates about.
=======================================> Conservation hunting; African-style
Shooters and Fishers Party Chairman Robert Borsak, says there is a
lack of understanding in Australia, about the culling of rogue, crop
raiding elephants in Africa, under carefully managed Problem Animal
Control programs.
Mr Borsak, who is also a member of the NSW Parliament, said he was
disappointed at the "political" criticism of his safari trip several
years ago, in which he shot one of these problem elephants.
He posted an account of his trip on a hunting website nearly four
years ago, where it sat without comment or controversy until it was
pointed out to the mainstream metropolitan media, which then decided
to make it an issue.
Mr Borsak said there were some relevant facts that people should be
aware of before they criticised him.
"The first point to make is that elephants are not an endangered
species in southern Africa.
"There are about 100,000 in Zimbabwe alone, where they compete with
subsistence farmers, who survive on an annual income of less than
$100
a year.
"Zimbabwe is an impoverished country, about half the size of New
South
Wales, and most villagers rely on subsistence crops of maize, cotton,
melons, sorghum and in some cases, bananas. You can imagine what
damage a rogue or problem elephant can cause to these crops.
"Elephants also kill many rural Zimbabweans each year, and I have
personally seen the devastation caused by elephants and cape buffalo
to village huts and crops.
"They go into the crops, generally at night, and while the villagers
try to keep guard, and beat pots and pans in an effort to drive them
away, their efforts mostly fail, and indeed if they enrage the
animals, they are often trampled.
"Because of this problem, the authorities in Zimbabwe developed the
local Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources
(CAMPFIRES ) program.
"This program charges international hunters a fee to humanely shoot
the elephants destroying the crops, and then utilising the meat, and
hides of the beasts to fund local projects. Importantly, it should be
noted that hunters do not retain any tusks, hides or meat.
"This unique program helps supports schools, health clinics and
drought relief in the depressed rural provinces in Zimbabwe.
"CAMPFIRES is a perfect example of an indigenous program benefitting
grass roots work in these impoverished communities.
"A Biodiversity Conservation study found that between 1989 and 2006,
CAMPFIRE income, mostly from safari hunting, totalled nearly USD$30
million, of which 52 per cent was allocated specifically to the sub-
district wards and villages for community projects and household
benefits, and to compensate villagers for damage" he said.
Mr Borsak said The IUCN, renowned as the World Conservation Union is
clearly right to suggest that the "challenge facing conservation
organisations in Africa is to become self sufficient by developing
strategies where revenue raised from the sustainable use of rhinos
can
be used to offset their high conservation cost. Successful
conservation of Africa's wildlife cannot be separated from the lives
of its people".
Mr Borsak said the concept has also been supported by New Scientist
Magazine.
"Hunting can be a positive force they say because it provides an
economic motive for maintaining wildlife habitats. "Without hunting,
many of these would be converted to cattle pasture, and there would
be
a rapid loss of wildlife" says Peter Lindsey, a conservation
biologist
at the University of Zimbabwe in Harare."
And in the same edition in the Editorial:
"Sad it may be, but the balance of evidence is that trophy hunting
can
help conserve threatened species and their habitats, so for people
who
care about the fate of wildlife, the real question is not whether to
allow hunting, but how to manage it. Done properly, trophy hunting
can
provide a source of jobs and income, and thus give local communities
a
reason to protect wildlife and habitats that might other-wise be
sacrificed to rural villagers' need to put meat on the table."
Mr Borsak said he was fortunate enough to be able to spend a
significant amount of money to visit Zimbabwe to hunt, and was always
accompanied by a professional guide, who takes him from village to
village to track down the rogue animals causing problems.
"Another factor is that many of the hunts are in tsetse-fly areas,
where the locals cannot keep cattle, and therefore many do not get
protein in the form of meat. The local wildlife however, is immune to
the fly.
"The elephants culled are immediately utilised by the locals
communities, and hundreds of people benefit from the meat. Not only
is
it sound conservation, it is also a humanitarian initiative
"If one puts dollar figures to the immediate benefits to the local
people from these safaris, US$2,550 cash per elephant, goes directly
to the local village, plus the benefit of the elephant meat. The
local
outfitter benefits by nearly US$11,000 to employ up to a dozen local
villagers for each expedition.
"What disappoints me most is that many people have simply attacked me
without even seeking to determine what circumstances were involved in
the culling of a rogue elephant," he said.
"If I have anything to regret, it is perhaps the show of hubris on my
part when reporting the hunt. Hunting these animals is a dangerous
business, and perhaps I should have been more circumspect when I
described the hunt"
"I welcome any reasonable debate on this issue to point out that
rogue
elephants do pose a threat to the local communities and the money
does
not go to Robert Mugabe, but to the local communities most affected
by
the problems," he said.