Indians For Guns

Recently, we had quite a few spirited discussions on whether hunting is an acceptable conservation tool .I stumbled upon this wonderfully informative article on Accuratereloading.

The following statistical evidence is gathered from the Selous Game Reserve,Tanzania. Please read and compare the revenue generated by hunters and how it out weighs photo tourism. I am not suggesting that we do away with the latter.I am suggesting that by foregoing the option of controlled hunting altogether,we will lose so much resources that could be used to make the national parks financially viable and true home for wildlife.

http://www.wildlife-programme.gtz.de/wi ... p50-80.pdf



Many amongst us express doubts about why such schemes could not be implemented in India.Please read the following paragraph. Tanzania, much poorer than India, is a success story in Wildlife management.Then why not us?

During the 1980s a rapid increase in poaching led to a significant drop in elephant numbers in the Selous Game Reserve,one of Africa’s oldest and largest protected areas. Since 1987, the Governments of Tanzania and Germany have cooperated there in a joint ‘Selous Conservation Programme’ to rehabilitate the reserve. Other agencies subsequently joined in a seldom-achieved partnership between donors. The programme managed to significantly reduce poaching and enhance management capacity. Income from safari-hunting (90% of the total) and photographic tourism greatly increased.A ‘retention fund scheme’ has been established, whereby half of the income generated remains with the reserve for management and investment purposes (around US$ 1.8 million per annum). Consequently, the reserve stands on its own feet financially, although complementary outside assistance is continuing. Collaborative arrangements with private sector investors have been developed as well as with local authorities and 51 communities in the buffer zones, which now manage their own wildlife areas and have a share in the conservation benefits. This experience of ‘Community-based Conservation’ has largely served as a model for Tanzania’s new wildlife policy, now incorporated into the national Wildlife Act.

I am attaching the PDF file of the article.Please do read and get back with your views.

Best-
Vikram

Hi Vikram,
> What an eye opener - the PDF!
> Zambia took help from Germany - an important point to note.
> Indian Govt. too should get the expertise from Eg. Kruger Park officials and implement a meaningful conservation program.
> Funding should be arranged from MNCs (this would give them the opportunity to exercise their Corporate Social Responsibility)
> Where there is a will - There's a way!
Cheers
Brihacharan

Hunters,ONE TENTH of tourist numbers, contributed far more in fiscal terms,and this money was used gainfully.
Obviously, a camera tourist will not pay 1500USD for a buff.Sanctimony aside, what is important is the revenue generated COULD be used for the Park, not for sending half a dozen toadies and the big man on a trip to China to study urban town planning or some such rot.
So, as Brihacharan says, IT CAN BE DONE,so why not here?
We really dont need MNC's Brihacharan, enough Indian companies feature in the Fortune 500. But a lot of them think CSR stops at adopt a village or adopt a child, so the bleeding heart libs have a field day with the press. been there done that, wore the T shirt

I wish there was a statistic that showed conservation numbers grow too with all that money coming in, a major portion is put towards conservation and showing conservation numbers would only improve our argument.

While the hunter pays through the nose, shelling out the "Trophy Fee" for every animal he shoots with his gun.
The "photo safari" tourist only pays for the boarding, lodging and entry fee. All the shots he takes with the camera are "on the house".
Must say that both (shooting with the camera or with the rifle) are equally enjoyable when getting close to wildlife.

My be your are right Prashant (shooting with the camera or with the rifle) are equally enjoyable when getting close to wildlife,but i enjoy my self with my rifle not with camera.

Baljit

by eljefe » Wed Jun 16, 2010 3:57 pm
So, as Brihacharan says, IT CAN BE DONE,so why not here?
Enough Indian companies feature in the Fortune 500. But a lot of them think CSR stops at adopt a village or adopt a child, so the bleeding heart libs have a field day with the press. been there done that, wore the T shirt.

Hi Eljefe,
> Bulls Eye - Buddy!
> Their apathy turns one's stomach.
> Let's not deny either the photographer or hunter their well intentioed pursuit - the question is are we committed and honest in protecting and conserving what providence has bestowed on us?
> As Chief Seattle rightly said , we are at the threshold of the "End of Civilization & the Beginning of Survival".
Cheers
Brihacharan

Business firms are in the money making business.They are not to work as charities.'Expecting' them to donate money may not make them pay.They can certainly be made to pay for the damage they cause.Convincing them to include ecological/environmental agendas into their corporate responsibility programmes will be a good idea too.

I am still waiting for the replies from our friends who oppose any form of hunting on this subject.


Best-
Vikram