Petting a lion in South Africa? (page 2 of 10)

Let's drill all the oil wells and mine every possible deposit, cultivate all the land, and cut down all the forests.... That's the Trump-style view of heritage—you're free to think that, and people on this forum are free to believe that biodiversity and remarkable landscapes have an intrinsic value that goes beyond the interests of local stakeholders....

No, I’m not defending the Trump-style view of heritage! But if defending biodiversity means expelling humans from that biodiversity and locking nature (meant for everyone) behind barbed wire, then I say no! It’s true that the Bushmen of the Kalahari were a huge threat to the "environment"!! So why were they expelled? Can you tell me, someone who’s ignorant and dishonest?..www.survivalinternational.org/peoples/bushmen Everywhere I’ve been in the most remote corners of the planet, I’ve seen that where Indigenous peoples live, the "environment" (I don’t like that term) that’s an integral part of their lives is protected. But where they’ve been displaced, evangelized, or stripped of their culture, their "environment" has deteriorated rapidly.

As for safaris, which you don’t seem to like much (that’s your right), it’s a growing economic sector that generates significant economic benefits, especially for local populations when well-managed (I naively believe this is the case in South Africa).

I don’t doubt for a second that it generates huge profits, but after seeing how the Zulus living in villages on the edge of Kruger Park live, I have my doubts about how much of those profits actually reach them! Some might say that some have found jobs in the reserve—that’s possible—but how many others are barely surviving? No means of transport to get to the nearest town! Even in West Africa (without wildlife parks), I’d never seen anything like it!

I’ll refer you to Jane Goodall’s work, who quickly realized she could only protect chimpanzees by finding a win-win model with local populations—today, it’s a success.

We’re not even talking about the same thing anymore... If, as you say, she found a win-win model with the local population, that’s great, but I haven’t gone to check for myself. Some prioritize defending wildlife at all costs by excluding the human populations that have lived among it for millennia—that’s one way of seeing things, but it’s not mine. My priority is defending Indigenous peoples first and their right to live in their natural environment as they always have. On that note, I’ll close the parenthesis and let other members discuss the right and relevance (or not) of petting wild or "domesticated" lions. What strikes me as a bit odd is that apparently, there are people motivated by this "activity"—which seems strange to me (petting or walking with lions)—but curiously, they’re not speaking up. So, for now, everyone seems to agree with the post’s author. Good! I’m done intervening, I promise!

Hi there,

Well, I’m not sure that flying over South Africa for a few weeks with hardly any contact with the Black population (which you even regretted) really gives you a strong enough opinion on the matter.

So I’ll just say that local communities—Zulu or otherwise—genuinely appreciate the creation of parks and reserves. In fact, they’re even asking to be more involved, even to manage ancestral lands, and they do benefit from them. Sure, it doesn’t solve all of South Africa’s unemployment issues, but it does help.

I’m saying this because by May, I’ll have made over 15 trips to the region. I’ve had a few conversations with locals—so much so that I’ve decided to learn Zulu to move beyond the typical European tourist vs. Black South African dynamic (for Afrikaners, my blond hair, blue eyes, and last name are enough… and for English speakers, well, my Franglais does the trick).

It’s your comment about Zulu villages near Kruger that got me thinking…

But we’re getting off topic, we’re getting off topic….

My latest contribution to this thread that has strayed quite far from its starting point, which shouldn’t be controversial.

Once again, you’re mixing up a lot of things. The cause of "indigenous" peoples is a real issue, and I find it a bit much to blame safari-goers for it. The Bushmen and the San in Southern Africa, the Pygmies in Central Africa, or the Sámi in Lapland, or the peoples of the Amazon rainforest, are primarily victims of institutionalized racism in their respective countries, which consider their ways of life obsolete and refuse to take them into account when they conflict with resource exploitation. It’s not really safari-goers but rather mining, logging, and oil companies that harass them. Your source even says so: "In the early 1980s, significant diamond deposits were discovered in the reserve. Shortly afterward, government representatives visited the reserve and told the Bushmen they had to leave because of these deposits on their land."

Now, regarding Kruger. The park is over a century old and was originally a hunting area, not exactly a densely populated region that was emptied of its inhabitants. Of course, there are poor people around the park. Decades of racial segregation don’t disappear overnight, and the tourism industry isn’t meant to employ everyone, but it does create a real ripple effect in the region, which would otherwise be just another peripheral area of the country...

François

I don’t advocate for the destruction of wolves or bears, but I also understand the concerns of livestock farmers

A farmer can change professions without dying. A bear or a wolf can’t...

The disappearance of wildlife and plant life is the result of human exploitation of nature, whether they’ve been local for generations or come from elsewhere.

Finding a balance seems completely utopian, given history shows that animal and plant life have no chance against the predator at the top of the food chain—humans.

I find it quite easy to preach such measures (shrinking human activity zones) when you espouse these ideas from the comfort of an urban living room.

At least I’m consistent with my beliefs.

Only Europeans seem to regret it. I’ve never heard a Moroccan farmer or rancher speak about the issue.

I don’t think only Europeans regret it. Would Moroccans have named their soccer team the Atlas Lions if they didn’t see this animal as a symbol of their country?

Besides, reintroduction studies are being discussed.

Maybe the Atlas lion will one day retrace its ancestors’ steps?🙂

Humans are the leprosy, the cancer of the universe. Animals would be happier without us—except for my cat, who’s convinced I’m his dad.

Humanity is the leprosy, the cancer of the universe. Animals would be happier without us—except for my cat, who’s convinced I’m his dad.

The day will come when animal life, whether domestic or wild, will matter more than human life. For many Indigenous peoples we’ve left to die on the edges of parks, that day is already here.

Why did you name your cat Luke, by the way? Okay, I’ll leave... Anyway, I really liked this discussion... at first.

Your reasoning is flawed from the start. You're separating two things that can't be separated. But from the perspective of a regular at the local pub, we couldn't expect more.

What’s horrifying is that little by little, humans, ever-expanding, are invading animal territories.... the natural balance no longer exists....

I totally agree, it’s truly horrifying! We should forcibly remove all those African populations still encroaching on wild animal territories and restore that natural balance so there’s more space for wildlife—and for tourists eager to photograph animals! We’ve already confined the Maasai in Tanzania, the Bushmen in Botswana and Namibia, and the indigenous people in Kruger, but it’s still not enough! books.google.fr/...20kruger&f=false

Hello,

You misunderstood what I was saying, and I never suggested we should confine people—what a way to stir up controversy where there isn’t any.... The expansion of human territory is primarily due to the establishment of intensive farming and increasingly vast agricultural lands (which benefit the locals very little). As for restoring the natural balance, yes, absolutely.... Not for photographing them, but simply to respect nature’s equilibrium....

Personally, I don’t have any qualms about the subject. Throughout human history, many cultures and civilizations have disappeared—even the most glorious ones—and it’s a natural fact that’s always been the case. Humans can’t be the solution since they’re the problem. We absolutely must protect wildlife if we want this planet to remain livable. The day bees disappear...... A. Einstein

Throughout the history of humanity, many cultures and civilizations have disappeared, even among the most glorious—it’s a natural fact, and it’s always been that way.

A natural fact!

Oh, come on... I think we sometimes give nature a little help.

It’s always been that way

So no reason for things to change!

We must protect wildlife imperatively if we want this planet to remain livable.

Wildlife and nature protectors sometimes forget that it’s Indigenous peoples who have always protected and respected them. Where they still live in harmony with nature, where they haven’t been driven out, evangelized, or stripped of their culture, wildlife isn’t endangered at all.

- "Oh no! The Amazon rainforest is shrinking like a shagreen leather, and this will increase CO₂ levels in the atmosphere!" And then, "The jaguars and freshwater dolphins are going extinct!" - "Yes, but they’re also killing the Indigenous peoples who live there." - "Who cares about them? They just need to adapt. Besides, it’s natural—it’s always been this way. What really matters is the CO₂ levels, the climate change that comes with it, and of course, the animals in that forest. The Jivaro? They’re useless to the planet! We’d be better off relocating them and creating wildlife parks for tourism."

Just a reminder that the original topic was "petting a lion in SA"—good idea or bad idea!

If you want to start a discussion on another topic, feel free.

Last night, France O aired a repeat of one of the many documentaries on this topic.

It showed a farm where lion cubs were made available for visitors to pet and photograph. We then learned that it was possible to organize a hunt with an adult lion for a few thousand euros. And that for roughly the same amount, you could bring home a trophy to decorate your living room.

The interested but nervous visitor was finally reassured about the lack of danger in this hunt. The lion would be drugged beforehand, and the hunt could take place from the safety of a 4x4.

Final scene: the killing of a poor, weak lion lured by a carcass to where the caricature of a hunter was waiting. A magazine emptied blindly, then a suffering animal....

Hi,

Another confirmation of a sad reality...

Thanks

Petting the idea of petting a lion—now there’s one that wouldn’t have crossed the mind of a San. Let’s just say they’re no Mowglis, and storytime around the fire isn’t Disney Channel.

Hi there, What’s truly outrageous is not just the lack of respect for the animal, but the exploitation of people’s good intentions—most of whom genuinely believe this spiel in good faith, even thinking they’re helping. And since they’re not exactly Mufasa, and have watched *The Lion King*, just like I have.

I almost forgot! So glad to hear from you! And live from AFS! !

Just bumping this post...

As many of you are planning your 2019 vacations.

http://www.bloodlions.org/blog/

Same for anything that leads you to a full report.

In English...

https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Harvey_180818_WorkingPaper_PredatorBreedingSA.pdf

Go straight to the conclusion on page 80...

If there are still people who think petting a lion is a good idea, it’s really disheartening! !

Thanks, Michel, for refreshing this post. And what about cheetahs? We’re about to head to South Africa, and I’ve noted some "conservation centers" like Cheetah Outreach, 50 km from Cape Town, and Daniell Cheetah Project west of Addo NP. Could you share your thoughts? Thanks in advance