What a Carrie On

BY JOHN NASH

Now that Boris is off, the good news is that Carrie Antoinette, ideologist and patron saint for eco-chuggers and wildlife scammers everywhere, will go with him. Hopefully too, in her expensive designer handbag, she will take with her the pet green, brown-nosed squawky-parrot, George Bloody Useless, Secretary of State for the Total Disregard of Rural People. Between Carrie, the little starry-eyed parrot and the green-wash Golden Boy, Lord Zac, they encouraged eco-larceny to become a national industry, parasites to infest and interfere with every rural industry across our once green and pleasant land, and gave a free pass to vexatious litigants, urban chisellers, tinfoil hat crop and fuel saboteurs, plus gangs of bone-head class war thugs to freeload on the hard work of Britain’s country people, making a tough job so much tougher.      

And, knowing they are/were protected, the parasites really have become very brazen, Dear Reader. In a breath-taking display of international barefaced dishonesty, Dr. Fishvet Jones, Gobbelian liar-in-Chief for that deceptive eco-chugger Born Free, proudly announced that, in a “joint position paper”, released on the 6th July in Brussels:

137 wildlife…. organisations from all around the world, including 45 NGOs from African countries, have spoken out against trophy hunting and urge policy-makers to ban imports” 

Dr Jones, Head of Policy, Born Free

He described it as a “position paper” but he should have described it as the Kama Sutra of conservation. The only positions it illustrated were the varied and abundant positions for screwing the unsuspecting UK public, performed by motley organisations of doubtful parentage and questionable personal motives.

The whole document is to real wildlife conservation what Chris Pincher MP is to pub socialising.

The claims (taken from the document) that follow are pretty rich coming from Fishvet Jones. He was the first damn Typhoid Mary who infected the UK with the Animal Rights mental disease formulated by those accused racketeers, HSUS of America. He, you might recall, also appeared before the notorious EFRA kangaroo hearing along with that oily shyster Eduardo Gonçalves (the donations harvesting saviour of absolutely no animals whatsoever anywhere world-wide) as one of four “experts” in a carefully orchestrated and outrageous EFRA kabuki-like theatre production designed explicitly (by Carrie, Zac and little green squawky, I suspect) to hoodwink both the UK government and public. There were no experts from hunting or hunting conservation or wildlife field management invited to give evidence, but there was the distinct whiff of bovine ordure and expensive lady’s perfume carried in the air, similar to the mixed fragrance rapidly fading away in Downing Street.

Enough. Kick the offenders out, Tory members. Or the public will do it for you in 2024.

Of course, the Born Free Foundation was itself the ingenious creation of a couple of actors, darling, who spotted a lucrative opportunity when they made a fortune from the animal exploitation movie “Born Free” in which 27 unfortunate victimised captive lions were used to make a pretend movie about one free one – don’t laugh – the poor 27 “stars” who made them so much money didn’t get to go free after filming. (Don’t ask – just put it this way – they didn’t retire to sing Lion King with the meerkats in the jungle). 

Born Free hasn’t improved much since then….some of its lions, so publicly “rescued from a circus life of Hell in Germany” to help publicise and generate the $4 million it lifts off the public with a kindly smile each year, turned out to be actually illegally seized in Germany by eco-zealous officials. Then, with much heart-warming fanfare and handy fundraising, Born Free (ha-ha) airlifted them to their sanctuary at Shamwari in South Africa where you too can visit them with a partner if you want to cough up a somewhat less than charitable £700 per person sharing, no small children allowed. “Rescuing” lions with public donations and then charging jelly-heads lots of wonga to look at them is big business these days – ask Chris Packham – he’s another expertNo wonder they defend their “altruism” with such determinationReal conservatives would have nipped this bloody nonsense in the bud years ago.  

So, what gems of truth did this epistle according to the eco-chugging Fagins tell us? Savour this morsel of their mendacity from Fishy himself:

Trophy hunting causes immense animal suffering while doing little or nothing for wildlife conservation or local communities” 

Really? Animals that live freely and naturally in the sunshine and are then harvested suddenly, without warning, by a high velocity bullet, are worse off than being raised in a shed on concentrates and pharmaceuticals, then trucked away for hours to be shot in the head or electrocuted in a strange abattoir? More suffering than a farmer shooting deer, squirrels, crows, pigeons, rabbits or even porcupines that are raiding vegetables and fruit destined for pious vegetarians who “don’t kill animals”? More suffering than blood-thinning, organ-destroying rat poison, required by law in ALL affected food processing premises? And, if it does “nothing for wildlife or communities”, then why did Zambia’s Green Economy and Environment Minister, Mr Collins Nzovu, say otherwise? Or how about Lesley Jansen of Resource Africa, who says otherwise, or how about Dr Amy Dickman of Oxford University’s WildCru who says otherwise and she bloody well HATES trophy hunting. You’re a liar, liar, pants on fire, Fishy, Old Cock……you should go back to the salmon factory farms where you started…..

Undeterred, Fishy Jones added that trophy hunting “damages the fragile social and genetic integrity of animal populations”. No, it doesn’t, you cheap huckster – only one scientific study (one! – of wild sheep, out of thousands of well-monitored species) suggested that modern trophy hunting has had any effect. Just one. No real scientists back your dreamed-up claim and I am amazed you can even spell “integrity”. Watch out for lightning, mate. God is watching.

Dr Moaner Schweizer of Pro Wildlife then helpfully adds to this enthusiastic effluent:

“Trophy hunting stands out among the worst forms of wildlife exploitation and is neither ethical nor sustainable.” 

Hardly, Moaner, my love – if you’re going to bloody moan, why not moan about the unregulated bushmeat trade that illegally gobbles nearly 5 million TONS of animals in sub-Saharan Africa annually? A wee 5 million ton oversight perhaps?  Better fundraising in demonising legal trophy hunters, perhaps? “Not sustainable”? Most UK hunters hunt in South Africa, where hunting and venison has encouraged farmers to re-wild 40 million acres of previous cattle farms and increased the wild animals from half a million to over ten million in thirty years or so. In Namibia the WWF (hardly pro-trophy hunting rednecks) have this to say, and you might care to explain mathematically how a 47% increase in numbers of wild animals in Namibia is “not sustainable”. Unlike Uncle Albert’s, there will be no Nobel Peace prize for your shabby piece of crooked, wallet-nibbling rodentry, Dr Schweizer.

The “position paper” continued, gushing:

“Trophy hunting can adversely affect the survival of species and undermine conservation efforts…. By targeting such animals, trophy hunters directly and indirectly contribute to population declines, disrupted social structure, and reduced resilience”

Except for a tiny, weenie little fact – there is not a single scientific proof anywhere that modern regulated trophy hunting has been responsible for any declines or extinctions. There is not a single instance where trophy hunting has undermined conservation – in fact, hunting supports 1.3 million km2 of sub-Saharan Africa, conserving habitat, conserving social structures and conserving resilience. Better shake the tin louder to drown out those lies.

In a marvellously inverted version of classical economics, this bend-over pamphlet also tells us that:

“The (trophy hunting) industry drives demand for parts and products of endangered species and incentivises and prioritises their killing through award schemes and other promotions”. 

Perhaps in your la-la land where the fairies carry hammers and sickles rather than starry wands, but in the real world, the modern, regulated industry has grown up to fill an existing market demand for parts and products in a legal, sustainable way. That explains its REAL success.  

Like fishing, harvesting a particularly fine old animal specimen is largely a matter of luck. Those trophy books that you call an “incentive” actually began as a useful record of how wildlife was doing, simply because hunters obtained precise measurements that can be somewhat difficult to obtain from a live Cape Buffalo or angry crocodile. Later, a few people looked upon the lists as a competition scoreboard, and so now there is talk in the hunting industry of modifying or collecting data another way, to discourage the record-bragging that diminishes much of the true ethos and awe-of-nature embodied in proper hunting. Most hunters don’t record trophy data of their successes anyway (they’re hunters – a very personal and private enterprise – and not interested in bragging, plus they don’t want to attract others to good hunting spots).

Here’s more mischief from this Kama Sutra of Sham:

Furthermore, shooting animals of protected and endangered species is often a privilege of foreign hunters, while access to wildlife and land is often restricted for locals. This disenfranchisement of local communities coupled with the social destabilising effects of trophy hunting on many species can fuel human-animal conflict rather than mitigate….”  

In South Africa you can’t shoot any endangered animal willy-nilly (they are strongly protected by TOPS Regulations) and pre-covid, there were 300,000 local hunters but only 6000 foreign visiting hunters, so “foreign” is another deceptive porkie-pie. The hunting grounds of Southern Africa, like farms or estates in the UK, are all owned or leased by somebody, so why should the general public be allowed to hunt major animals on Africans’ properties in unregulated ways? Marxian bumble-think excepted, have UK farmers disenfranchised the UK public by stealing their land, you flatulent idiots? Anyway, rural Africans still informally hunt small game for the pot, except in their National Reserves and Parks. Nobody hunts anything legally in the National Parks, apart from official culling and lethal management operations that are always done out of sight of sensitive snowflakes and eco-tourists.  Don’t tell them.

More golden droplets of eco-excrement follow…” the trophy hunting industry fails to deliver meaningful economic benefits to local communities, contrary to what is claimed by the pro trophy hunting narrative”. Already covered above – the locals, who ACTUALLY live there, ACTUALLY know otherwise and show that YOU parasites are ACTUALLY liars, paternalists and neo-colonialists, if not racists. Rural African voices matter, not yours.

And yet more scribbled eco-scrofula… “most hunts are conducted on private land and the hunting sector is plagued with corruption, trophy hunting revenues usually end up in the pockets of hunting operators, private farm owners and local elites”. Spot the halfwits, Dear Reader. Hunting operators and private farm owners ARE the locals, you devious, pick-pocketing chumps. You are contradicting your previous paragraph. Top Marx, however, for squeezing in a pointless “elites” reference. Viva! Viva! Here’s a newsflash – the “elites” steal from everyone.  Now grow up.

Next, this enlightenment from Dr Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs at Humane Society International/Europe (yep, that US vampire HSUS again), “no excuse to allow the inhumane killing of animals for entertainment”  (they are hunted, eaten, and made into all sorts of utilitarian foods, materials and decorative items, Dr Swabe) “or to make up for the often irreversible biological and ecological  damages” (there isn’t any recorded “irreversible damage” due to modern regulated trophy hunting – quite the reverse) “it causes to protected species” (the animals hunted are not endangered – you can’t get hunting/export permits for endangered animals unless there is a greater advantage for the animals) when there are alternative, more lucrative revenue streams available for development and conservation efforts,” (If there were any viable alternatives, me Old Joanna, the owners of hunting land would choose them, wouldn’t they? Farmers and community land owners are not as stupid as you appear to be. And, I venture further, that 40 million acres of natural habitat in South Africa alone, filled with indigenous plants and animals, is a damn sight more conservation than all of you blood-sucking parasites have managed between the lot of you because you are too busy intercepting precious money better spent in Africa.

And finally:

Surveys in the EU, Switzerland and the U.S. confirm that between 75 and 96 percent of respondents oppose trophy hunting and support import bans for trophies. In South Africa, the major African exporter of hunting trophies of protected species, a majority of 64 percent disapproves of trophy hunting

Which brings us to the heart of the real problem (and the scam) here and abroad. The 100,000 people working for the wildlife industries of South Africa, for example, are all busy working and investing their time and treasure in their wildlife and its conservation, just as the 2% of the UK’s (rural) population does. But you eco-parasites, however, invest very little in wildlife unless it’s PR, so you can spend all of your ill-gotten grants and donations to flood the media with your fictional but profitably dark Victorian accounts of “evil” trophy hunting that have as much in common with modern regulated trophy hunting as Stephenson’s Rocket has with Elon Musk’s Starlink. It is your Victorian fiction that the public hates, not modern conservation trophy hunting.  And it’s a con-trick. 

Shame. Boris was a great campaigner but no President and Carrie Antoinette, despite her blatant attempts, was no First Lady. If he had continued to campaign for conservative issues instead of the trendy but infantile urban dreams of her indoors and those of his hooray-henry bubble-chums, he could have been an exciting Prime Minister. Sadly and lazily, he allowed the ideological la-la theories of zero-carbon, green energy, bunny-hugging conservation and animal rights insanity to infect UK affairs, rather than take a proven, reliable, careful, conservative approach.

What a Carrie-on. Now can we get back to conservative values, please? The first job is to get the Fundraising Regulator, Trading Standards and the Advertising Standards Authority to actually do the work they are paid for and stamp on all this blatant lying and eco-racketeering deception. Remove the animal rights/sentience mullahs from DEFRA. Tighten up the laws against hate speech to include protection for farming, pest control, traditional country activities, field sports and field management. And stop trying to tell Africans how to attend to their own wildlife affairs – those days are long gone.

In the meantime, while we wait for sanity to return to government and then rural life here and overseas, you can help by making a donation to some much-needed pest control going on at the moment….. here.

John Nash grew up in West Cornwall and was a £10 pom to Johannesburg in the early 1960’s. He started well in construction project management, mainly high rise buildings but it wasn’t really Africa, so he went bush, prospecting and trading around the murkier bits of the bottom half of the continent. Now retired back in Cornwall among all the other evil old pirates. His interests are still sustainable resources, wildlife management and the utilitarian needs of rural Africa.