There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---
Top Posts of the month: You can nominate the best written and quality info posts as the top post of the month. Help us to choose and feature them in our special section. Click here to learn more about it and how you can help us

  • 2 Vote(s) - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
John Varty & Tiger Canyon

India sanjay Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
*****
#1

John Varty is a controversial South African wildlife filmmaker. John is also leading a controversial project which aims to create a free-ranging, self-sustaining tiger population in Africa. However, some experts feel that this is a money making concept by John Varty in an attempt to earn money from the tourism industry. One of his famous documented film is "Living with Tigers".

Here is a recent interview of John Vart by Sizie Modise

SM: How long have you been doing Tiger Conservation?
JV: 14 years

SM: What is your overall objective?
JV: To get a population of over 50 wild Tigers and create a park where Lions, Leopards, Cheetah and Tigers all coexist.

SM: Your recent expansion invested 1000 Hectares for Cheetah?
JV: Like Tigers, Cheetah suffer from loss of home range to humans and they are more vulnerable to being out competed by Lions, Leopard and Spotted Hyena. Cheetah lose kills and cubs to these rival predators. Cheetah are listed as a threatened species. Before we introduced Cheetah, there were no wild Cheetah in the Free State.

SM: Do you ever see Cheetah and Tiger co-existing?
JV: I would need a lot more land, more than 60 000 Hectares.

SM: What does it cost you to run Tiger Canyons per day?
JV: I have no idea, a lot of money.

SM: What does it cost to support and adult Tiger per year?
JV: R100 000

SM: Can I sponsor a Tiger?
JV: Yes you can, through the Tigress Julie Foundation.

SM: Have you had any big corporations sponsor a Tiger?
JV: No, only individuals.

SM: Does the South African Government give you any support?
JV: None. I have called for the government to create a full national park for Tigers, but I doubt it will ever happen.

SM: Has Tigress Ussuri replaced Julie as your favourite Tiger?
JV: They are different relationships. Julie was hand raised, while Ussuri is wild born and wild raised. Both are incredible ambassador Tigers. All the Tigers are my favourite, even Corbett.

SM: Do you bear any grudge against Corbett?
JV: None whatsoever, I am counting the days to when he walks free - it should be in 8 weeks time.

SM: How many pictures have already been taken of Ussuri?
JV: Hundreds of thousands. Ussuri is a very accessible Tigress and she chooses very picturesque den sites. Ussuri interacts with her cubs all the time so the photographic potential is huge. The afternoon light at Tiger Canyons is the best I have ever filmed in, Ussuri and her cubs literally glow in the afternoon light.

SM: What would it cost me to rename Ussuri?
JV: $100 000

SM: What will it cost to name one of her cubs?
JV: $10 000

SM: Why did you vasectomise Seatao?
JV: Seatao fathered Julies second and third litters. He is also the father of Shadow's two cubs. His son Mahindra is a very fine male, is well bred and carries his genes.

SM: Why has Shundarban never impregnated a Tigress?
JV: Shundarban suffers from a condition called Kryptorchen. This means his testicles are inside his body. The result is that the temperature of his sperm, is too high.

SM: How do you control who Tibo mates with?
JV: I have no control who she mates with, especially when all the internal fences are removed and all the Tigers are co-existing. Our policy is not to produce white Tigers but rather preserve the rarity of the white Tiger. I am DNA profiling every Tiger at the moment, but once the big area is operational, I have no control.

SM: Why do you use Mahindra vehicles
JV: They are cheaper than Landrovers

SM: Your motto is "Tread lightly on the Earth" – why?
JV: The truth is, the human population is now at more than 7 billion. Everyday we are burning fossil fuels. We are heating the planet and our footprint is heavy. Tread lightly is an objective I would love to achieve in the future….for now it remains marketing.

SM: What is your major environmental contribution?
JV: We are creating a wild population of Tigers outside Asia, this is valuable, extremely valuable. We are creating huge awareness through our films, newsletters and the website. Apart from this, perhaps our biggest contribution is that we have changed the land use system from destructive domestic stock to indigenous wildlife on a large piece of land. We are creating jobs as well.

SM: How many jobs have you created in Philippolis?
JV: I have created as many as 109 jobs. Presently 50 guys are fencing the last 14km of fence.

SM: How strong is your tourism?
JV: Very strong. The Big Cat Safari puts Lion, Leopard, Cheetah and Tiger together in one safari. There is nowhere else in the world you can achieve this. 52 Nationalities have visited Tiger Canyons.

SM: What kind of guest is visiting Tiger Canyons?
JV: Professional photographers, international film crews, knowledgeable, concerned people….. a pleasure to be with.

SM: When will you build a Lodge?
JV: When the bank lends me the money.

SM: Will your children go into conservation?
JV: I hope so, it's their journey.

SM: What succession planning do you have in place?
JV: Rodney and Lorna Drew have invested heavily in wild Tigers and Cheetahs. This helps me shoulder the responsibility. If Corbett had killed me, it would have been all over.

SM: What kind of return can an investor get from an investment in wild Tigers?
JV: A small financial return - a bigger environmental return and an even greater spiritual return.

SM: What is the spiritual return?
JV: I get to swim with tiger cubs, go hunting with Cheetah, film and photograph wild tigers in an area with no noise, no pollution and no crime. That’s a pretty spiritual lifestyle.

SM: One of your recent newsletters called for a champion for Tigers. Have you had any luck?
JV: There are many wealthy individuals interested in investing in the project. There are a few likeminded.

SM: You are working on your first musical, tell us about it.
JV: It’s a DVD with some of the songs which I have written 20 years ago. Now I have professional musicians recording for me. What’s exciting is that it’s a live show, I put microphones and drums in the audience and the lyrics are written on a big screen so the audience can sing along. It’s story telling at its best and a giant ‘sing song’.

SM: Who influences you musically?
JV: I have been influenced by musicians who have used their music to protest a situation. Bob Dylan and Joan Baez protested the Vietnam war. Barry McGuire’s "Eve of Destruction" had a big impact on me. Rodriguez's anti-establishment "Cold Fact" was a favourite of mine, Rodriguez, because he was half Native American, never got the recognition he deserved in America. Johnny Clegg’s anti-apartheid cross-over music was perfect in the liberation struggle. Bob Marley brought the opposing politicians together in one of his concerts in Jamaica.

SM: Do you have any protest songs in the musical?
JV: The song "In Cages Around the World", is a protest song against the use of tigers and indeed all wild animals in circus acts.

"in cages around the world you pace
60 000 in a never-ending futile race
In circuses you perform
But your teeth are pulled
And your claws are all gone…"

SM: Who helped you with this production?
JV: I would like to thank the many artists who performed in the show. Bobby Johnson of Rebirth Music did a fantastic job of professionalizing the music and Tidi Modise edited the production. The show will go out on DVD and on YouTube. All proceeds of the show will go to Tiger conservation. The concert is dedicated to Nelson Mandela and Tigress Julie. If you would like to order the DVD and a signed booklet with lyrics it costs R750 plus postage. The limited edition leather bound DVD and signed booklet with lyrics is R1500 plus postage. You can order through jv@jvbigcats.co.za . Delivery will be in 90 days. All proceeds go to Tiger Conservation.

SM: Where do you want to take your music?
JV: I would like to produce an album which highlights the plight of Tigers. The album would have artists like Ziggy Marley, Rodrigues, Johnny Clegg, Peter Sarstedt, Chris de Burgh, Tina Turner, Bob Dylan, Kris Kristofferson, Ronan Keating, Bryan Adams, Yusuf (ex Cat Stevens) all creating and performing.

SM: You better get going…some of those artists are getting old!!
JV: …And so am I (smile)

SM: You are writing 4 books this year, tell me about them.
JV: I am doing a book with Marsel van Oosten and Daniella Sibbing on Tiger Conservation and saving the Tiger. I am doing a book on the Big Cats: Lion, Leopard, Cheetah and Tiger with Daryl and Sharna Balfour. I am doing a book with my two boys Sean and Tao Varty. It’s a fun book. My last book is called "All the Girls", its about all the ladies I have known, 2 legged, 4 legged, furry.. and not so furry. It spans from Tina Turner to Tigress Julie, from Brooke Shields to Mother Leopard. It should be fun…..

SM: Do books make any money?
JV: None, but they carry powerful messages and they are fun to make.

SM: Do you ever get lonely?
JV: Never

SM: Have you ever been married?
JV: Never

SM: Would you like to be?
JV: Are you making me an offer I do not understand…?

Email: info@jvbigcats.co.za
Website: http://www.jvbigcats.co.za

 

 
2 users Like sanjay's post
Reply

United States Pckts Online
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#2

Interesting. But why would he focus on raising white tigers if he was truly trying to conserve tigers in general then having a white tiger would be at the bottom of the list. Since they don't occur in the wild why would he care about raising them in captivity unless he was hoping to sell them? That is the only thing that is fishy. It is also the cause of the gov't not getting behind him because his tigers are bengal/siberian hybrids and not pure blood.
2 users Like Pckts's post
Reply

India sanjay Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
*****
#3
( This post was last modified: 10-10-2018, 12:57 PM by Rishi )

Below is the recent content of newsletter by Famous John Varty- Read it till the end , very disturbing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:Hello Friends

Whenever a hunter posts a picture of his or herself on Facebook, all the conservationists rise up in arms, calling the hunter every name under the sun.

Recently Melissa Bachman, who shot a male lion in a canned hunt in South Africa, was crucified by the social media.

The Australian cricketer Glen McGrath made the same mistake by posing with an elephant he had shot in a hunting safari in Zimbabwe.

After his wife died of breast cancer, McGrath formed the McGrath Foundation which raises money for breast cancer.

Somebody on Facebook asked McGrath what the difference was between people dying of cancer and an elephant dying from a bullet from his gun? McGrath has said he now regrets the hunting safari!

However, a study in Cornell University in the USA, has found that hunters are more likely to invest in wild land or restoration projects than any other group of people.

Clearly the desire to hunt and kill animals for trophies burns strongly in many people, especially those who live in big cities detached from nature.

Safari Club International, the biggest hunting organization in the USA, has no less than 180 chapters and over 50 000 members.

When I tried to encourage investors to invest in an expanded Tiger Canyons, I received no interest from the conservation or photographic communities, none whatsoever!

However I did receive interest from the hunters. If they invested in the land, could they hunt the surplus male tigers, was the first question they asked? (Tigers are an Appendix I animal listed in the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species i.e. CITES)

It would be illegal to hunt a tiger in South Africa because South Africa has signed the CITES Convention.

However, tigers are hunted in South Africa illegally and this industry is growing rapidly. (It is legal to hunt a male lion in a canned hunt in South Africa)

Together with lions, tigers are hunted in the canned lion and tiger industry. (This involves hunting a male lion or male tiger with a gun or a crossbow in a confined area. The hunter stands on the back of a truck and shoots the lion or tiger from close range. There is no risk to the hunter and no fair chase involved).

With Botswana and Zambia banning the hunting of lions and leopards, I expect the canned industry to start offering lion, leopard, tiger and even cheetah.

Canned big cat hunting, coupled with the body parts trade, is already a million rand industry. I expect it to grow exponentially to a billion rand industry in the future.

I have lived in the Karoo of South Africa for 15 years. The Karoo once supported the greatest volume of wild animals this planet has ever experienced (the minimum figure given for springbuck is 100 million). The majority of the Karoo is under sheep and goats. It is an industry in decline, for the simple reason, it is not sustainable environmentally.

Some of the greatest hunters lived in the Karoo, the lion, the leopard, the cheetah and the bushman.

The South African Government doesn’t have the vision to restore the Karoo to its former glory.

The conservationists don’t have the means and the photographers don’t have the inclination.

The Cornell study showed that the hunters are high net worth individuals, therefore they have the means and they have the inclination.

The South African Government intends introducing a law that foreigners cannot own large tracts of land in South Africa. Therefore the scenario of overseas hunting groups restoring large areas of land in the Karoo, looks to be closing.

However the dilemma remains. If a hunting group is prepared to buy up 100 000 hectares of land in the Karoo of South Africa to extend Tiger Canyons, can I guarantee them to hunt 5 male tigers per annum for 15 years?

This is their question to which they are awaiting an answer.

Tread Lightly on the Earth
JV
2 users Like sanjay's post
Reply

United States tigerluver Offline
Prehistoric Feline Expert
*****
Moderators
#4

This is quite the dilemma. The functional demand for wildlife is ironically falling into those who want to destroy it. It's been only about 50 years and hunters want their hands on tigers again. 
Reply

United States Pckts Online
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#5

He's a joke. He was turned down by the India Gov't for good reason. He has no interest in conservation, he only cares about the all mighty $. He is strictly financed by private investors and his actions are to only please those who invest in him aka put $ in his pocket.
1 user Likes Pckts's post
Reply

India sanjay Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
*****
#6

@Pckts , He may be greedy person. But the points he raised is really a serious issue. I have already seen lot of photos that hunter group publish, They are active on facebook.

There are lot of photographers and wildlife lovers but psychically or financially they are not involved in conservation of wildlife. Only few people among them are actually doing something serious to save animals. They only click photo and share on facebook that's it.
Hunters are very strong financially as well as they have political support.
Its million dollar business in Many country.
2 users Like sanjay's post
Reply

United States Pckts Online
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#7
( This post was last modified: 03-23-2015, 11:30 PM by Pckts )

(03-23-2015, 11:00 PM)'sanjay' Wrote: @Pckts , He may be greedy person. But the points he raised is really a serious issue. I have already seen lot of photos that hunter group publish, They are active on facebook.

There are lot of photographers and wildlife lovers but psychically or financially they are not involved in conservation of wildlife. Only few people among them are actually doing something serious to save animals. They only click photo and share on facebook that's it.
Hunters are very strong financially as well as they have political support.
Its million dollar business in Many country.

 

Absolutely, in the US, the states with legal hunting generate quite a bit of revenue. There is a popular argument on why states should allow hunting and the benefits they carry.
But my response to this is simple,
I use my Trip to Thailand as my proof.
Thailands major financial industry is the Sex trade.
Children are forced into it and are given no choice but it is 10% of Thailands GDP.
So its allowed, but its wrong. Thats my feeling on hunting, just because something generates $ doesn't mean its right. We play a dangerous game that has already gotten us in trouble when we adopt that mindset. The US gov't is a perfect example. Big corporation over powers the masses because they contribute more money. Becaue hunting campaigns charge absurd amounts of money to do them, they generate $. But they are not the majority, they are the "1%" if you will.

"A political party leader in Thailand and former massage parlor owner stated that the prostitution industry in Thailand is earns over $6.4 Billion (200 Billion Thai Baht) a year in revenue. The amount generated by the sex trade in Thailand is equal to roughly 10 percent of the country’s GDP."
http://www.havocscope.com/revenue-of-the...-thailand/

Heres a ton more info on Sex Trade in thailand
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Tha...+trade+gdp

In Zambia they completely banned hunting for a time but they reinstated it because their revenue went down, but they don't allow hunting of big cats only. But then there is Canned hunting and that just completely cancels it out. So while Zambia was getting pressure to stop hunting and did so for a bit, the minute their wallets get hit, they fold.

This is the claim of Zambia Gov't as to why
"People must also be aware and understand that, the decision to lift the ban is not merely a consumptive matter, but a conservation one as well, as money, which is raised in these animal overpopulated areas is usually ploughed back into conservation. The decision is also a human-wildlife conflict mitigation measure as these places are known for this problem.
Conservation is much more than just allowing uncontrolled animal over-populations. It is about ensuring the balance between humans and wildlife, for harmonious existence of both. ZAWA has been a target of all sorts of misunderstandings because this role is not clearly understood."
http://www.zambiatourism.com/minister-li...on-hunting

The excuse of "overpopulation" is outrageous. We are all to familiar that no animal is going to win out between man and animal. The minute humans settle the animals loose. Overpopulation is impossible since every single animal species # lower than it was before humans got here. The truth is, we let them live until we take their land for ourselves and use the excuse of "population control"
Just like the show Wild Alaska.

If we want to stop contributing to this as a nation we need to stop purchasing commodities that are made and distributed by deforestation and other destructive means. Like what is occurring in Sumatra. I posted a great link there on tons of petitions against these corporations. You would never think it, but plastic is a huge contributor to forest destruction in Sumatra. Toy companies like Matel are destroying the little land that is left. But we as a species are completely unaware of this or choose not to think about it till its too late.

Sorry for the long write up, but this topic really upsets me.

 
2 users Like Pckts's post
Reply

Netherlands peter Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
Moderators
#8
( This post was last modified: 03-22-2016, 05:03 AM by peter )

Pckts\ dateline='\'1427129970' Wrote: He's a joke. He was turned down by the India Gov't for good reason. He has no interest in conservation, he only cares about the all mighty $. He is strictly financed by private investors and his actions are to only please those who invest in him aka put $ in his pocket.

 

You're doing it again, PC.

You apparently very quickly forgot about the 'debate' on collars and the warning you got. When an issue that raises a lot of commotion is discussed, the last thing we want is your emotions overshadowing a decent analysis and a debate. 

If Varthy would have been that interested in money, he would have bought some large zoo or circus cats. He didn't, but apparently is contemplating a move he can sell to his audience because he's desperate for money.

Hunting is a problem everywhere. Hunters will do anything to get hold of a trophy, including bribing public organisations. Politics is knowing how to play people and when to pull the trigger. 

Those who have plenty of it, decided money should be the basis of modern societies. The next step is to make sure most of us don't get it. Or not for long. If this goal is achieved, you can be sure that the majority of those in need will be willing to dance. In very poor countries, one can't expect those prepared to sell even their own body or their next of kin to care about dangerous animals. The prospect, therefore, is grim.

The revival of liberalism a few decades after the last war means the concept of State has failed again. If money replaces things of value, chances are exhibitionism will follow sooner or later. Trophy hunting is just one expression of it. Those interested in hunting will not accept a ban on large carnivores. They will do everything they can to lift it and reality says they are succeeding in many countries. 

Now that it's clear that the pendulum is swinging their way once again, the question is what we are prepared to do about it. This should be the focus of the debate, I think. Those willing to dance out of need are mere victims in most cases. Same, to an extent, for John Varty. 

How about delivering a decent analysis of the article Sanjay posted for starters? What is the real issue? Who are participating in the debate in the real world? Who's winning? Why? What is Varty really saying about his situation? What are his options? No opinions, but facts. Opinions only enter when a strategy has to be selected. Even then only to an extent. The reason is those guided by opinions usually are the first to sink. And hunters know. What is needed to reverse the situation and win the war? Entering the realm of politics here.
3 users Like peter's post
Reply

United States Pckts Online
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#9
( This post was last modified: 03-25-2015, 02:31 AM by Pckts )

@peter, I am going to debate this in a respectful manner but it is a debate, so hopefully both sides are appreciated and respected?
Please note that I am being respectful and will make sure to separate fact from interpretation:

My statements on Varty do not come out of know where, I am well studied on Jon Varty.
Varty brought this idea to the indian gov't first. Before Tiger Canyons doc was ever created, he was denied for the fact that all of his tigers where hybrids.


Here are a few of the questions and answers hes provided, I then will put my Opinion below. Its only my opinion, like what I stated before.

SM: What is your overall objective?
JV: To get a population of over 50 wild Tigers and create a park where Lions, Leopards, Cheetah and Tigers all coexist.

My Opinion: What purpose does this serve?
Tigers can never live with lions in a small segragated enclosure, let a lone leopards and Cheetah. None of these animals will be used for reintroduction to the wild, so why exactly would he want this?

SM: Do you ever see Cheetah and Tiger co-existing?
JV: I would need a lot more land, more than 60 000 Hectares.

My Opinion: For what purpose?



SM: What does it cost you to run Tiger Canyons per day?
JV: I have no idea, a lot of money.

My Opinion: Leaves it open so he can continue to get private fundingSM: Can I sponsor a Tiger?
JV: Yes you can, through the Tigress Julie Foundation.SM: Have you had any big corporations sponsor a Tiger?
JV: No, only individuals.

SM: Does the South African Government give you any support?
JV: None. I have called for the government to create a full national park for Tigers, but I doubt it will ever happen.

My opinion: So if he will get no gov't help, he can't release any of these hybrids to their natural habbitat what is he looking for?

SM: What would it cost me to rename Ussuri?
JV: $100 000

SM: What will it cost to name one of her cubs?
JV: $10 000

SM: How strong is your tourism?
JV: Very strong. The Big Cat Safari puts Lion, Leopard, Cheetah and Tiger together in one safari. There is nowhere else in the world you can achieve this. 52 Nationalities have visited Tiger Canyons.

SM: What kind of return can an investor get from an investment in wild Tigers?
JV: A small financial return - a bigger environmental return and an even greater spiritual return.

SM: What is the spiritual return?
JV: I get to swim with tiger cubs, go hunting with Cheetah, film and photograph wild tigers in an area with no noise, no pollution and no crime. That’s a pretty spiritual lifestyle.

My opion: It's about Tourism and Money. He says investors will get a "spiritual return" yet when asked what it is, he strictly speaks of himself getting the return.
He is unaware of what it costs to run his facility but to change the name of a Tiger adult its 100k or 10k for a cub.

In response to this
"If Varthy would have been that interested in money, he would have bought some large zoo tigers and circus drop-outs"
Its not that easy to buy zoo animals and circus dropouts. They cost money, but its not just them, its the need to house them, feed them and most importantly you need land and permits to do it. He doesn't possess the means to do so so he seeks contributions, creating a documentory off false hopes to increase financial gain is wrong to me. I am not the only person who shares this idea about varty, I will post a list below on some issues Conservationist have.

Please note this is not me speaking, simply posting the issues they raise

 John Varty The Tiger Man of AfricaThe very notion of breeding ligers in Africa for conservation is only slightly more ridiculous than breeding tigers in Africa.  No legitimate scientist or conservationist would condone anything that John Varty is doing with his inbred population of tigers.Quotes from real expertsNo commentus Mills, head of South Africa’s Endangered Wildlife Trust Carnivore Conservation Group:“The big concern I have over the project … is they are planning to release into the wild a species that is exotic, that doesn’t occur in that ecosystem. And I think as a basic principle in conservation, we should only conserve animals that are indigenous to the area. … “From a principle basis it is just wrong to set aside a large area and conserve it with an exotic species. Why don’t you also then bring in kangaroos and some bears and you could have a real nice mix that … some people might think is attractive? But certainly from a conservation point of view it doesn’t have any value. Because conservation is really about conserving animals in their natural ecosystem.John Seidensticker, chairman of the Save The Tiger Fund Council, and senior scientist at the Smithsonian’s National Zoological Park in Washington, D.C.:“I’ve heard many justifications with this project … (but) the conservation community is pretty much opposed to this. It’s diverting funds that could be used otherwise.  “Our definition of conservation is securing a place for wild tigers where they live, not a place in Texas or South Africa. There are a lot of people who spent their lives, sometimes at great risk of themselves, to work on (tiger conservation). It is going to be a story, this whole thing, about how to not do conservation.” Carole Baskin, Founder and CEO of Big Cat Rescue the world’s largest accredited sanctuary dedicated entirely to exotic cats:“The very first show called The Tiger Man of Africa has him boasting about the birth of a white cub, which is only produced through severe inbreeding.  To introduce inbred and cross bred tigers into a non native habitat only does harm.  The problem that tigers face in the wild has nothing to do with their ability to breed.  They breed like rabbits.  The problem is habitat.The lion is currently a candidate for the endangered species list as well and again, it isn’t because they aren’t good at reproduction.  It is because there is no where that they can be lions without the constant threat of poachers.  Much of the lion and tiger killing that goes on in the wild is because the animal has been blamed for killing livestock.  Using hand reared cats for his rewilding experiment just makes it even more likely that the cats will get into trouble if they escape his property.  That just endangers the cats he has brought there and any native cats in the area.  Only Dave Salmoni does more harm to big cats by teaching them to walk among humans.
 About John VartyJohn Varty (JV) is a controversial South African filmmaker. JV established Tiger Canyons near the town of Philippolis on the Van der Kloof Lake in the Karoo of South Africa as an experiment to supposed create a free-ranging, self-sustaining hybrid tiger population outside Asia. However experts feel that this is a money making venture by Varty in an attempt to earn money from the tourism industry. This was documented in a film called “Living with Tigers”.The Tiger Canyons ProjectHowever there are controversies to his proposed conservation strategy. One criticism about the project is with the chosen cubs. Experts state that the four tigers (Ron, Julie, Seatao and Shadow) involved in the re-wilding project are not purebred Bengal tigers, and should therefore not be used for breeding. The four tigers are not recorded in the Bengal tiger Studbook and should not be deemed as purebred Bengal tigers. Many tigers in the world’s zoos are genetically impure, a situation which also applies to these four.The 1997 International Tiger Studbook lists the current global captive population of Bengal tigers at 210 tigers. All of the studbook-registered captive population is maintained in Indian zoos, except for one female Bengal tiger in North America. It has been pointed out that Ron and Julie (two of the tigers) were bred in the USA and hand-raised at Bowmanville Zoo in Canada, while Seatow and Shadow are two tigers bred in South Africa.The tigers in the Tiger Canyons Project have recently been confirmed to be crossbred Siberian/Bengal tigers. Tigers that are not genetically pure are not allowed to be released into the wild and will not be able to participate in the tiger Species Survival Plan, which aims to breed genetically pure tiger specimens and individuals.  It has thus been claimed that these tigers do not have any genetic value, and that their release into the wild could result in genetic pollution, besides the extinction of purebred Tigers.
Discovery Documentary FraudThe documentary has been described as a fraud.  The tigers were apparently unable to hunt, and the film crew chased the prey up against the fence and into the path of the tigers for the sake of dramatic footage. Cory Meacham, a US-based environmental journalist mentioned that “the film has about as much to do with tiger conservation as a Disney cartoon.”

Li and Stuart now believe that from the start the Vartys’ agenda in the South China Tiger project was primarily to make a movie.

Stuart: ‘We talked about how sexy it would be if this was a project to save the most endangered tiger in the world and that this would be a very sellable story. They explained to me that selling a film is all about selling a story. And they didn’t have an ending to their story. And they said they needed to know what the ending would be. If the ending was saving the South China tiger, then suddenly they have a very sellable story.’

Li and Stuart now believe that from the start the Vartys’ agenda in the South China Tiger project was primarily to make a movie.



http://911animalabuse.com/john-varty-the...of-africa/


I have also read from a few posters who are on this very forum that Varty also allows hunters to tranq his tigers for a fee.
I have NO proof of it so I didn't use it as reason. But I believe one of the people who reported it was @Gaute, If I am wrong, I will quickly remove it and apologize for misquoting.





In addition, the tigers have not been released as the film suggests — and indeed still reside in a small enclosure under constant watch and with frequent human contact. The Discovery documentary contains footage that its maker, John Varty, has admitted on affidavit to be false.There are claims that Tiger Canyons’ Tigers have no conservation value, and experts question JV’s intention of building Tiger Canyons as a ecotourism industry in South Africa. Most experts concluded that it is just a money-minded venture which allows money to be earned through the deception that the tigers there are purebred, but in fact they have no conservation value as they are of mixed ancestry. Conservationists fear that the public will be misled in this cynical fashion.Paper Tigers: South AfricaTo millions of South African viewers they became household names – controversial wildlife filmmaker, John Varty and his wife, television celebrity, Gillian van Houten. The camera portrayed them as the idyllic bush couple, working together to attempt to return orphaned animals to the wild.The little lion cub Shingilana, Jamu the leopard … it all made for great television.In 1999 John began his most controversial production: filming the rehabilitation into the wild of two zoo-bred Bengal tigers. The story would end with their release into a reserve in the Karoo."
 The agreement was pretty straightforward – Stuart Bray entrusted $4-million to the Vartys to buy land, fence it and stock it with game.Dave Varty, Eco-tourism Developer: ‘Broadly speaking, he would provide funding, we would provide intellectual capital, expertise, etc. We would assemble the land, get the model, the economics of the model going, which included lodges, included rehabilitation of tigers, etc. etc.’So Stuart set up and guaranteed a credit facility in South Africa in the Vartys’ name. They were authorised to use this R35-million loan to set up the sanctuary. And it was up to the Vartys to rehabilitate the Chinese tigers and get them back to the reserve in China. In return they would reap the commercial benefits from filmmaking and lodges.





I understand that my intial remark seems harsh but it goes off interpretation of facts, so while I admit to being more judgemental than scientific in that first statement, I apologize. But I did use examples that generating money is not always in the best interest of conservation or the animals in question. 
 

 
3 users Like Pckts's post
Reply

Netherlands peter Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
Moderators
#10
( This post was last modified: 03-22-2016, 05:08 AM by peter )

Better. But.

The first advice is to let the facts speak for themselves. Questions and answers would do. When you report, assume all readers are able to count to three. If someone offers opinions all the time, readers feel like chickens being directed to the chopping machine.    

After questions and answers, we need the facts. Money first. Where is his paradise located? How big? Cost? Who paid? Who's the legal owner? Maintenance? Sponsoring? Accountant? What are sponsors offered in return for their money? Have their been complaints?  

After the interview and the money, we want to know about the animals. How many? What species? Do they have their own enclosure? How about the staff? How many? Well-trained? What is it they are doing? What is the aim of Varty? And what is he actually doing? 

When everything has been covered, the time to read has arrived. Is there a blog? Who writes? Anything known about the experiences of sponsors and tourists? What comes out on top when you read? What do you see? 

When you've finished, file a report and allow others to get to an opinion themselves. If you don't, you are leading the witness. 

I know about the Varty's, because I met some. Most are a mixed bag. They often care about nature, but they also often select dangerous animals only. They offer them some kind of security and privacy, but they also like media attention. They will boss many, because it's part of their nature. After some years, they start bossing the animals. In the beginning, there are only victories. Publicity, projects and money too. Then, one day, problems enter. There are arguments first. Then you suddenly see aggressive and dangerous dogs guarding the house. Staff members leave. Bonds are broken. Neighbours start complaining. Financial problems enter and so do laywers. In spite of plenty of help and money, most problems are never solved. Then desperation enters. Weird things start to happen. One day, everything seems to turn against them. In the best scenario, their dreams evaporate and they lose everything they have. In the worst scenario, people get damaged. 

Varty was threatened by some of his tigers. He didn't see it coming and didn't take it seriously. They never do. Then he was attacked. He survived, but forgot about the lesson. Now the tigers fight among themselves. I hope he and his animals will get out without more damage, but the script usually is followed right till the end. It was there when they started, but they never saw it. You can't play Dr. Morrell and expect a happy ending when you work with large carnivores in a way that doesn't suit them. They will tell you, but they are never heard. Those operating in the department of adventures never seem to be aware of the consequences of the game they play. One day, you pay.       

I've learned to refrain from judgements. I'm not a judge. I also refrain from advice in real life. People write their own book. At times, I watch some of the proceedings. When I do, I often see a scenario playing out that could have been written by a top writer. In most cases, the inevitable end is as bad as in a movie. 

Life has different layers or dimensions. We live in one and animals live in another. This has to be remembered. At times, when the animal says ok, boundaries can be crossed. Many don't seem to realize you can't just leave when you get in. When it's turned round and humans cross unseen boundaries, the consequences often are way more serious. Our planet has different life forms. It's our task to protect places we don't know. In the last century, humans started dominating all other creatures. This means we now are responsible. Animals need our protection. Just like the old, the sick, the feeble, the weird and those in need. The moment we say no is the moment we let go of everything we cherish. Once done, there's no turning back. It is important to know what you are really doing, but it isn't easy. This is especially true for pro's in collecting coins who still lack a nice Amur tiger in their trophy room.
2 users Like peter's post
Reply

Guatemala GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#11
( This post was last modified: 03-25-2015, 01:23 PM by GuateGojira )

(03-25-2015, 02:22 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: I have also read from a few posters who are on this very forum that Varty also allows hunters to tranq his tigers for a fee.
I have NO proof of it so I didn't use it as reason. But I believe one of the people who reported it was @Gaute, If I am wrong, I will quickly remove it and apologize for misquoting.

 
As you mentioned me here already, I going to clarify the issue before any confusion could rise.  the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Personally, I don't see the point to breed hybrid tigers, when he could breed pure specimens like the "Save the China's Tigers" project; he is expending money in an already doomed experiment, don't you think?

Obviously the "open hunting" will NEVER be a solution, but it is also true that hunters are the persons with money and are willing to invest but they demand blood for it -they demand sacrifices-. On the other hand, amateur "naturalist" and "photographers" only take pictures and publish them in Facebook trying to create conscience, but that is the end of they help, like Sanjay mentioned before. Even worst, now Scientists (that offer true help to conserve and protect animals) are been attacked an labeled as "heartless scientists interested only in data" (quoted from the words of Dr Luke Hunter) and are even expulsed from the forests, like happened with Dr Chundawat in Panna. Check this report from 2012, I don't know if the situation is the same at 2015:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/crO5GC7.jpg" class="lozad max-img-size" alt="" title="">
*This image is copyright of its original author


So, at the end, where is the future of the conservation:
1. The rich people that will give money ONLY if they are allowed to kill those same animals.
2. The amateur naturalists that only write in Internet but only very few enter in the true work of conservation.
2. The scientist that are "satanized" by some circles of extremists.

Remember, in this modern neoliberalism world, money have always the last word. [img]http://i.imgur.com/g8S9ZTs.png" class="lozad max-img-size" alt="" title="">
*This image is copyright of its original author

Greetings to all. [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img]
 
2 users Like GuateGojira's post
Reply

India sanjay Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
*****
#12

Wonderful explanation Guate.
Reply

United States Pckts Online
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#13
( This post was last modified: 03-25-2015, 10:32 PM by Pckts )

I agree with most @gaute says, especially towards Varty,
although, I believe the Naturalists actually provide interest and tourism increases because of the images they post on huge social networks like FB,
When looking at Kahna, Ranth, Kaziranga, Corbett etc., they all do so well with tourism. But its also why areas where tigers are not as likely to be seen don't do as well.

"This week, India’s National Tiger Conservation Authority announced that it plans to phase out tourism in its 37 tiger reserves. Here we ask two experts whether the government was right to take such a drastic step to arrest the decline of this endangered species, which now numbers just 1,350 in the whole of the subcontinent.Julian Matthews, chairman of Travel Operators for Tigers, says:Having spent many years visiting India’s forests and wildlife parks, I am amazed by the decision of the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) to cast tourism out of core tiger areas.These “over-loved” parks have the best habitats and the highest tiger densities. Corbett, the most visited park, still has the highest number of tigers in India (according to the NTCA’s 2008 census). Bandavgarh has the heaviest densities of tigers in its main tourism zone, with five breeding females and 14 cubs, and it receives 45,000 visitors a year.When sub-adult tigers leave the tourist zone to seek their own ranges in buffer zones, they get “lost” – poached or poisoned. These facts suggest that the best security for tigers exists in tourism zones, and tigers and their prey sense it.Related Articles Travel Operators for Tigers (TOFT) estimated that one Ranthambhore tigress generated some $130 million (£90m) in direct tourism revenue in the 10 years of her adult life. Take this away, and the forests will again have no economic value to those living nearby or to local politicians – and they will be sacrificed to farming, mining, industry or logging, as is happening in most unloved forests.Tourism makes forest personnel highly accountable and generates millions of dollars for conservation. Tiger tourism has the best anti-poaching units, operating vehicles with keen guides eight hours a day. On the borders of parks, tourism offers alternative livelihoods to hundreds, who might now resort to marginal farming, illegal logging, poaching and cattle grazing.I do not like much of what is happening in tiger tourism today. Too much is poorly planned; there must be better regulation and control – as we have urged.But let’s not kill the one industry that has the power to restore wildlife. Give the industry the best ground rules by which it can become a tool for conservation, not a soft cover-up for hiding the real reasons for the tiger’s demise – from poaching and the degradation of forests to lack of political and institutional will."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/safari...e-for.html

And this is from 2010, numbers have only risen since then.

But is this good or bad, is the real question?

A lot of the core tourism zones are also run by the Gov't and it is up to them on how much monitary donations they would like to make back to the forest. Taxes are paid, investors etc.
So while generating X amount, they may only pay back a smaller fraction to maintain it. Also, apparently the mass traffic by jeeps and tourists cause animals to change their natural migratory routes and lead them to travel to dangerous or human ran areas.
I doubt that if something generates as much money as tourism does, that they wouldn't monitor and make sure it has enough funding to continue to succeed. So I guess it comes down to man to determine if they want these places to succeed or not. I think they do, the recent translocation back to Panna and other tiger reserves seems like they are trying to bring tourism aka Tigers back to areas they once roamed.

My personal opinion is that they should allocate more $ to the Forest Department, and that goes for Africa and India. These guys fight a war with poachers and they are undermanned and outgunned. Lots of them patrol by Bicycle even, which offers its own dangers out side of fighting the poachers.

My personal opinion has always been that we need a UN type Gov't run Policy that would allocate a united protective service to any and all endangered species or habitats.
I think that some of these areas may generate a lot of revenue but they are in a not so wealthy country so a lot of their profit may go towards enriching the country and other countries like the US can have massive fish and game dep't and allocate a lot of $ to it, but if we had a united group the funds could be dispersed and made sure they went to the places they were intended.
Just a thought
 

 
Reply

India sanjay Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
*****
#14

I think its good debate point. Now I am adding JV response below, that i received today.
Quote:Hello Friends

As predicted, my last newsletter drew attention from a wide variety of people. Some people hate the idea, some think it’s a good idea, others don’t know. Some want to crucify me. There is no shortage of passion in this emotive issue.

For me it is fascinating to see how the scientist, the artist, the businessman, the hunter, the mother and the conservationists tackle the same problem.

Let me say from the outset that my grandfather and my father were both hunters. I grew up in a hunting environment (it is well documented in my book "Nine Lives").

I understand only too well the ego, the adrenalin rush, the thrill of the chase, the money that goes with hunting. I also understand the futility of killing a magnificent creature like a tiger. I personally rejected hunting a long time ago.

In my newsletter "Ambassador Cats", I describe how I fell in love with a cat in 1979, the Mother Leopard. Since this time I have been in love with a string of lions, leopard, tigers and cheetahs. Mother Leopard, Manana, Shingalana, Lioness Savannah, Tigress Julie, Shine a Light, Tibo, Ussuri, Zaria, Cheetah mother Shashe… the list goes on and on.

I could no more hunt these cats than fly to Mars and back.

However in this emotional roller coaster that I have embarked on are flaws. In 2 000, I wrote a mission statement:

"To assemble 100 000 hectares of land where a free ranging wild population of tigers can be created outside the Asian continent”.

The emotional journey I have traveled, may not have equipped me to achieve this objective, in fact it may be my Achilles Heel.

Consider the words of Professor Willem van Riet: "Emotions can take you to a point but no further. Without value, in the end you will lose".

In the words of an anonymous businessman "Varty’s an idiot, he has 4 non-productive males over 10 years old. Why doesn’t he hunt them at $150 000 each and buy the farm next door for more tigers".

The majority of anti hunters are concerned that 75 male tigers will die over a period of 15 years (This is assuming that I can get a permit to hunt them, which I wont).

As the scientists point out, if I am hunting 5 male tigers a year, then I should have a population of 50 male tigers.

If my ratio male:female is 1:2, then I have 50 males and 100 females.

If I have 100 females each producing an average of 2 cubs every 2 years. Then 100 extra cubs are being born each year.

If the present population of wild tigers is 1 500, then with a population of 150 tigers, Tiger Canyons would have 10% of the worlds wild population.

If the wild tiger is declining at 1 per day, then in 15 years Tiger Canyons may have 40 or 50 or 60% of the worlds wild tiger population!

Against these numbers the sacrifice of 15 males does not look so bad.

But it's not an all or nothing scenario. If you have a park of 100 000 hectares you can say no hunting 50 000 hectares and hunting in the other 50 000 hectares.

You could say only males of over 10 years old can be hunted. Fifty percent of the hunts could be green (a green hunt is one where the tiger is darted but not killed).

However there is more than tigers at stake.

On 100 000 hectares, 2 000 jobs can be created in the area of Philippolis (Philippolis is the 4th poorest town in South Africa. The infrastructure of Philippolis is rapidly declining). 200 White rhino and 50 black rhino can be warehoused for the National Parks Board (warehousing is where the rhino are owned by the National Parks Board but the private sector protect them. The province of the Free State has lost 2 rhino to poaching in the last 4 years).

The land-use system changes from destructive sheep to indigenous wildlife: 200 000 springbuck, 50 000 blesbuck, 25 000 blue wildebeest graze amongst buffalo, giraffe, rhino etc.

Lion, leopard, cheetah, tiger, wild dog and spotted hyena all co-exist.

The Serengeti of the South is no longer a pipe-dream….it is a reality. A living testimony to what can be achieved with vision, resolve and money.

However, without the money it remains a pipe-dream. I have been to the banks, the interest rates are crippling. I have searched for a champion without success. Now I am exploring the hunters. I am purely the messenger.

"Don’t shoot the messenger".

Tread lightly on the Earth
JV
Reply

United States Siegfried Offline
Wildanimal Enthusiast
***
#15
( This post was last modified: 03-27-2015, 03:56 PM by Siegfried )

What an interesting response.  While I hate to see any animals hunted, I do see the logic behind allowing it.  A true moral dilemma....

 
Reply






Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB