Episode 565 - Fiona Tande || Kenyan Anti-Hunting VS. Hunting

Summary

Podcast Summary: Blood Origins Inc. - Episode 565: Fiona Tande || Kenyan Anti-Hunting VS. Hunting

Introduction

In Episode 565 of Blood Origins, host Mike Axelrod engages in an in-depth conversation with Fiona Tande, an environmental journalist and wildlife conservationist from Nairobi, Kenya. The episode delves into the complex dynamics between anti-hunting sentiments and the role of hunting in conservation efforts within Kenya and broader African contexts.

Meeting Fiona Tande

The relationship between Mike and Fiona traces back to a cheetah capture project in South Africa, where Fiona's insights on hunting sparked a meaningful dialogue. Fiona recounts, "[...] what really surprised me about Fiona was at the end of the conversation she was like thank you so much for having that conversation with me. I didn't expect somebody like you and she said you as a hunter to be able to articulate and speak about hunting the way that you did." (01:01)

Hunting and Conservation: Different Perspectives

Fiona introduces Mike's work with the Pridelands Wildlife Film Festival, highlighting the importance of storytelling in shaping conservation narratives. She emphasizes the need to balance hunting practices with sustainable conservation, stating, "We believe hunting, fishing, and most importantly, people are central to sustainable wildlife conservation." (05:08)

Mike raises critical questions about the impact of trophy hunting on wildlife populations, particularly in Kenya. Fiona counters by explaining that the majority of trophy hunting is geared towards conservation. "I would say that 90% of trophy hunting is actually what you want it to be, which is conservation. And I'll explain why shortly." (20:13)

Trophy Hunting vs. Ethical Hunting

Fiona distinguishes between unethical practices like canned hunting and ethical trophy hunting. She asserts, "90% of trophy hunting, in my opinion, is the reason why wildlife conservation in these hunting areas is doing so well." (21:06) She elaborates on how ethical hunting targets primarily older, non-breeding males, thereby aiding in population control and habitat preservation without adversely affecting the overall wildlife ecosystem.

Colonial Legacy and Modern Hunting Practices

The conversation shifts to the colonial roots of hunting in Africa and its modern implications. Fiona acknowledges the lingering disparities but highlights progressive changes: "I see black professional hunters coming through the systems. I see black owners now coming through the systems." (42:33) She underscores the importance of involving local communities and diversifying the hunting profession to dismantle neo-colonial attitudes.

Hunting Models: Private vs. Public

Fiona contrasts South Africa's private hunting model with America's public resource approach. She notes, "South Africa went from 500,000 head of wildlife in 1970 to almost 22 million head of wildlife today because they focused on wildlife as an economic asset." (32:14) In contrast, the U.S. model, where wildlife is managed as a public resource, faces challenges in funding and effectiveness, particularly with high-cost tags like New Mexico's bighorn sheep tag selling for $1.3 million. (34:10)

Science and Conservation Efficacy

Addressing the scientific debate on hunting's role in conservation, Fiona concedes that hunting isn't a panacea but asserts its significant positive impact. "Hunting is not the panacea of wildlife conservation. It's not the be all and end all of it," she admits, yet emphasizes that hunting remains one of the few effective tools available to protect and increase wildlife populations. (75:03)

Myths and Misconceptions about Hunting

Fiona actively challenges prevalent myths, such as the notion that all hunting is detrimental to conservation. She counters misconceptions by providing real-world examples where hunting has directly benefited communities and wildlife. "People say hunting is not conservation, but if you look at it from a pure economics perspective, does a hunter and hunting operator want more wildlife on the ground or less?" (70:35)

The Future of Hunting and Conservation

Looking ahead, Fiona stresses the indispensable role of hunting in future conservation efforts amid increasing human encroachment on habitats. "If we as a society want to champion habitat protection and wildlife, why would you remove a tool in your toolbox that is helping to protect habitat and wildlife for the next 50 years?" (91:40) She urges for continued dialogue and collaboration between pro-hunting and anti-hunting factions to ensure sustainable conservation practices.

Responsible Storytelling in Conservation

Mike inquires about the responsibilities of storytellers in portraying hunting. Fiona emphasizes the importance of nuanced storytelling that highlights both the benefits and challenges of hunting. "We focus on the people’s story. It's very difficult to describe if you've never done it. It's not enjoying the kill; it's the adventure and the conservation impact." (81:26)

Conclusion

The episode concludes with mutual respect and an openness to future collaborations. Fiona expresses her willingness to engage with anti-hunting organizations to foster joint conservation projects, while Mike appreciates the balanced and authentic dialogue facilitated by Fiona. They agree on the necessity of hunting as a conservation tool and the importance of continued conversations to bridge differing perspectives.

Notable Quotes:

• Fiona Tande (20:13): "I would say that 90% of trophy hunting is actually what you want it to be, which is conservation."

• Fiona Tande (32:14): "South Africa went from 500,000 head of wildlife in 1970 to almost 22 million head of wildlife today because they focused on wildlife as an economic asset."

• Fiona Tande (75:03): "Hunting is not the panacea of wildlife conservation. It's not the be all and end all of it."

• Fiona Tande (91:40): "If we as a society want to champion habitat protection and wildlife, why would you remove a tool in your toolbox that is helping to protect habitat and wildlife for the next 50 years?"

Final Thoughts

Episode 565 of Blood Origins provides a comprehensive exploration of the contentious yet vital role of hunting in conservation. Fiona Tande's articulate defense of ethical hunting practices offers listeners a profound understanding of its complexities and underscores the necessity of nuanced conversations in shaping sustainable wildlife conservation strategies.

Transcript

[Robbie]

Fishing trips Anywhere Anytime fishingbooker.com Create Stories.

[Fiona Tande]

For Life on a Scenic Eclipse Mediterranean voyage with scenic it's more than a journey of a lifetime. It's ultra luxury cruising along elegant European Rivieras and idyllic Italian coastlines. It's being immersed in the history and culture of glamorous cities, towns and villages, its colorful architecture, landscapes and and regional cuisine. Scenic Eclipse in a class of its own Book your all inclusive voyage now and save.

[Robbie]

Want to plan your next fishing trip without the hassle? FishingBooker.com is the best way to find and book a fishing charter anywhere in the world. Whether you're chasing trophy fish or just looking for a family day on the water, fishingbooker makes it simple, fast and secure. With thousands of experienced guides, verified reviews and 247 customer support, FishingBooker takes the guesswork out of planning. Visit fishingbooker.com and book your trip today.

[Fiona Tande]

FishingBooker Fishing trips made Easy Fiona Tande is an environmental journalist out of Kenya. Nairobi, Kenya I had the pleasure of meeting Fiona on our cheetah project on a cheetah capture that we were doing in South Africa. She was a friend of Vincent van der Merva's and we actually got along really, really well. We had some incredible discussions around hunting. Fiona is actually an anti hunter and I started talking about hunting and its narratives and the benefits that come from hunting. And then we started talking about the Tanzania Kenyan Big Tusker debacle. And what really surprised me about Fiona was at the end of the conversation she was like thank you so much for having that conversation with me. I didn't expect somebody like you and she said you as a hunter to be able to articulate and speak about hunting the way that you did. And so we just stayed in contact. We had a podcast together which you're about to hear, in which we just wanted to connect again. And it actually turned the tables in which Fiona had a lot more questions for me post our first conversation. And so I think you're going to really enjoy this conversation because it's really a education for you listening to this on how to communicate about hunting to someone who may not understand it all. So enjoy. So there's a reason why I started Blood Origins and that reason is simple, is that I wanted to convey the truth about hunting. It brings awareness to non hunters that it's more than just killing animals.

[Mike Axelrod]

How do I start it? Brittany My name. Does my hair look okay?

[Fiona Tande]

My name is Mike Axelrod. Start again. Yeah, I hated it too. Braxton, you said something in the car, to me, you said that you were living on borrowed time. There's a perception around who hunters are, what we're supposed to be. And a feminist that works for a non profit that is a hunter that has only eaten wild game for the last 20 years is likely not the thing that people think about when it comes to a hunter. Fiona.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yes.

[Fiona Tande]

How cool is this world?

[Mike Axelrod]

Are really cool, in my opinion. In my humble opinion.

[Fiona Tande]

We randomly met in South Africa.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

On a crazy journey. And we won't talk much about that crazy journey because we're trying to keep it under wraps.

[Mike Axelrod]

Exactly.

[Fiona Tande]

And here we are connecting through podcast to get to know each other a little bit more and let people know about, you know, what you do and what we do and having cool, amicable conversations and discussions about things that are happening. Germaine to you, Jermaine to me. So, yeah, absolutely.

[Mike Axelrod]

And I'm really excited to get to have this conversation. It is really quite the coincidence that we met and now we are here a few months down the line. But I'm always so open to connections and where they lead. So, yeah, I'm excited. And thank you so much for welcoming me to your podcast.

[Fiona Tande]

Well, before we continue, I do a terrible job of introducing people. So, Fiona Tande, welcome to the Blood Origins podcast. You are out of Kenya. You are the second lady that I'm talking to out of Kenya. I sent you the first podcast link of the first lady that I spoke to out of Kenya.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right, right, right. Yes, I do.

[Fiona Tande]

I think this conversation will go a little differently than that first one.

[Mike Axelrod]

Well, we'll see. But yes. So I am from Kenya. I'm a wildlife conservationist and. And a filmmaker. I primarily work in freelance and I have organized the first and only Wildlife Conservation, Nature and Environmental Film Festival, not only in Kenya, but on the African continent. And so I'm really open and looking to make connections and network with folks pertaining to conservation subjects and just seeing how we as storytellers can shape the narrative of what is happening on the African continent. And that's where you come in, because hunting is very much part of this very diverse continent.

[Fiona Tande]

So tell me a little bit about the film festival. Has it happened already? I know you were talking about potentially doing it as an inaugural. We were going to talk. Obviously there's conversations about what we're going to do the next time you do the film festival. Have you had one already?

[Mike Axelrod]

Yes. So we've already had three last year, the third one. We're having a bit of a change in how we are Having this one, it's not going to be the main event. We are having a bit of auxiliary events and workshopping online, maybe masterclasses and then hopefully come back for next year's fifth anniversary. So we've been on for quite some time.

[Fiona Tande]

That's amazing, man. And what the film festival's called? What?

[Mike Axelrod]

Pridelands Wildlife Film Festival.

[Fiona Tande]

Pridelands Wildlands Film Festival. Amazing.

[Mike Axelrod]

Pridelands Wildlife.

[Fiona Tande]

Oh, sorry. Pridelands Wildlife. Sorry. It's what happens when you get me at 5:30 in the morning. I can't like remember things. All good? Yeah. Theodore, why did you start that? Why did you feel like you needed a film festival around wildlife conservation?

[Mike Axelrod]

Right. So it goes back to, I guess, the whole reason I got into conservation in the first place. I really didn't have a lot of people whom I saw who look like me in the conservation space. Being in Kenya, that's wild. But yes, it's a very closed rank space from what I experienced. So coming into that I did see a lot of, not a lot of local involvement. And then when I was pivoting towards filmmaking, the same was still happening again. Kenya being the wildlife hub of productions, you'd never see a lot of local talent being involved in that. So I got to attend a couple of festivals outside of the continent that were leaning towards wildlife and conservation, but couldn't really bottle that experience for people in Kenya. And so I figured why not just start something that was a platform that I could have a lot of the filmmakers that are up and coming in this space be celebrated and showcase their work and just feel like part of a community.

[Fiona Tande]

Look guys, I'm a hunter, right? And when I go hunting, I like to figure out how to get my trophies back home as expeditiously as possible. Well, you don't have to look much further than Safari Specialty Importers. We know that trophy importation can be quite a headache. That's why Safari Specialty Importers strives to make it as easy and hassle free as possible. They have access to a bonded warehouse, you won't be charged storage fees, and you get a dedicated team that's readily available and will update you at every step in the process. They'll even go one step further. Safari Specialty Importers is working with us at Blood Origins and they are going to donate $100 from every shipment that they work with to conservation projects that include anti poaching, community development and wildlife conservation. At the end of the day, choose to spend your money with a team that's dedicated to you and is dedicated to helping show How? Hunting is a great conservation model. Hassle free logistics, fuel and conservation go with safari specialty importers. Did you know that in 42 states it is 100% legal to buy a suppressor and protect your hearing? Silencer Central pioneered the simplified silencer buying process. It allows you to buy a suppressor online or over the phone. You go through all the paperwork with a certified expert and that suppressor ships directly to your front door. I don't even believe it, but I've done it and it's come to my door. You can buy a suppressor and have it shipped to you. They offer the best in service, a suppressor expert to make sure you get the suppressor you want. And from there they take care of everything. They take care of the paperwork, the applications to the atf. They even set up a free trust if you want one. And if you don't have the money, put down an interest free payment plan. It's incredible. You get access to your own customer portal online. It tracks your progress. So why not go get started today? Go to silencercentral.com or call 866-811-6536. And with today's fast approval times, you're actually going to be shocked at how quickly your suppressor arrives at your door. Bushnell has been a longtime supporter of Blood Origins and in keeping with the spirit of our collaboration, we've come up with an amazing idea. Bushnell is eager to help you get set up for conservation success. That's right. They want to help you. The conservation and research community is dominated by good people doing good things and investing significant time and effort for the benefit of habitat and the species. So what do you need to do? Pretty simple. Send us your conservation story and or your conservation wish. Could be managing whitetails, could be understanding your environment or species or something else related to conservation. What would you be able to do if you had a great trail camera setup? We will select the best story every other month and send you a camera bundle. Cell camera, normal SD camera, SD cards as well as optics. Everything you need to get set up for success. I can't wait to see what you submit. You can email [e-mail] DM US. Message us whatever you want. We are not hard to find. Good luck. Yeah, very cool. Very cool.

[Mike Axelrod]

Thank you.

[Fiona Tande]

Let me ask this question. This is the first controversial question of the podcast. Have you ever had anybody in the film festival that has produced something that is tied to hunting and wildlife conservation?

[Mike Axelrod]

Not really. No, I haven't.

[Fiona Tande]

That's A very polite way of saying, no, Robbie, never.

[Mike Axelrod]

Absolutely. But it is why I approached you, because it's, it's definitely. It's a topic that I've come across. And, and I do come from a country that is vehemently against hunting. But we'll get more into that in the podcast. But, yeah. So I really wanted to have a better understanding of it. It's something that took place, Hunting took place, has taken place in Kenya for a long time, but controversially, last year, you know, we lost a couple of Taskers to hunters. So it's, it's a topic that I wanted to have addressed in a sober and safe space. So that's why I'm here.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah. And look, I think that when you. And as we talked about it many times together, what we've prided ourselves in from a Blood Origins perspective, and as we move into a. We've actually built an additional nonprofit behind Blood Origins, and I'm not going to release its name yet, but we are working in those sort of circles that's more tied to sustainable use of natural resources, in which we believe hunting, fishing, and most importantly, people are central to sustainable wildlife conservation. For your kids, my kids, our grandkids, one day that we have to have opportunities and spaces specifically where intellectual, intelligent individuals like yourself and me can come together in a space and talk. And I'm not. And in the conversations we've had together, I'm not an evangelical wanting to convert you to being a pro hunting advocate. All I want you to do is hear me for what I'm saying and for you to probe me if you're like, that doesn't sound right. But also on the other hand, going, wow, that actually makes a little sense. And though it may not fit, say, the canyon model, or maybe it, it could in certain circumstances, just like I've been 10 days in India where hunting has been banned since 1972, and I go and sit with the poorest of the poor, just like it would be in Kenya, and go, why are these people not allowed to derive a benefit somehow from the wildlife that is interacting with them? Taking out their crops, taking out their livelihoods, killing their people. And yes, ecotourism is an option, but ecotourism is only in the famous reserves, like in the Amboseli ecosystem or in the Serengeti. And here in India was the big tiger reserves. And India is a completely like, you kill a pig in India, you can go to jail for 12 years.

[Mike Axelrod]

Wow.

[Fiona Tande]

Wow. And all they're doing is protecting their crops. And don't even eat the pig. Right. Some of them don't even eat it because it's Hindu. Anyway, I say it all to say that I really enjoy opportunities like this because I'm not, I don't. I'm not going to press you about becoming a pro hunting advocate. I just wanted this lay out the truth that I know.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

And you come away from it going, wow, I never thought about it like that.

[Mike Axelrod]

Fair enough. And, and I'm always, I'm very open minded as I, I would hope you took away from our conversation.

[Fiona Tande]

Absolutely.

[Mike Axelrod]

So.

[Fiona Tande]

Absolutely.

[Mike Axelrod]

I'm definitely keen to learn. Um, but I, I do want to have a very open and respectful dialogue around this, this topic, controversial topic.

[Fiona Tande]

So, Fiona, talk to me about how again, you were raised in Kenya, raised in a system that had no hunting, was, was your viewpoint very much like hunting is bad, bad.

[Mike Axelrod]

So it's interesting because there's the hunting you're talk, talking about and then there's the hunting that I was exposed to, which is mostly trophy hunting. And I don't know if there's a huge difference because it's definitely something I'm, I'm going to ask. But. So what I've been exposed to is trophy hunting. And I definitely, I'm not behind that because even with the animals that were being hunted, I would find that already they're endangered. You know, removing them from the ecosystem didn't make sense. And they've always, you know, hunters have peddled conservation, being the model behind their cause.

[Fiona Tande]

So in your mind, in your mind, what do you think? You sort of. I think it's a good, it's a good segue already. What is the difference? When, when you think about the hunting I talked about in trophy hunting, what did you, what do you see as the difference? Or maybe an easier question is why do you dislike trophy hunting?

[Mike Axelrod]

It, it has no bearing in conservation, in my opinion, because at the end of the day, when you get your trophy, whether it's the tusks or the head of a lion, you know, what are you doing to the species that you've left behind? I mean, we've seen the whole effect of Cecil the lion. He was in his prime. So what was the conservation reasoning behind that hunting? I've seen canned hunting. I've been exposed to that. I've read about that. I watched films about that. And so I feel like, and then coming from the African community, I know that we ourselves hunted in the early days and our hunting was more for subsistence and cultural reasons. So I, it's just about finding that balance and what it is that the explanation behind the hunting in. In this time and in this day and age, basically. What.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah.

[Mike Axelrod]

What are the benefits? And can we move away from that? So that, that for me is. Is what I'm. I'm looking at or trying to.

[Fiona Tande]

I would. So I would say that trophy. The idea of trophy hunting has been bastardized, and it's been bastardized as a bad thing. Now, I will say that 90% of trophy hunting, and I always give percentages because I. I'm never like a. It's always good or always bad. I would say for the vast majority, and I'll say about 90% of trophy hunting is actually what you want it to be, which is conservation. And I'll explain why shortly.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay.

[Fiona Tande]

10% of trophy hunting is actually on face value and is in an activity, has no bearing on conservation at all, period. Okay. Like, the canned hunting that you talked about is really no benefit. Somebody comes in, they pick a lion, they pick something and they shoot it and they take it home. There's no real benefit there. The only benefit, if you wanted to sort of look a little bit beyond that whole, like, motivation of that individual is tied to somebody's getting a job. If it's a plains game animal that's being canned, that that meat is being used somehow, somewhere, it's never being wasted. You know that, right? You. You live in Africa most. The idea that somebody kills something in Africa, chops off its head and leaves the body is just. That never happens.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay?

[Fiona Tande]

So. But 90% of trophy hunting, in my opinion, is the reason why wildlife conservation in these hunting areas is doing so well. And here's why I say that trophy hunting has a mon as a moniker, means that this individual. And again, I've got to take your. It's very difficult for you to do this, but you've got to remove the motivation of the individual of why they are there out of the picture. And Fiona, to be completely honest with you, very few people are going to Africa to hunt for conservation.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay?

[Fiona Tande]

Hear me for what I'm saying. They're going there to hunt because they like it and they think and it's fun for them and it's an adventure for them. And they get to go to these cool places and cool. And meet cool people and see cool animals and do the thing that they love, which is to hunt. But the indirect benefit of that activity, the indirect consequence of that activity is conservation. And here's why I say that in that trophy motivation, as this person's walking around a random piece of bush in Africa. What animal is he selecting or she selecting? They are often again, I'm not going to say all the time, 90% of the time are going to pick a very old male.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay.

[Fiona Tande]

A male that is done, he's done his breeding, he's, he's moved on from the herd, is really, you know, going to be in the last stages of his life. So when you think about a conservation of wildlife perspective as a paradigm, as a policy writ large, how do you increase a wildlife population? Which is what conservation is, right? Conservation means I want to sustain wildlife and I want to increase wildlife. Would you agree with that statement?

[Mike Axelrod]

But also preserve it.

[Fiona Tande]

But if you're sustaining it and increasing it, are you preserving it?

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah, technically, yes, you are.

[Fiona Tande]

Okay. Yes you are. Because it's going to be there. Preserving is keeping something there for the future.

[Mike Axelrod]

Exactly right.

[Fiona Tande]

So if you are ensuring the population stays the same or increases into the future, you're protecting it, you're conserving it, you're preserving it. So if you, if you needed to do that, how do you do it? Which parts of the population do you protect to ensure that an animal's population is preserved, protected and conserved?

[Mike Axelrod]

The young.

[Fiona Tande]

The young, absolutely. The young. Breeding males. Right. Unfortunately, you brought up Cecilia. Unfortunately, sometimes a breeding male in his prime is taken. Should that happen? We hope it doesn't happen, but it sometimes does. Now what happened from Cecil, Cecil started a movement in lion conservation which is called an aged based quota. Now if you look in, in Zambia, if you look in the asset started in the Assa, you look in the Salou, you look at all these places. Now there's age based line quota for lines being taken. So lines are only now being taken at over 6 years old, 7, 8, 9, 10 years old. Often those male lines are not with prides either. So by protecting the females, so nobody's hunting females, which is the reproductive engine of the population. Right. By protecting the young, by protecting young males, by protecting the breeding males and only targeting that male population. That is done. And again, they're not completely done. I'm not going again. I'm never going to say they're comp. Like they're never going to breed again. Which is part of this elephant controversy on the Kenyan Tanzanian border is that Amber Selli has good research that says that these old buggers that do get over the age of mortality, there's a, there's a very young age of mortality of, of male elephants in the Amboseli ecosystem. It's at like 41, 42 years of age. So once an elephant goes over that they do have, based on the science that Amphicidi has brought forward, that they do have a greater propensity for siring young elephants in that population. So it's a very unique system that for the majority, most animals, when they hit and humans, when they hit 70, 80, 90 years old in those time frames of a male, they just want to be left alone, like an old buffalo bull, an old sable bull, they just want to be left alone. And those are the animals that you take. So I say that all to say in my. As a philosophy, we don't call it trophy hunting, but hunting as a philosophy by targeting that specific animal, just from a wildlife conservation perspective has to be defined as wildlife conservation, as wildlife protection, I wouldn't call it preservation because again, we, we, we, we belong to the philosophy, philosophy of sustainable use. So a definition of conservation has use built into it. If you look at ICN specifically, some people say, well, you don't have to have use from a conservation perspective. Okay, but the animals are going to die anyway. I don't, I don't subscribe to the, the idea that take humans out completely, let animals do their thing. I think we have to be a part of it.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

So anyway, I say that to say that's my definition from a trophy hunting perspective. The other thing that you mentioned, which is really cool, is that you talked about cultural hunting, especially in Kenya. I read a book and I'll have to go and find it and I'll send you some pictures around it. There was a tribe in southern Kenya and it was led by a guy in the late 1800s by, I think it's Moses Katui or something like that. These guys were renowned elephant hunters with poison bow and arrows. And they would, this tribe would cover themselves in elephant dung and they would slip in and they would actually get like underneath the elephant and shoot a poisoned arrow into those elephants. I won't ask you to guess, but those guys, do you know what elephants they targeted.

[Mike Axelrod]

Elephants in their prime.

[Fiona Tande]

The biggest, the biggest elephants with the biggest ivory. And why did they do that? It had no ecological consequence at all. It was mainly because the biggest elephants had the most meat.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right? Right.

[Fiona Tande]

And the biggest elephants had the biggest tusks that they could trade with the Arabs on the coast for beads and for all other things. It's fascinating, fascinating when you actually look at it and you start looking at again, the bastardization of this term trophy hunting. And I've also heard people say it's a colonial term, right? That it's white people. I said, well, no, technically, the first trophy hunters were the tribes because they recognized, at the end of the day, a trophy is a value tied to someone. Right. My trophy may be for my family here. I want to kill the biggest, fattest female doe because I know it's going to feed my family the most. And that's the value for me. The value for, you know, Moses Couture and his tribe was the most meat and the most ivory because we get the most money from it or we get the most trading value from it. So, yeah, I hope that answered your question. It was a long answer to your question.

[Mike Axelrod]

It kind of does. I, I do have a few rebuttals, but let's pin that to when you come to that topic because I, I had a flow of questions that was going to help me get an understanding of this. First of all, I saw that and you have mentioned that you've grown up in, you grew up in South Africa and now you're working in the US So having seen both African and Western views, what difference stand out for you when it comes to hunting? For instance, you know, like you've spoken about, you know, many African communities traditionally hunted for subsistence or cultural reasons, whereas Western have a propensity for big game hunting, which often entails, you know, trophies. Have these contrasting perspectives shaped your own philosophy on what hunting should represent?

[Fiona Tande]

No. It's interesting you say that, you know, the, I think outside of America there is a, there is a, A viewpoint that Americans are this like, trophy hunting culture. And the reason being is that all you see is the traveling western philosophy. You don't see the homegrown philosophy tied to hunting. And I would argue that here in America specifically, there's a vast majority of the population that is, I wouldn't call them subsistence hunters, but I would very much call them, you know, blue collared individuals that want to fill their freezers with meat because deer meat is very abundant and it's very good for you.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

And it's cheaper than going to the grocery store and buying cow meat or lamb meat or anything like that. So I think that there is, if there is some synergies between, sort of, dare I say, like here I'm in Tennessee, I lived in Mississippi for 20 years. The redneck Mississippian, the rural country Mississippian, I think philosophically has very strong connections to like a rural person in Kenya specifically as it comes to, you know, figuring out where their meat's coming from.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

Interestingly enough, America and South Africa have very strong wildlife mod conservation models. They're arguably like two of the best wildlife conservation models in the world. South Africa went from 500,000 head of wildlife in 1970 to almost 22 million head of wildlife today. Like, holy smokes, that's a lot of wildlife. And why did you know, why was the change? Why did something like that happen? The reason it happened was because they went through a massive drought in the 70s. Sheep and cattle just could not last on the landscape. And they started looking around going, oh, that springbok's doing really well. That kudu is doing really well. What's going on here? And then somebody said, well, that kudu right there, I'll pay you a thousand dollars if I can come and shoot it. And you get to keep the meat and you get to do whatever you want with the meat, give it to the community, sell the meat. They're like, wow, okay, Capitalistic thoughts process. I can do better from a land use perspective. I focus on wildlife than I do on agriculture and livestock. And so that's what was born out of the 70s and today that is the value driven wildlife economy that is South Africa.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

But it's a very private model, Fiona. I E. And that's the only reason why it did so well is that, Fiona, if you had land and you put wildlife on your land and you fenced it, you know it belonged to you and you decide what you want to do with it. Ecotourism, game management, game farming, hunting, combination of all of it. In America, it's the opposite. It's not a private model, it's a public model. It's a public resource model. And so they have, they have taken the, the viewpoint of you need to the public, the resource belongs to the public. The state manages the resource for the public. And so it's two very contrasting models that work equally, equally well, but very different in their, in their hunting philosophies. And there's also other things, like really unique things. Like here in America they have very exclusive, like governor's tag. So for instance, the only way I could equate it to South Africa. And again, it wouldn't work. Tanzania, it wouldn't work. Would be like the minister of Tanzania says, I'm putting an elephant tag up for auction for the entire country. And then somebody can hunt that elephant wherever, whenever they want. So it happens in America, the. So for instance, sheep, wild big horn sheep. The New Mexico governor's tag for bighorn sheep just sold for $1.3 million for a sheep, Fiona.

[Mike Axelrod]

Wow.

[Fiona Tande]

And so you're like, that's crazy.

[Mike Axelrod]

It is.

[Fiona Tande]

You can buy a tag for 200,000. So why did somebody pay 1.3 million? Well, one, they are, they're looking for a tax write off. Two, they're interested in wildlife conservation, they're interested in having more sheep on the landscape. And the way that that system works is that tag that he got, all of that money gets pumped back into bighorn sheep conservation in New Mexico, in the state. So the guy literally just raised triple, quadruple the amount of money that the sheep program typically has on an annual basis to do their work to hunt one sheep. But that guy then gets to choose where he hunts, what he hunts, how he hunts the whole kitten caboodle. Like it's open 365 days a year. So it's a very privileged opportunity status. And some people don't like it because the model in America is that the resource belongs to the people. And you can't really pay for the, the model. You can't pay for the resource like you can in South Africa. That's a private model. You pay for that resource. So they think it's antithetical to, to the idea of, of wildlife conservation in America, but it also has its merits and as I just described in terms of putting money back into conservation.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right, so how would you say then those kind of, the different models have shaped how blood origins operate?

[Fiona Tande]

Basically, I think it just gives us an exceptional viewpoint of the world.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

I think like today, I told you before we got on here, I'm going to talk to a vegan farmer and his whole philosophy is hunting is not conservation, but it's very limited to an American viewpoint. And you know, we see, we see hunting in New Zealand, we see hunting in Australia, we see hunting in South Africa, in Tanzania, you know, obviously not. And then in places that have hunting band, India, Kenya, America, that have different systems. And so I think it allows us to have these kinds of conversations that we've, we've been privy to. We've opened our viewpoint, our perspective to all these different models that happens around the world. And we can see the, the good in those models and we can see the bad in those models.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, fair enough. All right. So in terms of colonial legacy in hunting, the history of trophy hunting in Africa is definitely intertwined with colonialism. You know, you think back of colonial era of safaris where outsiders claim big game drive big game trophies. So how would you reckon with that legacy today? Do you see a modern, do you see modern hunting culture taking steps to break away from those colonial era attitudes and involve local African communities more? Or does the shadow colonial exploitation still hang over international hunting expeditions from your experience or blood origins?

[Fiona Tande]

Yes, I completely acknowledge that there is disparities. I think that there is moves afoot everywhere to try as best as possible to get equality put into ownership of wildlife and trackers becoming professional hunters and professional hunters being of color, you know, everywhere, all across Africa. I think, I think the toughest hurdle, Fiona, is I think, unfortunately, because of a legacy, as you mentioned, of sort of colonialism and hunting being seen. I think this is important. Hunting being seen or wildlife management being seen specifically as like a colonial white thing. Even though people are like, okay, we need to have more representation of. Of race in the various folds of wildlife management, I think maybe there's a stigma that that's not what we do, that's not what we want to do. I'm not. Again, I'm not saying that that's. That's the case all across the board. Because I see things changing in South Africa. I see black professional hunters coming through the systems. I see black owners now coming through the systems. I see the same thing in wildlife veterinarian work. Right. For instance, Mozambique Conservation Alliance. The guys there, I don't think you'll see a white face in their team. And they're all vets, which is amazing to see. Right. They're really, really good guys. I think people recognize that, and I think people want to change. There's also just, you know, a massive hurdle to get over, which is 30 years or 40 years of that just being not something we do. Yeah, it's a tough question. And I don't know if it's changing quick enough, if there's enough opportunity. I do know that there is lots of people giving opportunities, opening opportunities, as much as they possibly can.

[Mike Axelrod]

Fair enough. Sorry to put you in this, on this podcast.

[Fiona Tande]

Oh, no, no, no. It's a great. It's a great question. And I love the fact this is my podcast. I'm supposed to be asking you questions and you're asking me questions.

[Mike Axelrod]

Well, I did get in. I remember us having this conversation, and it's something I'm definitely curious about. So I really wanted to use this platform to ask.

[Fiona Tande]

And I think it takes time too. Right. It doesn't. Especially in the field. I'll give you an example that a lot of people may not know of. When you look at professional hunting across Africa, the gold star standard for professional hunting is the Zimbabwe professional guide.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay.

[Fiona Tande]

And I say that very specifically. Zimbabwe professional guide is the highest standard of guiding in Zimbabwe, and they do not. Zimbabwe does not differentiate between a professional hunter and an ecotourism guide. They. They are the same person when they finish their exam. Okay, okay. Here are things that you don't realize that I think you would want somebody in the ecotourism space to be proficient in. In Zimbabwe, you have to. It takes you about four years to become qualified.

[Mike Axelrod]

Wow.

[Fiona Tande]

You have to do apprenticeships. You have to do number of hours. And the guides and professional hunters have to do the same things. And when I mean the same things, I mean the same things, I. E. In their. In their experience, as they move forward, they all have to kill elephant.

[Mike Axelrod]

Wow.

[Fiona Tande]

They all have to kill buffalo. They all have to. Not all the. The professional hunter side has to kill a cat, lion, and or leopard. Now, they're not hunting them for trophies. These are all problem animals that they're taking care of in rural communities. So they use the. The training opportunities for these guides to go in and help the people of Zimbabwe. Now you're like, whoa, Holy shit. I can't believe that an ecotourism guide has to kill an elephant. That's crazy, right?

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

Let me ask you a question. If you're. If you decide to take a walk, a safari walk with a safari guide in an area, would you prefer to know that that safari guide knows what's going. What to do when the shit hits the ceiling fan and an elephant charges in or not?

[Mike Axelrod]

That's a tough question, because I've always asked myself this in terms of rocking safaris. In my opinion, and I'll be very honest, I will bear the brunt of losing my life if it means.

[Fiona Tande]

Oh, no, you wouldn't, Fiona.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yes, I wouldn't. This is how I see it. The wild is wildlife's home. Right. It's like asking me if someone came into my home and threatened me, what's my duty? You know, is it to defend myself or is it to lay over because they came with good intentions? You know, I defend myself. Right. And the same for an animal. They don't. There's no proof that animals at least enduring these walking safaris, act out of malice. It's. It's definitely a reaction, whether it's feeling threatened or defending their territory, but it's always. It's. It's from a pure place. So for a guide, for me, I would tell my guide, first and foremost, do not take the life of this animal.

[Fiona Tande]

You're free to this. That would be so tough for him, Fiona. Like, if you Tell him, look, if an elephant charges, let him kill me. He's like, oh, hell no. Let him kill my job.

[Mike Axelrod]

But just not, don't kill the animal. And I think I've seen alternatives to having animals or repelling animals that didn't have to come to ending their lives. And it's something that's practiced in Kenya. So it would be wild for me to just stand there and watch an animal being shot in because they're protecting me and I'm the one who stepped into their home. Yeah. So that's. And it's been my, my view for a long time. It's not something I'm just coming up with right now. It's something I've definitely thought about and that's my stance on it.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah. You know that. Look, kudos to you because I wouldn't lose my life. I would, I would want my guide. And again, this is a absolutely rare case. Exceptional circumstance.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

Hope never, ever, ever happens. And the guides are taught never to put themselves in that situation. But you never say never.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

And in the situation where an elephant or something, you surprise an old buffalo, it just happens to be there. Old cantankerous curmudgeon is like, fuck you guys. You woke me up from my sleep. I'm coming to kill you. I want that guy to know how to kill that buffalo and have done it. Take care of that and don't let and protect me. So all power to you. You're going to let the buffalo take you.

[Mike Axelrod]

I mean, we didn't talk about buffaloes. That's my greatest fear. But yeah, it's definitely general in animals. And I would hope that the guide would know how to not surprise an animal in the wild so that we are not in that scenario at all. But yeah, also, you know, you don't put yourself in situations where an animal has to lose their life for what, you know, that's, that's my, that's how I approach, you know, have respect for wild, wild species, wild habitats and wildlife in general. That's it. So that none of you have to lose your lives, period.

[Fiona Tande]

So I say that all to say ZPGA is doing such a great job. There's. There is from an equality perspective, there's. There everyone, you know, it's an equal playing field. Right. The, the tests are so hard.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

That everyone just goes through and there's, there's amazing black professional hunters, amazing black guards, amazing white rangers, white guy, you. To me, ZPGA again, is the gold star stand. It's like you just have to be the best of the best because that's what we demand.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah. I mean, it's scary that there'd be enough problem animals for all the guides that are taking this test to be able to shoot down that.

[Fiona Tande]

For me, that's what. That's what you don't. There may be 400 people that take the entry examination.

[Mike Axelrod]

Mm.

[Fiona Tande]

By the time that 400 class finishes, there's only like eight of them left.

[Mike Axelrod]

Oh, okay.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah. It's so hard.

[Mike Axelrod]

Very. Yeah. Okay.

[Fiona Tande]

And the shooting requirements are so, like, the testing is so rigorous because Zimbabwe tourism is it.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

Tourism is their currency, and so they want to make sure that their guides are the best of them.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, well. Well, that's. That's good. And then it's something I've learned for sure today. So that's really cool. So to my other question. So in an age of lab grown meat, wildlife photography, safaris, and increasing concern for animal welfare, as you heard me say, some would argue that hunting is up and an outdated practice. Right. What would you say to people who claim there's no longer any need to hunt in modern society? You believe hunting still serves a valuable purpose, whether culturally or scientifically, that can't be met by alternatives like ecotourism, which you've mentioned, or controlled culling by authorities, or like wildlife contraception.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah. Sheesh. You asked a lot. There a lot of things to go through. So let me just quickly hit a couple. Lab grown meat. I'd prefer to eat real meat than multiple different chemicals. Yes, you can do it. Doesn't mean it's good for you. Right.

[Mike Axelrod]

But it is an age that we live in. You know, people.

[Fiona Tande]

It is an age we live in. But I wouldn't say that it's good for humans. I wouldn't say that it's scalable for every human on the planet. I don't think it would be good for the environment either. And the fact you don't know what you're actually eating is one of the biggest problems. Two from a necessity of hunting today. You're absolutely right. You don't have to hunt today. This is. That's why we have grocery stores. That's why we have meat. But if you're not okay with hunting, you've got to be okay with the animal hus. The sort of. The ability. Animal industry. Right. The animal in the complex, which is lots of animals being grown in. In confined spaces for human consumption. You have to be okay with that. And if you're okay with that in terms of random meat showing up in a random grocery store that you have no idea where the meat came from. You don't know how the animal lived. You don't know the standards that the animal lived in. You don't know how it died. You don't know the animals, the hands that touch that meat. You can't be against hunting. You can't, because of the ethics tied to it. Because the meat that I hunt, I know everything about that animal, Fiona. Everything. I know how old it was. I know how it lived. I know where it lived. I know that it had every day of its life that was happy until the last day that it had one bad day and its life got extinguished extremely quickly and as ethically as possible, then I know exactly who touched the meat. I know who processed the meat. I know everything about it. So to me, when somebody goes hunting is irrelevant nowadays because you can go get your food from the grocery store, I say that's a little hypocritical.

[Mike Axelrod]

Well, that would be coming from, again, an American perspective, because in Africa, we don't think of stuff like that. Our cows are free grazing, right? They're not confined in spaces. They're not fed chemicals. So we don't have that, I guess, luxury.

[Fiona Tande]

Same situation, though. Same situation. Kadua Cruz, you're in Nairobi right now, right? If you went down to your grocery store right now and you bought beef that is packaged in your grocery store.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

What do you know about that beef?

[Mike Axelrod]

I know it's not hunted.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah, but what's the difference between killed and hunted?

[Mike Axelrod]

I guess for me, I'm looking at wildlife versus domestic. I don't know of anyone who hunts cows in Africa.

[Fiona Tande]

What's the difference, though? What's the difference? They're both dying.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yes, but one has died. I don't know. I mean, there's no.

[Fiona Tande]

No, you're getting onto something. You're getting something very. So, no, actually, I'll help you put the point to what you're trying to say. One died for human consumption.

[Mike Axelrod]

Exactly.

[Fiona Tande]

One died for fun is what you wanted to say, right?

[Mike Axelrod]

Precisely.

[Fiona Tande]

But the meat is still being used the same way. And I would argue that the hunted meat is more. We wanted to take a step back. Has more ties to animal welfare than the meat in your grocery store. And here's why I say it. Animal welfare is what. Animal welfare is a thought process. That is, we want to make sure everything tied to an animal is the best it can be. Agreed?

[Mike Axelrod]

Agree.

[Fiona Tande]

So a hunted animal, free range. Right. Has very little human interaction, no hormones, no antibiotics, no crawled not pushed around, lived out until, you know, probably very old age, died to a single bullet.

[Mike Axelrod]

I know.

[Fiona Tande]

Okay. I think that's pretty good from an animal welfare perspective.

[Mike Axelrod]

And fair enough. That is a fair argument. Because even as you're saying that, you know, I was trying to say, is it for me, is. Is the issue the bullet and is it because, you know, even Native Americans would hunt with bows and arrows. Is that more humane? You know, what. What constitutes humanely dying? So that. That is a good argument from you. And I will. I will. That. I will accept that.

[Fiona Tande]

No, no, And I appreciate you saying that. I think the sticking point here is what I. What I helped you with is there's somehow some reason there's a connotation that an animal dying for fun is wrong.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah. It's still hard to wrap my. It definitely is hard to wrap my head around that, you know, why? Why? And what does that say about someone who's having fun from seeing an animal die? You know?

[Fiona Tande]

So let me ask this question. Does it. Is there a difference if I go out and hunt an impala? Okay. I'm the same individual. I go out because I. I'm looking forward to hunting an impala. I think it's going to be fun. I go through the hunt, I kill an impala. It was amazing. My motivation to go out to do that was because it was going to be an adventure and it was fun.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

That impala got taken. The meat got distributed to the local community. I was very grateful for it. They don't really have a protein source. I make. This is a scenario, or my job was to go out to kill an impala for the community for its meat. I did the same thing.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

But the motivation of me going was different. Is there a difference in your mind now?

[Mike Axelrod]

So you're saying in shock, the end justifies the means, Correct?

[Fiona Tande]

I'm saying that the consequence. Not the end, the consequence at the end of the day. Because I can't change people's motivations. Fiona.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

I can't change some. Like, I started this conversation. I can't change somebody to say, I want all of you white hunters in America, I want you to go to Africa to hunt purely because you are for conservation.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

I can't change their minds.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

And so if I can't change their minds, I'm like, okay, what is the result? What is the consequence of you doing. What you're doing in your mind is for fun. So that example with the impala, the consequence of the action is people are being fed. That need to be fed. Isn't that what we should just be about? Feeding the community as an example. As an example, right.

[Mike Axelrod]

No, I hear you.

[Fiona Tande]

An example.

[Mike Axelrod]

I hear you.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah.

[Mike Axelrod]

I'll counter and give an example from my own community. We hunted. Hunted being the awkward word. Lions. As part of a rite of passage. Right.

[Fiona Tande]

For young Maasai boys. Right.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yes. To become a moron. Right. One would argue they'd be having fun. As much as there were dangerous connotations to it. There was adventure, there was fun still, you know, it's a group of young men gathering to take on this formidable beast. So at the end of the day, did they're having fun, make it inhumane. And it's again, it was something that was taking place during rituals. It's not something that they'd wake up and decide to just hunt lions. And I've seen how that's been skewed by tons of these films that have come out to talk about Maasai and stuff. And so you bring a good point. Does having fun make it any less humane or even. Or. You know what? Basically, I get your point. So what I'm saying.

[Fiona Tande]

Well, I appreciate that. I appreciate that it's. And that's the toughest hurdle to get over at the end of the day. And really part of the conversation we've been having, the toughest hurdle is somebody getting beyond the cloud of someone, whoever that is, enjoying. And here's the crux. Enjoying killing an animal. See your face. Even just like nailed it right there.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah. Enjoying is such a heavy word.

[Fiona Tande]

I mean, yeah, but it's not actually enjoying the kill. That's the thing that again, it's so difficult to describe if you've never done it. It's not. Because here's the whole. There's so many sort of complex paradigms built into hunting. When somebody goes, oh, you guys enjoy killing. You love the bloodlust. I'm like, not really. Because if that was the case, then we would go volunteer our services at the abattoir and kill as much as we want. And there's also failure built into hunting. And so if there's failure built into hunting, then there must be something else that we love that we enjoy that is exciting to us. And if we are successful and we do kill something, what's funny is it's almost. It is anticlimactic because the hunt is over when you kill something. And so it's, it's. It's just a. Again, I'm struggling with it because it is such. It's so difficult to talk about because I don't do it. I enjoy hunting. Here's the difference. I enjoy hunting. What is hunting? Hunting is the adventure. It's seeing new places. It's spending 56 hours in airplanes to get to this random place in the middle of nowhere. It's the middle of the world that nobody's ever been to. Meeting cool people that have never seen a white man before, who want to sit around and give you tea around a fire that nobody has sat around before for an opportunity. For an opportunity to potentially kill something. Effy.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, so hunting is. Is. Is more than just the act, right? It's. It's the whole experience, basically, 100%.

[Fiona Tande]

That's what. That is what hunting is. It's this. And. And. And say, you know, if you would. The response to me could be, well, Robbie, you can do that without hunting. You could not do that without killing something.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah, yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

And I say, well, then I wouldn't have gone.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right, fair enough.

[Fiona Tande]

To your question about ecotourism, like, the last piece of your question, like, why can't ecotourism be the savior for everything? Well, number one, I don't think that there's enough places in the world that would ex. Would have enough volume of people to go do ecotourism. So I saw a survey once of students, and they said, list the top. If you had to go to a place to do ecotourism, list the places. 97 out of a hundred people listed. Okavango Delta, Serengeti and Kruger National Park. That was it. And so you've left with 5% of the world. If you extrapolate that out, 5% of the rest of the ecotourism gets split between everywhere else. That may be a large percentage sort of skewed through that survey, but there's a lot of competition for ecotourism, and they typically want to go to places that you can see the big five very quickly. Get in, get out. Two days, three days, get in, get out. So a place that I go to that takes 56 hours to get to that is incredibly difficult to get to. And then the density of wildlife is so low that you hardly ever see anything. Nobody's going to go there. No ecotourism will. No ecotourist will go there. And ecotourism is a volume business, Fiona. Right. So there's lots of studies. Timbavati, Namibia, is. You need, like, 66 ecotourism people to cover the cost of one hunter. So these places in rural, rural Africa can operate and survive and protect the habitat and protect the wildlife. And employ people with very few people coming to do the activity, which is hunting. You only 10 hunters to go into the middle of the Congo to protect the Congo, because they're willing to spend a hundred thousand dollars to go there.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

Versus a thousand tourists, you know, or 660 tourists spending, you know, 10 grand at a time and spending two or three days at a time and flying in, flying out. And you know, we need to have an entire other podcast to talk about the idea that non consumptive ecotourism is actually consumptive. When you talk about carbon footprints, water footprints, all of those kinds of things which.

[Mike Axelrod]

And so I want to unpin what we pinned in the beginning, the talk about hunting versus trophy hunting. First of all, I really want to, from your point of view, understand if there is a difference. And you know, coming from Kenya, it's definitely a country that's embraced alternative conservation models. Right. And we firmly stand against specifically trophy hunting, labeling it obviously outdated and even a form of neocolonialism like you talked about. What would you say is the difference between ethical hunting and trophy hunting and what safeguards exist or do you believe should exist to ensure that hunting truly targets conservation rather than perpetuate exploitation?

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah, I think I've already answered the question. I think trophy hunting is ethical for the vast majority of its time. Right?

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

I think there's going to be bad apples in every barrel. Ecotourism has bad apples, right? Ecotourism is not the be all and end all. There's bad operators in ecotourism circles. And I think the same thing applies in hunting circles. You have bad operators and those bad operators, unfortunately get a bad. Give the whole industry a bad rap because it's tied to killing animals. Right. You don't have a bad operator in the ecotourism world. Put a bad smell on the whole ecotourism country. Right. Ecotourism industry. Because there's no like real. The only way that they would do it is if they ran over a lion, say in the Serengeti, because they were racing to get there or something like that. That's the difference. And the same model happens the same way. If there's a bad operator in ecotourism, why is that a bad op? Why is he a bad operator or she's a bad operator? It's likely because money is involved, right? Same thing as hunting bad apples, bad operators getting influenced by money, being influenced by, you know, some sort of greed. That's it. So to me, that's the whole point of what I do every single day. And People have pointed it out on Facebook. They're like, why aren't you talking about this bad operator? I said, because nobody's Talking about the 90% that are good, right? I'm going to talk about the 90% that are good and not focus on the one that is bad or the two that are bad. Let's talk about the good guys. Let's talk about all the good things that happen because of hunting. Let's talk about the communities that are benefiting hand over mouth because of hunting, the wildlife that is benefiting, the people that are benefiting, the education that that is being provided and people getting. Are you talking about like breaking colonial neocolonial circles? I got example after example of people giving opportunities because of hunting that are now uber successful. Like I'm going into South Africa at the end of March to tell a story of a kid that got, had extreme potential, went to, got to the university level and just could not survive financially. And hunters stepped up and said, we want to help you. And there's now one of the most accomplished architects in Port Elizabeth coming out of a very, very rural place. And because he succeeded, there's now half a dozen of him that have come through the ranks that are now becoming uber successful. It's so amazing.

[Mike Axelrod]

So what kind of safeguards would you recommend so that these bad apples are not getting as much PR as they do? And we are talking about the good apples because, to be honest.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah, go ahead.

[Mike Axelrod]

It's because there are these opportunities to break ranks that allow them to be able to exploit the system and give a bad name to hunting. So what kind of safeguards do you think should be put in place?

[Fiona Tande]

No, I think the safeguards are in place. I think that we have laws, we have regulations, we have quotas, we have science based monitoring of our wildlife populations to ensure that you're not over harvesting. Does that sometimes happen? Yes, but I think people are, I think specifically hunters and hunting operators realize that, you know, they're in it for the long game. For instance, I'll give you an idea. Tanzania. One of the things that the finger was pointed at, Tanzania, that didn't benefit hunting or didn't benefit wildlife is that concession leases were given for five years at a time. If you were a businessman, Fiona, and went into a concession knowing that you've only got five years, and in five years time, after all of your investment in that concession, it is going to go up for tender again and you could lose it, what would you do? I know what I would do. Please tell us Please, I would rape the system.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, right.

[Fiona Tande]

I'm a businessman, you're a businesswoman. We would go in there and we'd make as much money as we could in the five years that we had it.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

And then we'd get out because we could lose it. That's what used to happen. And so in terms of safeguards, we talked about safeguards, there was, you know, yeah, they had quota, but they would, you know, go over quota and stuff like that. Not that it happened all the time, but today those, Those concessions are 15, 10 year leases, 15 year leases, 20 year leases. Now they were like, no, we want to invest and we want to think about sustainability because we can't. We have to. Wildlife is an economic asset to hunting. And here's the other thing that I think is a good takeaway for people and you to think about. People say hunting is not conservation, but if, if you look at it from a pure economics perspective, does a hunter and hunting operator want more wildlife on the ground or less wildlife on the ground? More. More, of course, because it means that there's more economic asset out there that's constantly growing. It's like your bank account, you want your bank account to grow, you want wildlife to grow as well. These hunting operators want wildlife to grow as well so that they have quota in the future to sell, to make money, to put back into anti poaching, to put back into the communities. It's just this amazing circle. And so I like to think of it like that, a lot. Like people, you gotta think of these places like a small economy and you want your economic assets to grow and to sustain themselves over time. So laws, regulations, policies, these things like concession lengths of time, the age based quota that we talked about for lions, all of these things are in place everywhere.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

That safeguards wildlife, that safeguards the industry.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, so speaking of science, there's definitely an intense debate in conservation science about whether hunting helps or harms wildlife. Supporters point out that regulated hunting can fund conservation and control over population and poor oversight. Poor oversight have led to declines. That's what critic says. From your experience and research, what does the science say? And is hunting effective as a conservation tool? And how does blood origins approach the nuance of hunting? The nuance that hunting is sometimes beneficial and not really a silver bullet. Bullet.

[Fiona Tande]

I would say that hunting is not the panacea of wildlife conservation. It's not the be all and end all of it.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

I think that today when you look at land use, I like to use this. When you look at Land use across the world. What? Land use is positive and promote. Promotes wildlife. Fiona, out of A percentage of 100% of land use across the world, how much percentage do you think is pro habitat, pro wildlife.

[Mike Axelrod]

Percentage wise?

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah.

[Mike Axelrod]

Maybe 80%.

[Fiona Tande]

The opposite. The opposite? I would say 8%.

[Mike Axelrod]

Wow.

[Fiona Tande]

Why do you think we have a, this whole like push for 30 for 30. Have you heard of 30 for 30?

[Mike Axelrod]

No. No, I haven't.

[Fiona Tande]

30 for 30 is protecting 30% of the land by 2030 all around the world. Why do you think we have that? Because we, a lot of people recognize that we don't have much land right now set aside for habitat and wildlife.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

When you look across the world, there's probably 8% of the land, 9% of the land dedicated specifically for wildlife or habitats or whatnot, or have positive benefits and consequences to wildlife and habitat. When you break that 8% out, what are the things that are pro wildlife and pro habitat? Some agricultural systems. Yes. Wilderness areas like your jungles, your mountains, your, you know, massive tiger areas in Russia. Okay, you've got your philanthropic model, right? The people who go in and spend money philanthropically to protect areas. You've got your carbon credit systems, your biodiversity credit systems, and how. I'm at four. Okay. Ecotourism, five. National parks, state parks, dum dum dum, you know, whatever. 6. And hunting, 7. Anything else that you can think that's pro wildlife and habitat.

[Mike Axelrod]

I guess the conservancies fit into the national parks.

[Fiona Tande]

State parks, national parks. Yep, yep, yep. So seven, there's only seven things in the world that are pro wildlife and pro habitat. So whenever somebody says we want to get rid of hunting, or science that says hunting is not good, like why would you throw out a tool, one of the few tools that we have for this thing that we all think is necessary, which is protecting wildlife and protecting habitat. Now again, when science says that hunting is not good, or as you say, sometimes is beneficial, nothing is perfect. Ecotorium never is not perfect either. Right. Hunting isn't perfect. Hunting doesn't have to happen everywhere, but there's a lot of places, again, I would say the vast majority, 80% of areas that people hunt, 90% of areas that people hunt, there is, there is no doubt is good for protecting habitat, for increasing wildlife and helping people. Tell me what's bad about those three things. And I don't need science, I'm a scientist, I don't need science to say or scientific peer reviewed study to tell me that. MOZAMBIQUE, In Qatar, 11 hunters went in and put 20 lions in four years ago. There's 105 lions today. I don't need a science peer reviewed paper to tell me that that's good.

[Mike Axelrod]

Great.

[Fiona Tande]

And I've got example like that after example, after example, after example. Now are there examples out there that hunting was not good? Yes. Okay, we're not perfect. Was there a piece of science that came out of Zambia in. I don't think it was the Kafue system, it was the Luanga system that showed that hunting was detrimental to lion populations and a moratorium had to be put in place that then after the moratorium, lion populations increased hundred percent. The hunting operators should have recognized that before the moratorium got put in place and put a moratorium on themselves.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right.

[Fiona Tande]

So you don't have the population to continue hunting the way that you are. Your economic asset is declining. Stop. So I think that a lot of people expect hunting to be this like absolute perfect thing by human nature. It cannot be.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right, good. Well, that's a very good point. And so now for me, coming from a background of filmmaking, I wanted to ask you a couple of questions in regards to films. As a filmmaker, at least I'd call you that. And storyteller with blood origins, you're portraying arguably a very controversial subject. Right. What responsibilities do you feel in depicting hunting in a fair and truthful way? How do you ensure that your content doesn't glorify unethical behavior or on the flip side, gloss over the real conflicts and emotions involved in hunting? And are there any examples that you can give me about any of your work that perhaps changed this preconceived notions about hunters and brought a nuance to a public debate?

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah, I think that we don't focus on, we don't focus on the act of hunting. This whole conversation's been about the benefits, consequence and impacts of the activity of hunting. And I feel like that nobody has focused on that. And that's what we focus on. And I think from a storytelling perspective, from a filmmaking perspective, what's the most powerful story that you can tell in that world is the story of someone.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

A person's story, the people's story. And that's what we love to focus on. And I think that's a very powerful tool because it's very difficult. You know, we've got a, we've got a piece coming out that I literally just finished four days ago about an elephant documentary out of Botswana. The benefits of elephant hunting to people in Botswana. And you know, we got to spend some time in front of a she said she was 20, she looked 16, in a rural mud hut in the middle of nowhere, and her dad had been trampled by an elephant, dead. And it's like, holy shit. How do you like. I have the privilege of telling this lady's. This girl's story to the world that this is the circumstance that she lives in. You know, a Western voice, a Kenyan voice, saying, it's bad. Don't hunt elephants. And I hate to do this, but I'm going to, because you did say, I'd prefer to die than an elephant dying. Well, put yourself in this lady's circumstance. This is a mud hut in the middle of nowhere with six little kids running around and chickens running around. You're like, whose kids are these? Are they the dads? Are they hers? We don't know. And she has nothing. Like he was the breadwinner. Like she has nothing. Or the. The old lady who goes to the elephant carcass after a trophy hunter, I'll say that specifically a trophy hunter or a hunter has come in and taken an elephant, Botswana, and uses the meat and is industrious and entrepreneurial and takes the meat and dries the meat and sells the meat for her now to afford education for her six daughters to go to mount and go and be in school. That without that elephant hunting, that is. That's not even possible. Like, there is no employment. She. This woman would not have an opportunity to do it, plus feed her family at the same time. It's just. And those are two examples. And I just, I get all the time, you know, I get the privilege of being behind the lens listening to this, number one. And then I get the privilege of showing the world, telling the world these stories.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right? Yeah, well, that, that I. I do agree that that's definitely something that I've come across. The tragedies of elephant conflict in, In Botswana. And, And I think storytelling is a powerful tool in. In, I guess, explaining the nuance of. Of what it means to. To be on the receiving end of being trampled or at least being affected by an elephant. And then also, not necessarily glorifying hunting, but also, but explaining it, you know, making people understand why is it that there's this quota or concession towards hunting. So I would say I would definitely agree in terms of storytelling, it does have that power. But then with the rise of digital media, filmmakers now have unprecedented power to shape public debate. So what, in your view, are responsibilities by storytellers when portraying hunting and conservation? Ensuring that our work is not neither overly sanitized nor unjustly demonizing.

[Fiona Tande]

No, that's a great one. And I think we've got to. I am constantly wary of falling into the trap and I hate to say it this way of not being truthful because I think that the anti hunting establishment is not truthful and they use that, they use that a lot in the digital media space to, to amplify their voice. We're not going to mention her name, but we talked about it in certain individual in, in South Africa together and I think she does the. She is so vitriolic and she uses that, that line of vitriol to amplify her voice. And it doesn't matter what is said. There's no consideration for logic, there's no consideration for truth, there's no consideration of anything but my opinion in a very vitriolic way. And I do not want to step into that stream of talking at all. And that's what we need to be careful of.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah, absolutely. But it is a powerful tool. Right. It can amplify your message as you so rightfully put. So how do you use your platform to I guess, demystify this?

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah, I think we use that.

[Mike Axelrod]

I've been told.

[Fiona Tande]

Yeah. You know, I love to take people for what they say and debunk them. But we debunk it in a very respectful, gentlemanly method. And we say, oh, you said this, let's deconstruct this. Like for instance, the Botswana just released a press release by the center for Humane Economy our America, saying we want to translocate elephants out of Botswana because they're imperiled. Angola is a safe haven and we want to promote ecotourism over hunting. Well, number one, imperiled. Imperiled suggests that they're in trouble, they're in danger. There's 132,000 elephants in the 28% area of the KAZA survey in Botswana. Probably 150,000 elephants in Botswana. No shape or form is that imperiled. Number two, Angola is, is a, is a, is a safe haven over Botswana. Wildlife poaching through the roof. There's mines, there's, there's no infrastructure. How can Angola be a safe haven over Botswana? And number three, by saying you're promoting ecotourism over hunting is you're pitting them against each other. They work in harmony together. In Botswana, like in Kenya and Tanzania, there's areas that should never be hunted. Where you've got permanent water, great wildlife, great wildlife viewing. Ecotourism is it. That is the tool that needs to be used. But right next door to it where you've got 400 miles of nothing but bush of the same bush that all that's in there are a couple of zebra, a couple of wildebeest, lots of elephant, and a sternbuck. No ecotourist is going in there. So how do we use that area to the value of. For the people, for wildlife, for habitat? Hunting is a great tool for that area.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, well, speaking of debunking, what are some of the myths or misconceptions that you've come across either personally or with your organization that you would like to, again, debunk for the greater public to have a better understanding, especially when it comes to hunting or hunters?

[Fiona Tande]

I think we've talked about a couple of them already. You know, that hunting is not. Conservation is something we constantly debunk. And I think that I've given numerous examples in this hour and a half just to tell somebody that actually it is. You know, again, go back to the original definition of what conservation is. It is that, you know, when. When an animal is hunted that it's just like the. The head is cut off. And that's the. The whole reason why somebody hunts. No, that's. That's not it. It's. Yeah, everything is used in most parts of the world. And I think, just. I think a lot of what we do is. And again, this comes from me, and the voice that we bring forward is that you may have a. A certain connotation of who a hunter is and how they're supposed to act and how they're supposed to speak. And I hope that I demystify or change that opinion of you around a hunter through me.

[Mike Axelrod]

I mean, you've certainly helped me look or recognize the nuances of hunting, especially coming from a community that has been vilified for our practices. I really do come to such conversations with an open mind and readiness to have dialogue. So if anything has happened, that's definitely been helpful in our conversation.

[Fiona Tande]

Perfect.

[Mike Axelrod]

But finally, now, living in this, you know, looking ahead with younger generations being more urbanized and often more critical of sports, what do you see as a future of hunting? Do you think hunting will still have a place in conservation and culture 50 years from now? And how might hunters organizations like Blood Origins need to evolve to keep hunting relevant, ethical, and socially acceptable in a world that's rapidly changing?

[Fiona Tande]

I think hunting has to survive. If we, if we as a society, regardless of what you think about hunting, if we as a society want to champion habitat protection and wildlife. Being around for your kids, my kids, our grandkids, one Day. And you recognize that the world today is no longer a sea of habitat with islands of humanity, but rather a sea of humanity with islands of habitat. Why would you get rid of a tool that is protecting one of those islands? Humanity is only going to get bigger and bigger, and the pressures on wildlife and habitat is only getting bigger and bigger. So why would you remove a tool in your toolbox that is helping to protect habitat and wildlife for the next 50 years? And I'll take it, I'll be a little stronger in my words, take it one step further. If you are against that tool, then I would argue that you are anti wildlife conservation.

[Mike Axelrod]

Bold statement.

[Fiona Tande]

Because again, people can, people are very quick to talk about, you know, ban this, ban that, and, and that's why we're allowed to have these kinds of conversations. I say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's start the baseline here and understand what your definition of wildlife conservation is. Stop right there. Let's just answer that question. Because if you answer the way that I think you're going to answer it, that's what I'm doing. So you just don't agree with the method, Right? That's it. You don't agree with the tool, but you agree with. Coming back to what we've been talking about, but you agree with the outcome. You agree on the consequence. So if the outcome and the consequence of you and me are the same.

[Mike Axelrod]

Then the tool should be talking about here.

[Fiona Tande]

What are we talking about here? Now, people will get into this whole, like, anyway, I won't get into it, but, you know, people. I won't get into it. But to me, that's, it's just. There's some asinine discussion points in there that people bring up and they're just irrelevant. I'll just say it. Some people, like, well, if, you know, if, if child rape was your tool to, you know, decrease a population, would you still be for it if we were for decreasing? I said, what? I've had these kinds of art. I said, what? What? Like, what are you talking about? Or, you know, it's just that's, that's, that's, that's a hypothetical crazy, you know, comparison anyway, so. Piano, you're amazing, man. Thank you for the questions. We need to do part two. When we, I, I honestly think we'll do part two. How about this? We'll do part two and we'll talk specifically about, like, all the things that I've found out about the Kenyan Tanzanian elephant thing.

[Mike Axelrod]

Okay, yeah, that sounds good. And maybe hopefully part two can be in person, but we'll see.

[Fiona Tande]

Oh, for sure.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

Or part three, for sure.

[Mike Axelrod]

But exactly. Because again, this was my way of paring this conversation into the festival because I really think it's important that as conservationists and as storytellers, we look at these topics not as a way of trying to impose opinions, but open the forum for different opinions and. And welcome. You know, the end goal, which is conservation, so that's today, was you didn't.

[Fiona Tande]

Send me your questions.

[Mike Axelrod]

Exactly. I did not.

[Fiona Tande]

I just. And I just answered them. And that's what I would love to be at your film festival on stage with a microphone and people from the audience ask the questions that you just answered. Asked. And I answered in the same way, super honestly, super authentically. And again, at the end of the day, what I would. I love is that people are going to see me as the hunter and be like, whoa, I didn't think a hunter spoke like that.

[Mike Axelrod]

Well, I'll tell you what, when I met you and learned that you are a hunter, it definitely debunked a lot of things that I thought hunters would speak like or act like, to be honest. So you've done a good job in that respect and I applaud you honestly for the work that you are doing. Robbie, I think that. I think the way you approach this topic is very grounding and very accommodating of people who don't come from the same background and may have their own skepticism or apprehension towards the subject matter. And the fact that we're having this forum to learn from each other's points of view is just the step that we need towards understanding and having a more embracing world, which is what we need at the end of the day.

[Fiona Tande]

So.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah, thank you. I'm excited for possible opportunities. And do you envision, like, working with organizations from parts of this world that are not like, are not pro hunting, but other like synergies that you think could exist where you could work with people.

[Fiona Tande]

Dude, I would, I would. If you had to ask me, like, what is. My absolute goal would be to find, like, this is a little extreme, but is to find an anti hunting organization and say, let's partner and do a wildlife conservation project together. Let's do something awesome together.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

You know, and. But I don't think I'd. I don't think an anti hunting organization would do it because there's politics involved and there's money involved of them being seen to be associated with a hunting organization. I need to find an organization that is more middle of the road that's willing to take a little bit of a risk to say no. You know, we're pro wildlife regardless of the tool and let's partner with these guys. And so. Yeah.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah. And I think conversations are a great start. You're not going to find anyone who's going to change their mind simply from seeing what you've done and being converted immediately. They need to have this kind of dialogues and examine what the their point of view and see, okay, we have differing tools, but the end goal is the same. So why not work together? And in that respect, I'm, as someone who's definitely anti hunting, I'm very open to working with you.

[Fiona Tande]

Sweet.

[Mike Axelrod]

And look forward to that.

[Fiona Tande]

Well, if you've got when is your film festival this year?

[Mike Axelrod]

It is next year in May.

[Fiona Tande]

Oh, that's right. That's right. That's right. It's next year. That's an example. Okay, cool.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah.

[Fiona Tande]

All right, Fiona, well, appreciate you.

[Mike Axelrod]

Yeah, same here. Robbie, thank you so much for your time and answering my questions. And I look forward to part two and three.

[Fiona Tande]

Absolutely.

[Mike Axelrod]

All right.

[Fiona Tande]

Well, that's it for today. Appreciate you listening as always. Leave a review, share it with your friends and most importantly, do what's right to convey the truth around hunting.

[Robbie]

Want to plan your next fishing trip without the hassle? FishingBooker.com is the best way to find and book a fishing charter anywhere in the world. Whether you're chasing trophy fish or just looking for a family day on the water, fishingbooker makes it simple, fast and secure. With thousands of experienced guides, verified reviews and 247 customer support, FishingBooker takes the guesswork out of planning. Visit fishingbooker.com and book your trip today. FishingBooker Fishing trips made easy.