Let’s look at the facts
There are certainly challenges and tough realities in the world of wildlife management, but facts are important in understanding the situation. When it comes to lions, even more so.
‘Blondie’ was the name given to a collared lion that was recently hunted in Zimbabwe. It was collared by UK-based research organization, WildCRU, that runs the collaring program and has done so for more than 15 years. The hunt for Blondie stirred a media frenzy. The media, anti-hunting activists and most notably, the non-hunting / photographic safari experts, whose livelihood should also be founded on conservation, went ballistic.
Africa Geographic’s CEO sent me a video clip late on a Friday evening about the Blondie hunt. (Screen grabs illustrate the piece above) I wanted to respond because his likes seldom want to engage / hear the facts from the other side. And if they do, it gets twisted. None the less, I watched the clip and asked why he used Cecil’s hunt from 10 years back, as the backdrop to this latest hunt video, particularly when that hunt (Cecil’s) was a legal hunt, no crime was committed, but it no doubt got emotions going for any ill-informed viewer.
When I raised this fact, he was condescending and non-engaging, and cut the communications there and then, saying, “How can I defend the indefensible?”
While I respect his business acumen, I am opposed to his (Africa Geographic’s) convenient and consistent omission of important facts, and his use of sophisticated wordsmithing to drum up support for his travel business. And as a sponsor of Blondie’s collaring, he probably felt a lot more passionate about this, which I do understand.
Too bad, as an aside, that he doesn’t inform the wannabee travelling public about the reality of Madikwe’s elephant overpopulation crisis, how that is destroying the game reserve to which his business is selling numerous safari packages.
In fact, a simple search on his site – “Madikwe elephant overpopulation” brings up no response. As this fenced-in African ‘zoo,’ is opposed to sustainable utilization or management of its wildlife and has been dancing to the tune of photo-only tourism, the game reserve is all but destroyed. That is a fact. The Wildlife Authority is frantically in the throes of preparing the rights to trophy hunt a few, but mainly to destroy, cull, call it what you like, 1000-plus elephants. Does anyone know what that will look like?
Then the likes who claim to be conservationists and abhor the principles of sustainable utilization of wildlife will soon see the global PR disaster for the ‘photo only’ tourism sector. The biggest loser will be the wildlife biodiversity of this once magnificent 185 000-acre African wilderness. Instead of being managed along the way, or the likes of the photo tourism sector speaking up, they kept quiet as they marketed this malaria-free game park while making money. They said nothing. It was against the photo tourism principles, and so anyone with half a brain on wildlife management and conservation knew this was inevitable. When something is now finally having to be done, an article is posted that ‘Hunting in Madikwe is to be introduced’ – which is a crowd-drawing headline.
Lost in the text are all the salient details: 1600 elephant in the park, when sustainably, there should be 500. Some believe it should be 250, but the fact remains – it is 3 to 6 times the carrying capacity and now it is too late.
Having had enough of this, and the fact that he opened the batting only to cut the conversation or debate, I felt it needed a response.
So, I took his article and commented in Red next to each section – which you can see below.
Trophy hunted: Another Hwange collared pride male lion
Blondie, a well-known, collared pride male lion in Zimbabwe’s Hwange area, has been trophy hunted after being lured into a hunting area with bait – leaving behind 10 cubs.
This lion was shot 10km (6miles) outside the park. Not adjacent to the park, because there was a property in between. Lion expert Dr Paul Funston states that lions walk at 8km (5 miles per hour) and to roam this distance is nothing for them. And lions, when there are no other calling males in a territory, are always roaming.
The only reason it was there was because it wanted to leave the park. Or it wanted to be in this area outside the park (which could be and probably was its home range). There was zero evidence that it was lured or baited out of the park – stated as a fact in the attention-grading headline. When in the park, the lion is the property of the park. When in an adjacent property (forestry), or in a community area, it is the property of the community. The reason communities are happy to support this model of quota-based hunting is that they benefit. Period. Hence the management of free roaming lions is complicated.
During the week of 29 June 2025, Blondie was shot and killed by a trophy hunter just outside Hwange National Park, in the Gwaai / Sikumi Forest area (5 miles is not ‘just outside’) Despite wearing a conspicuous research collar (If you look at the animal and its mane in the photo, you can decide if this is easy to see. Oddly enough, in the video prepared for the PR campaign there was no footage of Blondie showing his conspicuous collar, only other lions with collars – insinuating that they can be seen) and being younger than the recommended minimum hunting age of six years, This is a recommendation, not the law. Besides, it is impossible to determine the age accurately between 5 or 6 years this young lion was lured (no evidence) out of a photographic concession and killed in what many are calling a deeply unethical hunt. What is the difference between an unethical, and then a deeply unethical hunt? It should be either legal or illegal. Yet, sources say the hunt took place legally, with all required permitting in place. The Professional Hunter is allegedly a member of the Zimbabwe Professional Guides Association (ZPGA).
This is the key point. A legal permit has to be, and was approved by the National Parks of Zimbabwe.
National Parks have a duty to look after all the conservation of Zimbabwe.
Governance is the key issue to which all this should be aimed – not drumming up support from the masses, with skewed details, playing on emotions.
Tour operators do not want to take on the Government because they too depend on the allocation of areas to run their businesses and instead take on the hunters. The hunters are operating within the law – but despite that, the tour operators deem it acceptable.
Blondie was collared by the University of Oxford’s Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU), which used a collar sponsored by Africa Geographic, in April this year. These GPS satellite collars are fitted to track free-roaming lions, prevent human-wildlife conflict, and support long-term conservation. Africa Geographic approached WildCRU and the University of Oxford for comment, but we are yet to receive an official response. I can’t comment on why they have not responded but the fact is – WildCRU understands that their collared animals get hunted. They collar lions for research purposes only, not to ensure they become, or remain tourism icons and, according to their research unit head, she was ok with this.
Africa Geographic CEO Simon Espley had this to say: “As the sponsor of Blondie’s research collar, we are dismayed and angered by this development. That Blondie’s prominent collar did not prevent him from being offered to a hunting client, confirms the stark reality that no lion is safe from trophy hunting guns. He was a breeding male in his prime, in the early part of this article, the male was referred to as a “young male”… now he is “in his prime”… making a mockery of the ethics that ZPGA regularly espouses and the repeated claims that trophy hunters only target old, non-breeding males.”
ZPGA has recommendations and ideals and then the Government has laws. No law was broken. And ethics can be very dubious depending on personal frameworks.
At the time of his death, according to one source, Blondie was 5 years and 3 months old and the dominant male of a pride that included three adult females and ten cubs – seven cubs around one year old and three approximately one month old. Zimbabwe hunting regulations mandate a minimum age of 6 years for lions trophy hunted, focusing on mature, non-pride males.
Now they speak of a ‘mandate’… and regulations.
There is no LAW to hunt a minimum age of 6 years. What is recommended and what is the LAW are two different things.
At just over five years old, Blondie was in the prime of his life. He was not a transient male on the periphery; he was a territory-holder, and a father. His sudden loss is expected to cause turmoil for the pride, with a high likelihood that incoming rival males will kill his youngest cubs. This is a fact. Such infanticide is common in lion dynamics, especially when coalitions shift. In the chaos that follows, the lionesses may flee the safety of the concession into communal lands, where snares and human conflict await.
Blondie had often been seen on the private photographic concession since 2022 (where hunting is prohibited). Blondie took over the Zingweni pride and sired the current cubs. The pride’s movements frequently followed buffalo herds around Dete Vlei and into the Ganda Forest, outside Hwange National Park’s boundary. A missing fact is that the lion prides move in areas where new photographic tourism companies operate. These companies feel that the lions should remain untouched and never be hunted, whether 5, 7 or in Cecil’s case, well over 10 years of age, that they should remain icons of Zimbabwe’s tourism.
And maybe they should. (The subject of a great article)
But, that is a decision for the governing authority to make… not the Photo operators to keep nailing the supposed unethical unscrupulous hunters. The hunters are running a business and operating in the law.
According to reports from operators in the area, Blondie was last seen in his core range in June 2025. Observations suggest that he was baited out of the photographic concession over a period of several weeks and lured into the hunting area, where he was subsequently shot. The entire pride reportedly followed him during this period.
There are concerns that the Professional Hunter (PH) involved in the hunt was aware that Blondie was collared and that he had dependent cubs.
In the legal world, this kind of language is called conjecture.
It has been reported that, two weeks prior to the hunt, the hunter confirmed seeing Blondie with cubs and lionesses. When approached by AG for his side of the story, the PH declined to comment, other than to say that the hunt was “conducted legally, and ethically.” There is a reluctance to cooperate, because despite facts being presented, this article, penned by the CEO himself, highlights the use of emotive innuendos and conflicting points to support the anti-hunting case. Regardless of what fact is presented – activists against legal hunting will not do anything other than support their cause.
An image posted of Blondie’s trophy-hunted body on social media. The image has since been removed.
Blondie was the last known descendant of the Somadada pride, which had previously moved from Hwange into community areas. He had since established a stable pride in an area where resident lions have historically been scarce, due in part to conflict with local communities and previous hunting pressure.
Stakeholders have raised questions about the ethics of the hunt, specifically concerning the lion’s age, his status as an active pride male with dependent cubs, and the presence of a research collar.
AG reached out to the Zimbabwe Professional Guides Association for comment – we are yet to receive a response. The reason they don’t and won’t is because even if facts are delivered… HOW they are delivered or presented is not within ZPGA’s control.
The photographic operators in the region report that there are few, if any, established lion prides within the hunting concessions themselves. Correct. As a result, male lions are often drawn from adjacent photographic areas or park lands. They wander, roam, in their huge territory. Conservationists and local stakeholders continue to call for a review of lion hunting quotas along the boundaries of Hwange National Park, and for clearer ethical guidelines in such cases.
As mentioned above, this is a case for the government to review and do something because such hunters are merely operating within the law.
Hwange National Park’s lion population has long been under pressure from trophy hunting operating from adjacent hunting concessions. These concessions frequently lure pride males out of protected photographic tourism zones – often using bait – to make them available to hunters. Known lions like Cecil, Xanda, Mopane, Sidhule, and others have been trophy hunted just outside park boundaries, despite having research collars or being active pride males, leading to major demographic disruption within local prides. Studies indicate that from 1999 to 2012, human activity caused approximately 88% of male lion deaths in Hwange, mostly through trophy hunts, resulting in skewed age-sex structures and affecting cub survival and pride stability. Although local lion numbers rebounded when hunting quotas were reduced, renewed hunting pressure has coincided with renewed population declines and ongoing conservation concern.
Sadly, the travel and wildlife media platforms, some of whom have their own behind-the-scene travel businesses, do not want to man up and deliver the facts.
Hard as they are to accept – there is a reality out there. Parks can only support a sustainable number of animals.
In the big tourism photo game reserves around the Kruger National Park, many Game reserves are happy to take the money the hunters provide. Some, by offering hunts on the property without telling their photo tourism clients. Some by selling off the animals to be hunted elsewhere (avoiding the ‘Not in my back yard’ stigma), but in both instances – never bothering to explain the cold hard facts and challenges of wildlife management to the very people they should be…the photographic tourists coming to enjoy the game reserve naively believing everything lives in harmony.
The greatest National game parks in South Africa have been selling off excess game for decades. Surely, we all deserve to know the facts.
The challenge is that photo tourism activists, which is the only way to describe them, are against any hunting of game. And having businesses founded on the conservation of wildlife, this is extraordinary.
They are on a crusade to stir up emotion and, ideally, action. Action in the form of signing something, sponsoring something, or selling something (in this case travel itineraries).
Photographic tourism is a huge business in southern and East Africa and it should understand, respect, and work with the legal hunting industry for the good of all wildlife.
But in general, sadly, they do not. They are arch enemies. And so the fight, it appears, is gaining momentum.
