The Exploitation of “Blondie” to Ignite Another Global Misinformation Campaign Against African Conservation.
Trevor Oertel
August 2025
On the 24th July 2025, Africa Geographic, a tour and travel company, published a sensational and misleading article titled “Trophy hunted: Another Hwange collared pride male lion”, alleging that a young collared lion nicknamed “Blondie” was lured from a photographic concession neighbouring Hwange National Park into a hunting concession. They then insinuate he was illegally and unethically hunted. The article has since gone viral, amplified by global media outlets and animal rights groups, mirroring the firestorm that followed the legal hunt of “Cecil” a decade ago. But just like then, the facts have been twisted to fit an agenda.
Towards the end of June 2025 “Blondie” was legally hunted in a designated hunting concession roughly 20 km from Hwange National Park. Mr. Tinashe Farawo, spokesperson for Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (ZimParks), in an official statement, confirmed the hunt’s legality and has responded to inquiries about the hunt with clarity and transparency.
In a recorded answer to questions, he said, “This particular hunt, everything was in place. The hunt was legal. The hunt was accompanied (by a ZimParks wildlife ranger). There was a quota. It was hunted in private land outside Hwange National Park.”
There is no evidence of baiting or luring, nor has Africa Geographic produced any to support their claim. Such accusations are not just misleading. They are defamatory.
The claim that “Blondie” was lured from a photographic concession or Hwange National Park is entirely unsubstantiated and false. According to the Professional Hunter (PH) and supporting accounts, the lion abandoned his former territory in March 2025 after a territorial dispute with a rival coalition. He was observed alone and appeared to be living as a nomad outside the park boundaries for at least a month before the hunt took place. The PH has categorically stated that Blondie was not lured from any park or photographic area boundary. A bold statement to make if not true considering Blondie had a GPS collar on.
Media outlets, parroting Africa Geographic’s implications, claim that “Blondie” was under the minimum age of 6 years for trophy lions. Yet ZimParks officials and the PH involved assessed the lion to be over 6 years old, possibly even 8 to 9 years old.
Even more critically, ZimParks policy permits hunting of male lions from age 5 upward, depending on local context and the lion’s status (e.g. territorial, nomadic, etc.). These guidelines exist to protect pride dynamics, not to satisfy Western public relations campaigns.
One of the most egregious misconceptions being circulated is that collared lions are “protected” and must not be hunted. This is categorically untrue.
The collar on “Blondie” was part of a scientific study initiated by hunters in collaboration with WildCRU and Conservation Force in the early 2000. The aim is to understand lion movements, causes of mortality, and human-wildlife interactions, including trophy hunting.
Both ZimParks and WildCRU have confirmed that collared lions are not protected from hunting, as long as the hunt is legal and conducted outside the park. These lions are collared to provide precisely the kind of data that events like this yield. To vilify legal outcomes of the very science being conducted is dishonest.
Africa Geographic published a few photographs of Blondie, including a photograph of a lion and a hunting party, captioned “An image posted of Blondie’s trophy hunted body on social media. The image has since been removed. “ This is false.
Besides, the PH stating that the photograph was not his lion, a comparison between the various photographs of Blondie published by Africa Geographic, it’s clear to see it’s a different lion. The photograph is actually an uncollared lion that was legally hunted in early July by a different hunting party. The PH of this hunt is known to me.
Publishing this image as if it were evidence is more than lazy journalism, it is irresponsible and a wilful act of deception.
Despite Africa Geographic trying to provoke outrage on behalf of conservation science, WildCRU has raised no objection to the hunt. Nor should they. Their role is to study real-world dynamics affecting lions, not to dictate national wildlife policy, especially in a country with a sovereign and well-established conservation authority like Zimbabwe.
What’s becoming increasingly obvious is this exploiting of “Blondie” is being used as a deliberate PR exercise. The Africa Geographic article was published just days after the 10th anniversary of the Cecil lion saga, timed for maximum emotional impact and global attention.
Now, animal rights NGOs, influencers, and anti-hunting lobbyists are riding the wave of outrage to reignite calls for trophy hunting bans. They’re weaponizing this narrative to erode conservation funding models they neither understand nor contribute to.
In doing so, they undermine the sovereignty of African nations, the livelihoods of rural communities, and the scientific integrity of conservation policy across Southern Africa.
Southern Africa’s conservation model is built on the sustainable use of natural resources, including regulated hunting. Revenue from legal lion hunts funds anti-poaching units, pays salaries, develops infrastructure, and supports local livelihoods.
Attacking this model based on misreporting and emotional manipulation is not only neocolonial in tone but catastrophic in effect. Wildlife does not survive on sentiment. It survives on funding, governance, and reality-based science.
Simon Espley, CEO of Africa Geographic, has refused to answer my direct questions sent to him in a request for comment. These included clear and reasonable inquiries into the source of their claims, the legitimacy of the photograph used, and their understanding of Zimbabwean hunting laws and scientific research protocols. His silence speaks volumes.
In his “Newsletter Editorial of the 8th of August 2025” he shares my emailed questions and a Facebook post of mine with his viewers, claiming he and Africa Geographic have done no wrong nor had they claimed the hunt was “illegal”. To prove that Africa Geographic had not stated that the hunt was illegal, he selectively and out of context quoted from the Africa Geographic article claiming “Our actual wording in the article was, and I quote, ‘Source say the hunt took place legally””. Conveniently omitting to include the first word of that sentence “Yet” and thus changing its entire meaning.
In his defence, he shifts the blame for the published misinformation squarely onto the shoulders of the media. He states:
“Our breaking news article about Blondie’s demise was picked up by multinational news media platforms, talking heads and tabloids, resulting in a snowball effect and amplified awareness. Unfortunately, some of these platforms resorted to factually bereft headlines and claims to gain attention. It is what it is.”
Will Blondie be the next false trophy hunting narrative?
Recent research shows there is truth in the saying “lies get halfway around the world before truth has even got it’s pants on” as researchers found that false news travels 6 times faster on social media than the truth.
As the truth slowly comes out it remains to be seen if Africa Geographic, that claim to publish “inspirational, factual articles about Africa’s incredible natural wonders”, and it’s CEO Simon Espley knowingly spread false news or is this an elaborate advertising and marketing ploy by Espley and Africa Geographic.
It is time the media stopped sacrificing facts for fundraising. Conservation deserves better. Africa deserves better.
Let this not be another Cecil moment. Let it be a moment of truth.
Trevor Oertel
Bio
Trevor Oertel is a South African businessman with business interests in South Africa, Botswana and the UAE. But foremost, he is a conservationist and wildlife enthusiast. In his youth, he was a professional hunter and wildlife manager, hunting and working in the Eastern Cape and the Kalahari. Trevor’s passion is falconry, a pursuit he has followed since childhood, specifically hunting ducks and partridges under Peregrine Falcons. Trevor has been very instrumental in legalising falconry in various provinces in South Africa and was instrumental in the formation of the South African Falconry Association (SAFA) in 1990. Trevor has served under various Ministers of Environmental Affairs, on the “Minister’s Wildlife Forum”. As a former farmer in both South Africa and Zimbabwe, he finds some conservationists’ naivety in understanding basic concepts such as “carrying capacity” and “sustainable use” hard to understand as they sit back watching biodiversity and habitat destroyed, while promoting failed bans that enrich poachers and animal right organisations at the expense of our wildlife, natural heritage and African people. Trevor is currently an Executive Committee Member of the “Sustainable Use Coalition of Southern Africa” (SUCo-SA) and has represented SUCo-SA at CITES meetings both in Panama and Geneva.
