It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
People that hunt for fun are closet psychopaths. They murder for joy, not survival. They kill so they can show how "strong" they are by mounting carcasses in their homes for all to see. These creatures that kill for fun are not humans, they are demons, and they must be stopped.
kim_jong_illI disagree only with this. I live in the Yukon in Canada and you need a motorized vehicle to hunt certain animals. You can't haul a massive bison through 4 feet of snow for a 100 kilometres and some areas are only accessible by powerboat or atv. they're often too far into the wilderness to take horses or hike. If you can get to a hunting zone by walking or horse then do that. but if you can't, use a motorized vehicle
I mainly meant trophy hunters, especifically hunters who target exoctic animals with declining populations. Hunting to feed yourself and your family Is fine, do what you have to.
_Fluffy_"70.4 percent of Americans would pay to view lions on an African safari, while only 6.6 percent would pay to hunt them."
Profahoben_212How do you figure that they fund parks/park rangers and conservation efforts? It's through rich people willing to spend a shit load of money. By killing one legally they can afford to save many more.
S.J.WBut this is just hypocritical. Look at Rhinos, Cheetahs, Elephants, the list goes on, they are all on the endangered list and yet are still hunted.
Those poor whales being killed by the Japs each year, but who gives a fuck about lions aye? The exact same bullshit that Japan spits out about scientific research is the exact same bullshit that trophy hunters spit about conservation. You can't be against Japan then be pro trophy hunting. That makes you a hypocrit.
What endangered list do you speak of? Or, just maybe, are you simply spouting a false rhetoric that makes you feel good about yourself?
And yes, I can very much be anti-Japan whaling and pro-trophy hunting. Whaling plays absolutely no part in conservation. Trophy hunting is the primary (and often only) reason that animals are present in many places, and even that some species still exist at all (look up Scimitar-horned Oryx for example).
Have you noticed how my "facts" are actually grounded in reputable data, whereas you lack the wherewithal to even spell "hypocrit" correctly?
Huck_NorrisI hear you. I just don't agree with the desire to shoot and kill a lion, rhino, elephant or really any other animal that is just being shot so people can think they're cool.
IMO real hunters or sportfishermen have every intention of eating their kill/catch, and don't just go around killing shit because they think it's cool to kill shit.
My stance on hunting and fishing issues is if they do everything legally i dont have a problem with it. A lot of these guys are just really passionate about hunting and large african game is seen as the ultimate prize. Theyre not psycopaths. I just think its insane yiu see all this outrage over trophy hunters but not any threads made on here or any news stories about poachers. Those are the real evil bastards
eheathIts a sport, but people still enjoy shooting wild game to eat, thats what the majority of real hunters do.
**This post was edited on Aug 19th 2015 at 4:10:36pm
Well ya but they hunt because they enjoy it. Op seems to think that if you dont cry like a little bitch after killing an animal youre a psychopath.
RusticlesAlso, the meat tastes better, is arguably healthier, wild deer are treated somewhat more humanely than a cow in a feedlot (if ya gotta eat meat) and in a lot of areas the deer/moose herd needs to be culled.
I 100% agree with all that
S.J.WBut this is just hypocritical. Look at Rhinos, Cheetahs, Elephants, the list goes on, they are all on the endangered list and yet are still hunted.
Im sure someone already responded to this on the next page but incase not....
Endangered animals are ysually only allowed to be hunted if they are sick, no longer able to reproduce or deemed detrimental to the rest of the population
_Fluffy_I think that the animals are more valuable alive.
Ever think that those numbers are so lopsided because only 6% of the people would be able to afford it? It would cost what a couple hundred to go wath animals? Whereas hunting them costs tens of thousands even up into hundreds of thousands
Or maybe consider that 6-7% of americans hunt. That makes that number pretty high when in context.
.Hugo.My stance on hunting and fishing issues is if they do everything legally i dont have a problem with it. A lot of these guys are just really passionate about hunting and large african game is seen as the ultimate prize. Theyre not psycopaths. I just think its insane yiu see all this outrage over trophy hunters but not any threads made on here or any news stories about poachers. Those are the real evil bastards
The only difference between them is the direction the money is flowing. Rich white men pay it for the privilege of legality in the guise of enjoyment and expensive permits, and the poaches do it for the money to feed their families in most cases.
If you think poachers are the problem and rare-animal safari hunters are legit, you have been swayed by the smoke and mirrors money buys. Nothing more. This isn't about whitetails, ducks or beaver trapping. It's about money buying favor. That's really it.
Huck_NorrisThe only difference between them is the direction the money is flowing. Rich white men pay it for the privilege of legality in the guise of enjoyment and expensive permits, and the poaches do it for the money to feed their families in most cases.
If you think poachers are the problem and rare-animal safari hunters are legit, you have been swayed by the smoke and mirrors money buys. Nothing more. This isn't about whitetails, ducks or beaver trapping. It's about money buying favor. That's really it.
Ya exactly, one does it legally and brings more money to africa (ya some of it may go to the corrupt govt) that keeps these conservation parks open and operating, so these animals can survive. The other is ruining these conservation efforts and pulling money away from the parks.
So you think theyre on the same level? The people being swayed are the ones that let the media manipulate their emotions into thinking african animals are some sacred majestic creatures and that legally hunting them is some kind of atrocity.
Really why do you think african safaris are so wrong? No part of the animal gets wasted. If the hunter doesnt eat it the guides either take it or feed a village with it so the not hunting for food thing doesnt work... and thats about the only reason ive ever seen given
.Hugo.Ever think that those numbers are so lopsided because only 6% of the people would be able to afford it? It would cost what a couple hundred to go wath animals? Whereas hunting them costs tens of thousands even up into hundreds of thousands
Or maybe consider that 6-7% of americans hunt. That makes that number pretty high when in context.
Also what happened to the other 23%?
So you think that if everyone could afford it they would shoot rhinos and giraffes rather than view them? I'm sorry but hunting an animal like a lion and then calling it a conservation act is a huge contradiction. if these hunters are such great people why don't they donate the money to whatever country they were thinking about hunting. They would be "conserving" a hell of a lot of recource by not flying across the atlantic just to kill something. They are making the decision based on a needy tribe, the hunter just wants a new head on his wall and he's willing to waste an exorbitant amount of money to do. How Is that a conservation act? The locals have guns and can kill animals themselves If they need to survive. They can't because it's only legal for whitey to do if he has loads of cash.
Are you going to start defending the Native American genocide and slavery now?
.Hugo.Ya exactly, one does it legally and brings more money to africa (ya some of it may go to the corrupt govt) that keeps these conservation parks open and operating, so these animals can survive. The other is ruining these conservation efforts and pulling money away from the parks.
So you think theyre on the same level? The people being swayed are the ones that let the media manipulate their emotions into thinking african animals are some sacred majestic creatures and that legally hunting them is some kind of atrocity.
Really why do you think african safaris are so wrong? No part of the animal gets wasted. If the hunter doesnt eat it the guides either take it or feed a village with it so the not hunting for food thing doesnt work... and thats about the only reason ive ever seen given
I will certainly agree there are tertiary benefits to the legal practice, but what I'm saying is that in essence, the selfish desire for a piece of these animals is what drives this entire cycle, legal or illegal. We as humans think we're special and it sucks to see the natural world- and the more beautiful an animal the more we want to kill it- suffer as a result of our hubris.
It's sad really. The psychology of killing just for the rush of killing something special and rare will never sit well with me. i's just my opinion though, so carry on man, nobody needs to make me happy except me.
_Fluffy_Are you going to start defending the Native American genocide and slavery now?
Native American genocide? I will absolutely agree that some terrible things happened and by in large Aboriginal people were/have not been treated well, but to say colonization was an act of genocide is a stretch.
_Fluffy_So you think that if everyone could afford it they would shoot rhinos and giraffes rather than view them? I'm sorry but hunting an animal like a lion and then calling it a conservation act is a huge contradiction. if these hunters are such great people why don't they donate the money to whatever country they were thinking about hunting. They would be "conserving" a hell of a lot of recource by not flying across the atlantic just to kill something. They are making the decision based on a needy tribe, the hunter just wants a new head on his wall and he's willing to waste an exorbitant amount of money to do. How Is that a conservation act? The locals have guns and can kill animals themselves If they need to survive. They can't because it's only legal for whitey to do if he has loads of cash.
Are you going to start defending the Native American genocide and slavery now?
Youre just putting words in ny mouth, i never said any of that youre a fucking nutjob haha. The last sentence about slavery and genocide.... what? Hahaha thanks fir letting me know youre trolling
Huck_NorrisI will certainly agree there are tertiary benefits to the legal practice, but what I'm saying is that in essence, the selfish desire for a piece of these animals is what drives this entire cycle, legal or illegal. We as humans think we're special and it sucks to see the natural world- and the more beautiful an animal the more we want to kill it- suffer as a result of our hubris.
It's sad really. The psychology of killing just for the rush of killing something special and rare will never sit well with me. i's just my opinion though, so carry on man, nobody needs to make me happy except me.
The thing is if only legal hunting is done, the animals are not going to go extinct, or even become endangered because of being hunted by humans. Fir me, until hunting over there is made illegal (probably never will be) i just dont see a problem with it. Guess we will just agree to disagree
But thanks for actually making logical points instead of acting like a lunatic like fluffy up there. I can see where youre coming from and understand it, i just see it differently i guess
saskskierNative American genocide? I will absolutely agree that some terrible things happened and by in large Aboriginal people were/have not been treated well, but to say colonization was an act of genocide is a stretch.
.Hugo.Youre just putting words in ny mouth, i never said any of that youre a fucking nutjob haha. The last sentence about slavery and genocide.... what? Hahaha thanks fir letting me know youre trolling
The thing is if only legal hunting is done, the animals are not going to go extinct, or even become endangered because of being hunted by humans. Fir me, until hunting over there is made illegal (probably never will be) i just dont see a problem with it. Guess we will just agree to disagree
But thanks for actually making logical points instead of acting like a lunatic like fluffy up there. I can see where youre coming from and understand it, i just see it differently i guess
I see you've resorted to slandering my credibility rather then actually refuting my points, typical.
You implied that people don't hunt because they can't afford it and if they could they would, which is nothing but speculation and a horrible one at that.
The Native American Genocide and Slavery are examples of extreme exploitation. The dwindling exotic animal population in Africa is a form of extreme exploitation.
iFlipWhat endangered list do you speak of? Or, just maybe, are you simply spouting a false rhetoric that makes you feel good about yourself?
And yes, I can very much be anti-Japan whaling and pro-trophy hunting. Whaling plays absolutely no part in conservation. Trophy hunting is the primary (and often only) reason that animals are present in many places, and even that some species still exist at all (look up Scimitar-horned Oryx for example).
Have you noticed how my "facts" are actually grounded in reputable data, whereas you lack the wherewithal to even spell "hypocrit" correctly?
Oh bullshit. Stop hiding behind the consveration argument for hunting. An study done by asked locals what they thought of trophy hunting. This was their response "We're more closely allied with the photographic operators than the hunters. They (the hunters) are finishing off the wildlife before we've had a chance to realize a profit from it. Hunters don't recognize us; they only recognize the government 25 percent of hunting fees (that) goes into the "hole" at the district. We're supposed to get 5 percent- we don't even see that."
How about that only 3% of all money from troophy hunting goes back into the community and conservation efforts or that the study found that " Trophy hunting advocates present the industry as large, citing figures such as $200m in annual revenue. But in the context of national economies, the industry is tiny, contributing at best a fraction of a percent of GDP. Nature based tourism does play a significant role in national
development, but trophy hunting is insignificant. Across the investigated countries, trophy
hunting revenue was only 1.8% of tourism revenues."
You've been brainwashed into thinking hunting helps conservation. It doesn't, not by any means does it help anyone or any animal. Where as nature reserves where people just look at the lions maybe shoot a photo of them actually does help. You know, like Cecil the lion?
And I speak of the IUCN endangerd list. You can find all the numbers here. Trophy hunting doesn't help with conservation, and whaling doesn't help with science. They're both bullshit shades that people put over their acts so they don't have to deal with the guilt of being a psychopathic cunt.
HOW THE FUCK ARE WE CONSERVING ANYTHING???? ANIMAL SPECIES ARE DYING OFF AT AN ACCELERATED RATE. YOU GUYS ARE FUCKING CLUELESS.
Extinction of Species • Every 20 minutes, the world adds another 3,500 human lives but loses one or more entire species of animal or plant life - at least 27,000 species per year. (Source: PBS) • At the present rates of extinction, as many as 20% of the world's 7-15 million species could be gone in the next 30 years. This rate of extinction has been unprecedented since the disappearance of dinosaurs 65 million years ago (Source: WWF).
Habitat Destruction (Source: Animal Alliance, unless stated otherwise) • Human population reached 1 billion by 1800. Over 6 billion by 2000. Conservative estimates predict that our population will reach 9 billion people by 2050 (Source: Population Reference Bureau) • The hourly destruction of an estimated 240 acres of natural habitat is directly attributable to the growth in human populations. • 80% of the decline in biological diversity is caused by habitat destruction.
Plight of Rhinos (Source: International Rhino Foundation) • Of the dozens of species of rhino that once roamed the earth, only 5 now exist. • Where there were once over 100,000 black rhinos on the plains of Africa, there are now only 2,707 on the entire continent. • The staggering decimation of the rhino population is due to poaching, to satisfy the demand for the horn for use in Eastern traditional medicines and as dagger handles. • Prices up to US$40,000 a kilo have been recorded for the much prized rhino horn - more than 5 times the price of gold.
The African Elephant (Source: CITES) • 5 -10 million African elephants existed in 1930. Less than 1% of that number (approximately 600,000) remained when they were added to the international list of the most endangered species in 1989. • Demand for ivory combined with loss of habitat from human settlement led to these huge declines in population.
African Wild Dog (Source: American Museum of Natural History) • Listed as one of the worlds most endangered canids, and the most endangered predator in Africa, there are now only between 4,000-5,000 African wild dogs in the wild. • A century ago, African wild dog packs numbering a hundred or more animals could be seen roaming the Serengeti Plains. Today, pack size averages about 10, and the total population on the Serengeti is probably less than 60 dogs. • Due to their large home ranges, African wild dogs are particularly vulnerable to habitat destruction. • They are widely regarded as pests, and poisoned, shot, trapped and snared in many areas. • Their most serious threat, though, is introduced diseases. Burgeoning human populations have brought the African wild dogs into frequent contact with domestic dogs, many of which carry canine distemper and rabies.
The African Lion (Source: Enkosini Wildlife Sanctuary) • The African lions' numbers are diminishing rapidly due to habitat destruction, persecution by livestock farmers outside of protected areas, and human greed. 10,000-15,000 free-roaming African lions remain, down from 50,000 a decade ago. • The willingness of Asians and Westerners to pay handsomely for lion head trophies combined with the urgent need for revenue among African locals means that these great predators are increasingly hunted for sport. • Trophy hunting not only depletes the population of the African lion, but threatens its gene pool as well. Killing the dominant male of a pride (normally the target of a trophy hunt) sets off a chain of instinctive behavior in which the subsequent dominant male kills all the young of the previous male (6-8 estimated deaths result from each male shot).
Cheetahs (Source: The Cheetah Spot) • In 1900 there were about 100,000 cheetah worldwide - present estimates place their number at 10,000 -15,000 with about one tenth of those living in captivity. • Throughout recorded history a cheetah pelt was a badge of wealth for its human owner. The animal was killed for its skin by some and captured for its hunting skills by others. More recently, increasing human populations have squeezed cheetahs and their prey from their natural habitats
Definitions • Poaching is the illegal hunting, capture, or collecting of wildlife. Snaring is a common form of subsistence poaching and can lead to the maiming of many animals not intended for consumption. (Source: Bagheera: Glossary of terms) • Canned hunts are commercial hunts, which take place on private land under circumstances that virtually assure the hunter of success. The animal is often fenced in, or has been habituated to eating at a feeding station at the same time every day. Canned hunts are prevalent in the United States and South Africa. (Source: Animalunderworld
iFlipwhereas you lack the wherewithal to even spell "hypocrit" correctly?
Do you even know what wherewithal means? I dont think he needs more money to not forget the "e" next time he spells hypocrite. It kinda ironic that you are trying to use a word that you dont know the meaning of in order to insult somebody. I love this website.
"A study done by asking locals." Wow, that sounds absolutely credible. I also looked at your site that you gave as a source for your assertion that certain animals such as the African Elephant are endangered. That site, which is not officially endorsed by any credible institution, does not even list those animals as endangered. The African Elephant is listed as "vulnerable" on there, a far cry from endangered. "Vulnerable" is like saying a fish in a lake is "vulnerable" to acid rain or an oil spill.
"In Botswana, the country home to one-third of the African elephant population, 150,000 of them inhabit an area about the size of the New York metro area. This is unsustainable. A short drive around the Chobe National Park reveals the destruction the animals have wreaked on the environment since 1990, when the population in the reserve numbered only a few thousand. The once-lush forest has been decimated by the elephants. Soil sullies the water where it was previously held back by a robust root system, and game has died of starvation in their ravaged habitat."
The article goes on to assert:
"Elephants have no natural predator. The population is controlled only by disease, hunting or starvation due to the self-inflicted destruction of their own environment. Large-scale culling is the best solution to this catastrophic problem."
That's from mainstream American media, which is usually so ardently anti-hunting.
As to the rest of your post, it is rooted in no logic, no facts, and personal, uninformed opinion. Hunting is absolutely the driving force behind conservation, here in the US and abroad. Even a cursory look at organizations such as the National Wild Turkey Federation, Ducks Unlimited, the National Wild Sheep Foundation, and others will show this. When the wild turkey was on the verge of extinction, who was it who stepped up to the plate with a massive captive-rearing and reintroduction effort? Hunters. Now the wild turkey is prolific in 49 of the 50 states, and in record numbers. When the California droughts were killing the crops of farmers, and causing many animals to die of thirst, who stepped forward and paid tens of thousands of dollars to have water delivered to areas where desert bighorns live? Hunters.
The people you consider the enemy, hunters, are wildlife's greatest allies, protectors, and friends.
_Fluffy_HOW THE FUCK ARE WE CONSERVING ANYTHING???? ANIMAL SPECIES ARE DYING OFF AT AN ACCELERATED RATE. YOU GUYS ARE FUCKING CLUELESS.
Extinction of Species • Every 20 minutes, the world adds another 3,500 human lives but loses one or more entire species of animal or plant life - at least 27,000 species per year. (Source: PBS) • At the present rates of extinction, as many as 20% of the world's 7-15 million species could be gone in the next 30 years. This rate of extinction has been unprecedented since the disappearance of dinosaurs 65 million years ago (Source: WWF).
Habitat Destruction (Source: Animal Alliance, unless stated otherwise) • Human population reached 1 billion by 1800. Over 6 billion by 2000. Conservative estimates predict that our population will reach 9 billion people by 2050 (Source: Population Reference Bureau) • The hourly destruction of an estimated 240 acres of natural habitat is directly attributable to the growth in human populations. • 80% of the decline in biological diversity is caused by habitat destruction.
Plight of Rhinos (Source: International Rhino Foundation) • Of the dozens of species of rhino that once roamed the earth, only 5 now exist. • Where there were once over 100,000 black rhinos on the plains of Africa, there are now only 2,707 on the entire continent. • The staggering decimation of the rhino population is due to poaching, to satisfy the demand for the horn for use in Eastern traditional medicines and as dagger handles. • Prices up to US$40,000 a kilo have been recorded for the much prized rhino horn - more than 5 times the price of gold.
The African Elephant (Source: CITES) • 5 -10 million African elephants existed in 1930. Less than 1% of that number (approximately 600,000) remained when they were added to the international list of the most endangered species in 1989. • Demand for ivory combined with loss of habitat from human settlement led to these huge declines in population.
African Wild Dog (Source: American Museum of Natural History) • Listed as one of the worlds most endangered canids, and the most endangered predator in Africa, there are now only between 4,000-5,000 African wild dogs in the wild. • A century ago, African wild dog packs numbering a hundred or more animals could be seen roaming the Serengeti Plains. Today, pack size averages about 10, and the total population on the Serengeti is probably less than 60 dogs. • Due to their large home ranges, African wild dogs are particularly vulnerable to habitat destruction. • They are widely regarded as pests, and poisoned, shot, trapped and snared in many areas. • Their most serious threat, though, is introduced diseases. Burgeoning human populations have brought the African wild dogs into frequent contact with domestic dogs, many of which carry canine distemper and rabies.
The African Lion (Source: Enkosini Wildlife Sanctuary) • The African lions' numbers are diminishing rapidly due to habitat destruction, persecution by livestock farmers outside of protected areas, and human greed. 10,000-15,000 free-roaming African lions remain, down from 50,000 a decade ago. • The willingness of Asians and Westerners to pay handsomely for lion head trophies combined with the urgent need for revenue among African locals means that these great predators are increasingly hunted for sport. • Trophy hunting not only depletes the population of the African lion, but threatens its gene pool as well. Killing the dominant male of a pride (normally the target of a trophy hunt) sets off a chain of instinctive behavior in which the subsequent dominant male kills all the young of the previous male (6-8 estimated deaths result from each male shot).
Cheetahs (Source: The Cheetah Spot) • In 1900 there were about 100,000 cheetah worldwide - present estimates place their number at 10,000 -15,000 with about one tenth of those living in captivity. • Throughout recorded history a cheetah pelt was a badge of wealth for its human owner. The animal was killed for its skin by some and captured for its hunting skills by others. More recently, increasing human populations have squeezed cheetahs and their prey from their natural habitats
Definitions • Poaching is the illegal hunting, capture, or collecting of wildlife. Snaring is a common form of subsistence poaching and can lead to the maiming of many animals not intended for consumption. (Source: Bagheera: Glossary of terms) • Canned hunts are commercial hunts, which take place on private land under circumstances that virtually assure the hunter of success. The animal is often fenced in, or has been habituated to eating at a feeding station at the same time every day. Canned hunts are prevalent in the United States and South Africa. (Source: Animalunderworld
You are putting a multitude of different issues together, trying to lump hunting in with other issues that are indeed bad. I'll take it one step at a time:
Extinction: Yes, the current extinction crisis is horrible. It is primarily due to overpopulation, habitat destruction, and pollution. No animals are at present going extinct due to hunting. Do not confuse poaching with hunting.
Habitat Destruction: Yup, same as above. Too damned many people.
Rhinos: Blame the Asians with their micro-penises that don't work. As I addressed previously, these rhinos are being poached, not hunting. Hunters have done more for rhino anti-poaching efforts than any other organization or people.
African Elephant: Demand for ivory? Again, blame the Asians. Elephants are being poached in areas where the population cannot sustain it. Elephants are being hunted in areas where there are overpopulations and/or sustainable populations. The African Elephant is at present doing very well in many places, and is doing very well everywhere hunting is legally permitted.
African Wild Dog: I have seen these during my time in Africa. They are majestic creatures. The natives hate them because they wreak havoc on their livestock. Thus they get trapped, poisoned, shot, etc. Hunters do not shoot them. They are not on quota and do not exist in huntable numbers, thus hunters are not interested. There is no way to blame the white hunter for this one.
The African Lion: What you said (quoted) is incorrect. Lion hunting has recently undergone a complete overhaul in the safari industry. There are now industry-wide guidelines pursuant to the hunting of wild African lions. An excerpt from these guidelines states:
"Huntable male lions are defined as those male lions whose off-take has no negative impact on the sustainability of local lion population dynamics. Research has shown that these are typically lions six years of age or more that have completed at least one breeding cycle. To reduce risks of infanticide, males of any age known to be heading prides or known to be part of a coalition heading prides with dependent cubs (18 months old or less) should not be hunted. Based on these considerations, a huntable male lion is at least six years of age and is not known to head a pride or be part of a coalition heading a pride with dependent cubs. The ideal huntable lion is an older individual known to be a transient, that is, no longer in breeding association with any pride. For the long-term sustainability of this valuable resource, is the maturity or pride status of a lion is in question, it is strongly encouraged that the hunter foregoes taking that lion. Research models have confirmed that responsible hunting does not alter wild lion population dynamics if restricted to males which meet the criteria of a huntable lion."
Cheetahs: Again, this cannot be blamed on white hunters. Cheetahs are not presently hunted on safari, for the most part. Overpopulation of humans and habitat destruction, yep, we've been over this.
Poaching: Hunters are at present the largest funders of anti-poaching efforts. Poachers take game indiscriminately, regardless of age, gender, population numbers, etc. Safari operators employ large anti-poaching patrols.
Canned Hunts: This is a topic for another place and has little to do with what we are discussing. They make me a bit sick but are a necessary evil. They also have absolutely no impact on wild game populations whatsoever.
iFlip"A study done by asking locals." Wow, that sounds absolutely credible. I also looked at your site that you gave as a source for your assertion that certain animals such as the African Elephant are endangered. That site, which is not officially endorsed by any credible institution, does not even list those animals as endangered. The African Elephant is listed as "vulnerable" on there, a far cry from endangered. "Vulnerable" is like saying a fish in a lake is "vulnerable" to acid rain or an oil spill.
"In Botswana, the country home to one-third of the African elephant population, 150,000 of them inhabit an area about the size of the New York metro area. This is unsustainable. A short drive around the Chobe National Park reveals the destruction the animals have wreaked on the environment since 1990, when the population in the reserve numbered only a few thousand. The once-lush forest has been decimated by the elephants. Soil sullies the water where it was previously held back by a robust root system, and game has died of starvation in their ravaged habitat."
The article goes on to assert:
"Elephants have no natural predator. The population is controlled only by disease, hunting or starvation due to the self-inflicted destruction of their own environment. Large-scale culling is the best solution to this catastrophic problem."
That's from mainstream American media, which is usually so ardently anti-hunting.
As to the rest of your post, it is rooted in no logic, no facts, and personal, uninformed opinion. Hunting is absolutely the driving force behind conservation, here in the US and abroad. Even a cursory look at organizations such as the National Wild Turkey Federation, Ducks Unlimited, the National Wild Sheep Foundation, and others will show this. When the wild turkey was on the verge of extinction, who was it who stepped up to the plate with a massive captive-rearing and reintroduction effort? Hunters. Now the wild turkey is prolific in 49 of the 50 states, and in record numbers. When the California droughts were killing the crops of farmers, and causing many animals to die of thirst, who stepped forward and paid tens of thousands of dollars to have water delivered to areas where desert bighorns live? Hunters.
The people you consider the enemy, hunters, are wildlife's greatest allies, protectors, and friends.
If you truly believe that you are not doing something awful than I cannot judge you.
So being wiped out because of non-native disease is genocide? Yes, I know that's an over simplification, but this was by far the biggest contributing factor in the reduction of the Native American population following colonization.
iFlip"A study done by asking locals." Wow, that sounds absolutely credible. I also looked at your site that you gave as a source for your assertion that certain animals such as the African Elephant are endangered. That site, which is not officially endorsed by any credible institution, does not even list those animals as endangered. The African Elephant is listed as "vulnerable" on there, a far cry from endangered. "Vulnerable" is like saying a fish in a lake is "vulnerable" to acid rain or an oil spill.
"In Botswana, the country home to one-third of the African elephant population, 150,000 of them inhabit an area about the size of the New York metro area. This is unsustainable. A short drive around the Chobe National Park reveals the destruction the animals have wreaked on the environment since 1990, when the population in the reserve numbered only a few thousand. The once-lush forest has been decimated by the elephants. Soil sullies the water where it was previously held back by a robust root system, and game has died of starvation in their ravaged habitat."
The article goes on to assert:
"Elephants have no natural predator. The population is controlled only by disease, hunting or starvation due to the self-inflicted destruction of their own environment. Large-scale culling is the best solution to this catastrophic problem."
That's from mainstream American media, which is usually so ardently anti-hunting.
As to the rest of your post, it is rooted in no logic, no facts, and personal, uninformed opinion. Hunting is absolutely the driving force behind conservation, here in the US and abroad. Even a cursory look at organizations such as the National Wild Turkey Federation, Ducks Unlimited, the National Wild Sheep Foundation, and others will show this. When the wild turkey was on the verge of extinction, who was it who stepped up to the plate with a massive captive-rearing and reintroduction effort? Hunters. Now the wild turkey is prolific in 49 of the 50 states, and in record numbers. When the California droughts were killing the crops of farmers, and causing many animals to die of thirst, who stepped forward and paid tens of thousands of dollars to have water delivered to areas where desert bighorns live? Hunters.
The people you consider the enemy, hunters, are wildlife's greatest allies, protectors, and friends.
If you actually read the study you'd find that the quote from the locals was their opinion on hunters. It wasn't the entire study. And I'm not going to read the wall street journal because that's an opinion piece. Not a study based on facts. And that source you posted from wall street journal stating that 150,000 elephants live in Botswana is bullshit. There is only 35,000 to 40,000 wild elephants left in Africa. Glad to see you know how to source check an opinion article. And at the turn of the century there was 200,000 elephants. Hmm wonder what caused so many elephants to die out? There is no difference between a poacher and a trophy hunter in my eyes, one pays to shoot an animal where only 3% of the money goes into the community and conservation and one just kills an animal. Not much of a difference.
Like I've stated from that study, not a bullshit opinion article, hunting does not help conservation or Africa in any way. Where as reservation parks do help conservation and do help Africa.
A basic google search returned this saying that the African elephant population is around 500,000. Im not really sure what you mean by wild, does that mean that the other 460,000 elephants in Africa are domesticated? Because I still consider elephants in conservation parks or reserves to be wild.
A basic google search returned this saying that the African elephant population is around 500,000. Im not really sure what you mean by wild, does that mean that the other 460,000 elephants in Africa are domesticated? Because I still consider elephants in conservation parks or reserves to be wild.
okay my bad I got Asian elephants and African elephants mixed up. It's been a long day.
saskskierSo being wiped out because of non-native disease is genocide? Yes, I know that's an over simplification, but this was by far the biggest contributing factor in the reduction of the Native American population following colonization.
I'll be sure to make another thread one day in your honor. But for now,
"And so, when the College Board decided in 2012 (1) that high school students taking Advanced Placement US history should learn about the American Indian genocide - and other events in our history that do not support the notion that ours is a country where peace, justice and the so-called "American way" have always prevailed - the uproar could be heard from Texas to Georgia, and Colorado to North Carolina."
"Michael Yellow Bird of the Arikara and Hidatsa Nation, a professor of sociology and director of indigenous tribal studies at North Dakota State University, said, "In my estimation, most American students receive what has been called an authoritarian education that celebrates a master narrative of this nation and really focuses on what appears to be its greatest accomplishment, the idea of American exceptionalism, the idea that America has done all these great things and sort of occupies a special place on the planet among all countries."
_Fluffy_I'll be sure to make another thread one day in your honor. But for now,
"And so, when the College Board decided in 2012 (1) that high school students taking Advanced Placement US history should learn about the American Indian genocide - and other events in our history that do not support the notion that ours is a country where peace, justice and the so-called "American way" have always prevailed - the uproar could be heard from Texas to Georgia, and Colorado to North Carolina."
"Michael Yellow Bird of the Arikara and Hidatsa Nation, a professor of sociology and director of indigenous tribal studies at North Dakota State University, said, "In my estimation, most American students receive what has been called an authoritarian education that celebrates a master narrative of this nation and really focuses on what appears to be its greatest accomplishment, the idea of American exceptionalism, the idea that America has done all these great things and sort of occupies a special place on the planet among all countries."
holy shit you guys are such tryhards, ever think of taking a break from the internet?
_Fluffy_I'll be sure to make another thread one day in your honor. But for now,
"And so, when the College Board decided in 2012 (1) that high school students taking Advanced Placement US history should learn about the American Indian genocide - and other events in our history that do not support the notion that ours is a country where peace, justice and the so-called "American way" have always prevailed - the uproar could be heard from Texas to Georgia, and Colorado to North Carolina."
"Michael Yellow Bird of the Arikara and Hidatsa Nation, a professor of sociology and director of indigenous tribal studies at North Dakota State University, said, "In my estimation, most American students receive what has been called an authoritarian education that celebrates a master narrative of this nation and really focuses on what appears to be its greatest accomplishment, the idea of American exceptionalism, the idea that America has done all these great things and sort of occupies a special place on the planet among all countries."
A) I'm not American, but I completely agree that more needs to be taught about aboriginal history and colonization, both in Canada and the States.
B) I'm going to take a leap here and assume I've taken more aboriginal history and culture classes (granted around Canadian and not American history) than you in the process of getting my social work degree. I'm also going to take a leap and say I've likely worked with more aboriginal people who are still working through the trauma experienced through the residential school system and other historical injustices. I've also got an aboriginal sister. By no means am I saying I'm an expert on the topic, but I'm also not ignorant or uninformed about the history of relations with the Aboriginal community.
S.J.WThan* lololololol but for reals a study found that the smarter you are, the more likely you are to be left wing. Explains why you're such an idiot.
in general i am a conservative however i am a huge advocate for nature conservation and preservation, I think that global cllimate change/pollution is the #1 most important issue we are facing right now. take a fucking break from the internet kid
_Fluffy_I see you've resorted to slandering my credibility rather then actually refuting my points, typical.
You implied that people don't hunt because they can't afford it and if they could they would, which is nothing but speculation and a horrible one at that.
The Native American Genocide and Slavery are examples of extreme exploitation. The dwindling exotic animal population in Africa is a form of extreme exploitation.
Dude look at your ranting in every thread you post in. Youre a fucking nutjob.
Show me where in that post i said everyone would hunt in africa if they could afford it.
You just ignored my whole post rather than refuting my points, kinda hypocritical no?
Oh and if you think legal hunting is causing the lowering of animal populations youre severely know absolutely nothing about hunting
SFBin general i am a conservative however i am a huge advocate for nature conservation and preservation, I think that global cllimate change/pollution is the #1 most important issue we are facing right now. take a fucking break from the internet kid
so you just vote republican because your parents voted for them? Because if you thought climate change was the most important issue facing today, you'd actually vote democrat and not republican. And kid? You're probably the same age as me, you were involved in a school shooting like 2 years ago, so tops you're like 20. So you can't exactly call someone a kid when I'm the same age as you. But call me whatever you want as long as you get to feel superior.
saskskierA) I'm not American, but I completely agree that more needs to be taught about aboriginal history and colonization, both in Canada and the States.
B) I'm going to take a leap here and assume I've taken more aboriginal history and culture classes (granted around Canadian and not American history) than you in the process of getting my social work degree. I'm also going to take a leap and say I've likely worked with more aboriginal people who are still working through the trauma experienced through the residential school system and other historical injustices. I've also got an aboriginal sister. By no means am I saying I'm an expert on the topic, but I'm also not ignorant or uninformed about the history of relations with the Aboriginal community.
idk what to say about your "aboriginal education" but here is a little bit of history for you.
"At the beginning of the 1830s, nearly 125,000 Native Americans lived on millions of acres of land in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, North Carolina and Florida–land their ancestors had occupied and cultivated for generations. By the end of the decade, very few natives remained anywhere in the southeastern United States. Working on behalf of white settlers who wanted to grow cotton on the Indians’ land, the federal government forced them to leave their homelands and walk thousands of miles to a specially designated “Indian territory” across the Mississippi River. This difficult and sometimes deadly journey is known as the Trail of Tears."
_Fluffy_Its a very wasteful practice. A lot of resources are wasted so white people can fly thousands of miles to shoot one animal at near point blank range. It's truley ridiculous. Isnt part of hunting the challenge?
I think the use of a motorized vehicle to assist in hunting anything should be banned.
_Fluffy_It's a Rich White American problem.
"Most of the folks who do this are men from a wealthier subset. These are people who, for vacation, go to an African country and pay up to tens of thousands of dollars for the opportunity to kill a lion, rhino or elephant that they can bring back home."
"When the government tells a local man in Chad that he can't hunt but then allows a rich, white hunter from Texas to hunt, it's a really terrible message to send," he said. "It's colonialistic and sends mixed signals to locals who see hunting is OK when a rich, white guy does it but not OK when a local does it."
"A $350,000 permit to hunt a rare black rhino was sold last December, international hunting organization Dallas Safari Club announced"
""What happens in practice, most of the time, that money goes straight to corrupt government officials or outfitters and doesn't actually wind up back in hands of local community where hunting goes on, and they then aren't incentivized to protect wildlife and conservation areas," he said."
"The number of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fish across the globe is, on average, about half the size it was 40 years ago, according to a report released by the World Wildlife Fund last October."
_Fluffy_Maybe they do it to build character and better appreciate how easy life is. I think I would learn a lot from killing a deer, although im positive it would sadden me. I think trophy hunters lack a great deal of empathy.
_Fluffy_and I'm talking about trophy hunters. Some people still kill deer/fish/fowl for food believe it or not.
I think its stupid to kill animals just to mount them on a wall. If the hunter is shooting game to eat for a long time then thats perfect. Id rather have that then have them supporting the beef industry.
_Fluffy_idk what to say about your "aboriginal education" but here is a little bit of history for you.
"At the beginning of the 1830s, nearly 125,000 Native Americans lived on millions of acres of land in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, North Carolina and Florida–land their ancestors had occupied and cultivated for generations. By the end of the decade, very few natives remained anywhere in the southeastern United States. Working on behalf of white settlers who wanted to grow cotton on the Indians’ land, the federal government forced them to leave their homelands and walk thousands of miles to a specially designated “Indian territory” across the Mississippi River. This difficult and sometimes deadly journey is known as the Trail of Tears."
I will reiterate again, that I live in Canada and don't know a ton of American history, particularly it's First Nations history, but have heard of the Trail of Tears.
At no point have I argued that terrible things didn't happen and the treatment of Aboriginal people in Canada and the States hasn't been despicable, but I'm not willing to go as far as saying it should be called genocide.
Up here in Canada there is a lot of talk about 'cultural genocide' (there is a lot of debate over that terminology) because while there wasn't a systematic elimination of aboriginal people, there was a determined attempt at eliminating their culture and assimilating them into white culture.
You have written a lot of words, said a lot, and offered nothing of substance, no actual facts, and a tremendous amount of hearsay and fearmongering. You have been unsuccessful in countering my well-reasoned, fact-based arguments. Will you continue to cunt up this thread with useless drivel, or will you simply admit that you were either misinformed or underinformed and move forward?
_Fluffy_>implying people dont hunt because they cant afford it.
If you would use your brain just a little bit you would see your 6% matches up exactly with the percentage of hunters in america. So all you proved with those percentages is that hunter would hunt in africa and non hunters would not.
_Fluffy_Your English teacher would be very upset with you.
Trying to insult my english. Classic move when you have nothing to refute me
_Fluffy_HOW THE FUCK ARE WE CONSERVING ANYTHING???? ANIMAL SPECIES ARE DYING OFF AT AN ACCELERATED RATE. YOU GUYS ARE FUCKING CLUELESS.
Extinction of Species • Every 20 minutes, the world adds another 3,500 human lives but loses one or more entire species of animal or plant life - at least 27,000 species per year. (Source: PBS) • At the present rates of extinction, as many as 20% of the world's 7-15 million species could be gone in the next 30 years. This rate of extinction has been unprecedented since the disappearance of dinosaurs 65 million years ago (Source: WWF).
Habitat Destruction (Source: Animal Alliance, unless stated otherwise) • Human population reached 1 billion by 1800. Over 6 billion by 2000. Conservative estimates predict that our population will reach 9 billion people by 2050 (Source: Population Reference Bureau) • The hourly destruction of an estimated 240 acres of natural habitat is directly attributable to the growth in human populations. • 80% of the decline in biological diversity is caused by habitat destruction.
Plight of Rhinos (Source: International Rhino Foundation) • Of the dozens of species of rhino that once roamed the earth, only 5 now exist. • Where there were once over 100,000 black rhinos on the plains of Africa, there are now only 2,707 on the entire continent. • The staggering decimation of the rhino population is due to poaching, to satisfy the demand for the horn for use in Eastern traditional medicines and as dagger handles. • Prices up to US$40,000 a kilo have been recorded for the much prized rhino horn - more than 5 times the price of gold.
The African Elephant (Source: CITES) • 5 -10 million African elephants existed in 1930. Less than 1% of that number (approximately 600,000) remained when they were added to the international list of the most endangered species in 1989. • Demand for ivory combined with loss of habitat from human settlement led to these huge declines in population.
African Wild Dog (Source: American Museum of Natural History) • Listed as one of the worlds most endangered canids, and the most endangered predator in Africa, there are now only between 4,000-5,000 African wild dogs in the wild. • A century ago, African wild dog packs numbering a hundred or more animals could be seen roaming the Serengeti Plains. Today, pack size averages about 10, and the total population on the Serengeti is probably less than 60 dogs. • Due to their large home ranges, African wild dogs are particularly vulnerable to habitat destruction. • They are widely regarded as pests, and poisoned, shot, trapped and snared in many areas. • Their most serious threat, though, is introduced diseases. Burgeoning human populations have brought the African wild dogs into frequent contact with domestic dogs, many of which carry canine distemper and rabies.
The African Lion (Source: Enkosini Wildlife Sanctuary) • The African lions' numbers are diminishing rapidly due to habitat destruction, persecution by livestock farmers outside of protected areas, and human greed. 10,000-15,000 free-roaming African lions remain, down from 50,000 a decade ago. • The willingness of Asians and Westerners to pay handsomely for lion head trophies combined with the urgent need for revenue among African locals means that these great predators are increasingly hunted for sport. • Trophy hunting not only depletes the population of the African lion, but threatens its gene pool as well. Killing the dominant male of a pride (normally the target of a trophy hunt) sets off a chain of instinctive behavior in which the subsequent dominant male kills all the young of the previous male (6-8 estimated deaths result from each male shot).
Cheetahs (Source: The Cheetah Spot) • In 1900 there were about 100,000 cheetah worldwide - present estimates place their number at 10,000 -15,000 with about one tenth of those living in captivity. • Throughout recorded history a cheetah pelt was a badge of wealth for its human owner. The animal was killed for its skin by some and captured for its hunting skills by others. More recently, increasing human populations have squeezed cheetahs and their prey from their natural habitats
Definitions • Poaching is the illegal hunting, capture, or collecting of wildlife. Snaring is a common form of subsistence poaching and can lead to the maiming of many animals not intended for consumption. (Source: Bagheera: Glossary of terms) • Canned hunts are commercial hunts, which take place on private land under circumstances that virtually assure the hunter of success. The animal is often fenced in, or has been habituated to eating at a feeding station at the same time every day. Canned hunts are prevalent in the United States and South Africa. (Source: Animalunderworld
iFlipYou have written a lot of words, said a lot, and offered nothing of substance, no actual facts, and a tremendous amount of hearsay and fearmongering. You have been unsuccessful in countering my well-reasoned, fact-based arguments. Will you continue to cunt up this thread with useless drivel, or will you simply admit that you were either misinformed or underinformed and move forward?
'Nearly 40 years ago, Kenya banned trophy hunting. Within the past two years, other African countries have realized the wisdom of Kenya’s approach and instituted similar bans. Botswana and Zambia, once major destinations for pursuers of Africa’s “Big Five” – African elephant, African lion, Cape buffalo, leopard, and rhinoceros – have also prohibited this biologically reckless activity because of the harm it causes to wildlife populations. Even the United States, home to the world’s largest number of trophy hunters, has taken steps to join the trend. In April, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) banned the import of sport-hunted elephant trophies from Zimbabwe and Tanzania over concerns that the hunts were driving down elephant populations already severely impacted by poachers.
It’s about time. If the Dallas Safari Club auction for the opportunity to kill a critically endangered black rhino in Namibia proved anything, it is that trophy-seekers will pay an exorbitant amount of money for bragging rights and a head to hang on the wall, instead of using that wealth to preserve and protect wildlife.
The winner of the auction agreed to pay $350,000 for the right to kill the black rhino – a creature highly desired by those who seek to add the rarest animals to their trophy collections. Contemplate for a moment what money like that could buy in poor countries that are often riddled with corruption. According to Transparency International, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania are three of the most corrupt countries in the world, and money from trophy-hunters fuels this corruption. Corrupt officials allow animals to be killed in dangerously high numbers – to the point of harming the conservation of the species. Corruption that led to poor wildlife management is exactly the reason that Kenya banned hunting so long ago and why others are following Kenya’s lead today.
The Namibian government decided to allow the slaughter of a black rhino as a fundraising mechanism, but those funds will not necessarily go back to black rhino conservation as some claim. Instead, they will go into a general pot of money allocated to all manner of projects including those that have nothing to do with rhinos, or which could even be harmful to rhinos, such as “rural development.”
Cashing in on the desires of some to shoot rare species and display their remains back home in lavish “trophy rooms” – macabre mausoleums filled with dead animals – is what is driving Namibia’s approach, not the conservation needs of the species. The best way to conserve critically endangered species like the black rhino is to ensure that every animal remains alive and contributing to the genetic diversity of the species. Species with a diverse gene pool are more able to overcome challenges to their survival. The Namibian case proves, once again, that cold, hard cash undermines wildlife conservation.
Fortunately, the black rhino is listed as an endangered species under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), meaning that the winner will need to get an import permit from the FWS to bring the carcass home. The ESA makes it clear that such permits should be granted only when the import will enhance the survival of the species in the wild. Once the winner applies for the import permit, there will be a 30-day comment period. We plan to provide evidence to the FWS that the recreational shooting of a member of a critically endangered species is harmful to that species. We invite you to sign a petition that we will submit along with our comments showing that people do not support issuance of the import permit.
The US government needs to understand that the American public does not support the Orwellian idea of killing endangered species to save them – even if it comes with a big cash payout. Where will it end? Will a Safari Club International member offer $1 million for the opportunity to shoot an orangutan, $2 million for an Asian elephant, and maybe even more for a Siberian tiger?
While those animals are highly protected because they are listed as endangered under the ESA, others are not so fortunate, and the numbers killed by American trophy hunters annually are staggering. In 2012, the parts of approximately 600 African elephants, 750 African lions, and 698 leopards were imported into this country.
small excerpt of a poll page Reader Opinion What do you think: Is there a place for hunting in conservation? Vote and be counted.
American trophy hunters belong to clubs, such as the Dallas Safari Club and Safari Club International, where they can compete to kill the most animals for the most awards. To earn every award that SCI offers, at least 171 different animals from around the world must be killed. Many SCI members have records for killing more than 400 different creatures that populate their trophy rooms. Hunters receive award trophies for shooting a prescribed list of animals. For example, the “Trophy Animals of Africa” award requires the hunter to kill 79 different African species to win the highest honor.
Animals like elephants and lions are much more valuable alive than dead, to the economies of African nations and to the entire world. An animal can be watched throughout his lifetime, and there’s a growing pool of eco-tourism customers waiting for that thrilling experience. On the other hand, the creature targeted by the hunter dies, meaning the revenue gained is merely a one-shot deal. What’s more, the pool of people who want to kill elephants, lions, or leopards for fun is comparably tiny, and it’s declining. The pictures and the memories for the eco-tourists will last a lifetime, and it’s a trip they’ll never be ashamed to recount to their grandkids.
Make no mistake: Trophy hunting is setting wildlife conservation back, and there are better ways to save these animals than by shooting them.'
(Source): Teresa M. Telecky, PhD is the director of the wildlife department for Humane Society International.
.Hugo.the animals are not going to go extinct, or even become endangered
iFlipHunting is absolutely the driving force behind conservation,
why the fuck are you talking about turkeys? California droughts? lets stick to the topic.
S.J.WLike I've stated from that study, not a bullshit opinion article, hunting does not help conservation or Africa in any way. Where as reservation parks do help conservation and do help Africa.
YES!
_Fluffy_'Nearly 40 years ago, Kenya banned trophy hunting. Within the past two years, other African countries have realized the wisdom of Kenya’s approach and instituted similar bans. Botswana and Zambia, once major destinations for pursuers of Africa’s “Big Five” – African elephant, African lion, Cape buffalo, leopard, and rhinoceros – have also prohibited this biologically reckless activity because of the harm it causes to wildlife populations. Even the United States, home to the world’s largest number of trophy hunters, has taken steps to join the trend. In April, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) banned the import of sport-hunted elephant trophies from Zimbabwe and Tanzania over concerns that the hunts were driving down elephant populations already severely impacted by poachers.
It’s about time. If the Dallas Safari Club auction for the opportunity to kill a critically endangered black rhino in Namibia proved anything, it is that trophy-seekers will pay an exorbitant amount of money for bragging rights and a head to hang on the wall, instead of using that wealth to preserve and protect wildlife.
The winner of the auction agreed to pay $350,000 for the right to kill the black rhino – a creature highly desired by those who seek to add the rarest animals to their trophy collections. Contemplate for a moment what money like that could buy in poor countries that are often riddled with corruption. According to Transparency International, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania are three of the most corrupt countries in the world, and money from trophy-hunters fuels this corruption. Corrupt officials allow animals to be killed in dangerously high numbers – to the point of harming the conservation of the species. Corruption that led to poor wildlife management is exactly the reason that Kenya banned hunting so long ago and why others are following Kenya’s lead today.
The Namibian government decided to allow the slaughter of a black rhino as a fundraising mechanism, but those funds will not necessarily go back to black rhino conservation as some claim. Instead, they will go into a general pot of money allocated to all manner of projects including those that have nothing to do with rhinos, or which could even be harmful to rhinos, such as “rural development.”
Cashing in on the desires of some to shoot rare species and display their remains back home in lavish “trophy rooms” – macabre mausoleums filled with dead animals – is what is driving Namibia’s approach, not the conservation needs of the species. The best way to conserve critically endangered species like the black rhino is to ensure that every animal remains alive and contributing to the genetic diversity of the species. Species with a diverse gene pool are more able to overcome challenges to their survival. The Namibian case proves, once again, that cold, hard cash undermines wildlife conservation.
Fortunately, the black rhino is listed as an endangered species under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), meaning that the winner will need to get an import permit from the FWS to bring the carcass home. The ESA makes it clear that such permits should be granted only when the import will enhance the survival of the species in the wild. Once the winner applies for the import permit, there will be a 30-day comment period. We plan to provide evidence to the FWS that the recreational shooting of a member of a critically endangered species is harmful to that species. We invite you to sign a petition that we will submit along with our comments showing that people do not support issuance of the import permit.
The US government needs to understand that the American public does not support the Orwellian idea of killing endangered species to save them – even if it comes with a big cash payout. Where will it end? Will a Safari Club International member offer $1 million for the opportunity to shoot an orangutan, $2 million for an Asian elephant, and maybe even more for a Siberian tiger?
While those animals are highly protected because they are listed as endangered under the ESA, others are not so fortunate, and the numbers killed by American trophy hunters annually are staggering. In 2012, the parts of approximately 600 African elephants, 750 African lions, and 698 leopards were imported into this country.
small excerpt of a poll page Reader Opinion What do you think: Is there a place for hunting in conservation? Vote and be counted.
American trophy hunters belong to clubs, such as the Dallas Safari Club and Safari Club International, where they can compete to kill the most animals for the most awards. To earn every award that SCI offers, at least 171 different animals from around the world must be killed. Many SCI members have records for killing more than 400 different creatures that populate their trophy rooms. Hunters receive award trophies for shooting a prescribed list of animals. For example, the “Trophy Animals of Africa” award requires the hunter to kill 79 different African species to win the highest honor.
Animals like elephants and lions are much more valuable alive than dead, to the economies of African nations and to the entire world. An animal can be watched throughout his lifetime, and there’s a growing pool of eco-tourism customers waiting for that thrilling experience. On the other hand, the creature targeted by the hunter dies, meaning the revenue gained is merely a one-shot deal. What’s more, the pool of people who want to kill elephants, lions, or leopards for fun is comparably tiny, and it’s declining. The pictures and the memories for the eco-tourists will last a lifetime, and it’s a trip they’ll never be ashamed to recount to their grandkids.
Make no mistake: Trophy hunting is setting wildlife conservation back, and there are better ways to save these animals than by shooting them.'
(Source): Teresa M. Telecky, PhD is the director of the wildlife department for Humane Society International.
S.J.Wso you just vote republican because your parents voted for them? Because if you thought climate change was the most important issue facing today, you'd actually vote democrat and not republican. And kid? You're probably the same age as me, you were involved in a school shooting like 2 years ago, so tops you're like 20. So you can't exactly call someone a kid when I'm the same age as you. But call me whatever you want as long as you get to feel superior.
both my parents are staunch liberals lol. i used to leanepretty left but i noticed hypocrisy and brainwashing of the movement in general and it no longer appeals to me kid.
