Trophy Hunter Trampled To Death By Elephant

[Randy Winkman]

ofcorsa said:

For thousands of years man relied on his hunting instincts to survive,I can understand that hunting gives people a primal connection with nature. Illegal poaching should be punished to the full extent of the law however.

And for thousands of years people had to fight, kill, steal, rape etc for land, property. women .....

[Jasandjules]

steviegunn said:

Individuals like Walter the Dentist are no better than the nasty kid who goes around the neighbourhood shooting peoples pets with an air gun, same thing, more money.

Yup.

[ehonda]

This ain't hunting. You can drive right up to these wild animals in the park and spend all day shooting them with a camera, to shoot them with a weapon must be about as challenging as playing darts.
It's just killing and anyone that gets satisfaction from that should be locked up. Personally I'd be embarrassed to show the world I'd killed a buffalo, it's "hunting" a cow FFS.

[audidoody]

"Hunting" is what creatures do to survive.

Paying a bloke who knows a bloke £32,000 to entice a protected animal who responds to human intervention with bait from its territory to it can be shot with a bow and arrow by some half-wit from Minnesota is psychotic slaughter.

[DrDoofenshmirtz]

ofcorsa said:

For thousands of years man relied on his hunting instincts to survive,I can understand that hunting gives people a primal connection with nature. Illegal poaching should be punished to the full extent of the law however.

Yes, thankfully in the civilized world, most people have moved on.
Sadly, there are still a few psychopathic misguided fools intent on destroying what little there is left.
And as for the comments above comparing this to farmed animals - FFS, grow up. This was the dominant male in a pack. The pack is now effectively destroyed, and the cubs will likely be killed by the new dominant male. Yes, they will move on. But was it really worth it?

Hopefully this sad case will highlight what is going on, and the perpetrators named and shamed via social media.

[ofcorsa]

We are so civilized we cram animals into cages and force feed them drugs and animal by products to satisfy our need for protein. But yeah a cuddly Lion died so lets all get angry on social media.

[SPS]

ofcorsa said:

We are so civilized we cram animals into cages and force feed them drugs and animal by products to satisfy our need for protein. But yeah a cuddly Lion died so lets all get angry on social media.

When no one gives a st about this kind of crap - let the last one out switch off the proverbial light.

[Digga]

Cannot fathom the mentality of some people.

I've spent a little time watching game in Africa and, although I realise from a gamekeeping perspective, there are times when animals need to be controlled and even killed, I cannot see how anyone would see such an act as 'sport' or recreation.

And don't get me started on fking poachers and tts who think horns, tusks, penises or god knows what have mystical powers. If anyone wants to do 'somthing useful with a gun' that's who should be in their sights.

This was taken a long while ago now, but is still a very strong memory of conflicting emotions; it was great to feed a black rhino by hand, but it shouldn't really be possible for me to have got so close in the first place. The poor sod had been orphaned whilst very young - nearly died - and was hand-reared by rangers and was never fully able to return to a truly wild habitat.

[BlackLabel]

Oops! It happened again.

South African hunter Theunis Botha crushed to death by elephant after it is fatally shot in Zimbabwe

[FN2TypeR]

Just a pity that the elephant had to die too.

[LimaDelta]

So much ignorance on this thread it beggars belief.

For those who want to form their opinions on fact rather than Facebook captioned photos here is a good place to start:

http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_informingde...

But the simple truth is this - African nations which allow trophy hunting have significantly higher populations of game species than those which don't.

I don't know the facts of this latest incident but this man has left behind a family. He has also undoubtedly carried out far more conservation work than the posters on this thread, and knows far more about African wildlife management than some keyboard warrior who has probably never even set foot on the continent of Africa.

[hairyben]

LimaDelta said:

So much ignorance on this thread it beggars belief.

This is the problem with todays information wars, everyone can find evidence to confirm whatever PoV suits them. This thread is a great example, with these hunters being everything from evil sickos destroying endangered species to get kicks to carrying out essential culling that profits the conservation - you just need to pick a belief that suits!!

I guess I'm the freak of nature insofar as I dont want to join a clan, I'd rather know what the true facts are. While I think anyone wanting to spend 50 grand to destroy a big cow would probably be better served taking some of that and chatting to a shrink before engaging to kill such majestic creatures, so long as theres no suffering or endangering of the species I'm not going to stick my oar in.

So who do I believe?

[JulianHJ]

LimaDelta said:

Some spurious stuff about conservation...

Evils of factory farming - I'm with you on that. (Edited to clarify - in reference to Ofcorsa's comment)

Killing animals for fun - no. We could do with far fewer humans on this planet, and I'm pleased this latest sicko is no longer with us. I'd be very happy if the rest of those sharing his mindset turned their guns on themselves. What kind of warped mind leads people to decide to cause harm for their own enjoyment? This guy is no better than those who stage dog fights, or go around dismembering cats.

Edited by JulianHJ on Monday 22 May 10:27

[LimaDelta]

JulianHJ said:

LimaDelta said:

Some spurious stuff about conservation...

Evils of factory farming - I'm with you on that.

Killing animals for fun - no. We could do with far fewer humans on this planet, and I'm pleased this latest sicko is no longer with us. I'd be very happy if the rest of those sharing his mindset turned their guns on themselves. What kind of warped mind leads people to decide to cause harm for their own enjoyment? This guy is no better than those who stage dog fights, or go around dismembering cats.

^^ My bold.

Simply not true I'm afraid. I'm not saying that all hunters are angels. There are aholes in any walk of life, but to think that hunters derive any sort of enjoyment from the suffering of animals is ignorant and delusional. Most are animal lovers, with pets and some dedicate their entire lives to the protection of endangered species. Hunters will do anything they can to ensure a clean kill, with as little suffering as possible. There is no pleasure in seeing a wounded animal suffer.

Some of the people doing the most good in Africa are hunters. Where does the money to combat poachers come from? How much have you personally donated to ensure the welfare of animals in Africa? Trophy hunters give an animal a value which without the hunting simply would not exist. The elephant would still be killed, by a farmer, or a hungry villager, or an ivory poacher. The only difference is the $50k would not be there to be invested back into conservation.

Like it or not (and I am fully aware that hunting does not sit well with many people), hunting, and in particular big game hunting, brings a massive benefit to these communities, and to the species themselves. The money is reinvested, the locals are fed (which means they don't have to resort to poaching) and the animal population remains healthy. The only people against this are well-fed metropolitan types with very little understanding of the subject.

Personally I consider any meat eater who is not willing to kill their own food a hypocrite of the highest order.

I don't expect everyone to be in favour of hunting, but I do think it is disingenuous to claim that those who take part suffer from some kind of personality disorder. After all, it is pretty much hard wired into our DNA.

[Randy Winkman]

LimaDelta said:

So much ignorance on this thread it beggars belief.

For those who want to form their opinions on fact rather than Facebook captioned photos here is a good place to start:

http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_informingde...

But the simple truth is this - African nations which allow trophy hunting have significantly higher populations of game species than those which don't.

I don't know the facts of this latest incident but this man has left behind a family. He has also undoubtedly carried out far more conservation work than the posters on this thread, and knows far more about African wildlife management than some keyboard warrior who has probably never even set foot on the continent of Africa.

Do they have higher populations because they allow trophy hunting?

Could he not do that conservation stuff but not shoot the animal? Just to prove he loves wildlife and isn't a sicko.

[LimaDelta]

Randy Winkman said:

Do they have higher populations because they allow trophy hunting?

Could he not do that conservation stuff but not shoot the animal? Just to prove he loves wildlife and isn't a sicko.

Firstly, I'm not sure why they would have to 'prove' anything , and secondly where exactly does the money come from for these conservation projects if not from hunting?

If an old bull has already bred and is at the point where he is nearing the end of his life, perhaps becoming a detriment to the herd (being violent or breeding with direct offspring) then why not allow someone to pay $50k to humanely kill it and use the money to further the conservation and anti-poaching efforts? These animals are not indiscriminately killed, you know that right? They are selected in small numbers to be culled.

With a managed population his will go on regardless of whether a rich trophy hunter is there. The only difference is that without them, there will be no money going back into the community. The locals will be poorer and more inclined to make money elsewhere - like poaching.

[ATG]

Randy Winkman said:

Do they have higher populations because they allow trophy hunting?

Could he not do that conservation stuff but not shoot the animal? Just to prove he loves wildlife and isn't a sicko.

Yes to the first. No to the second. Hunting provides vital revenue. Reserves are not unmanaged wild spaces. We don't have that luxury. The ecosystems are managed to compensate for their restricted sizes and species imbalances, and to artificially favour the most endangered species. Within these frameworks animals are going to be culled, so why on earth wouldn't you make as much revenue out of that process as you can?

[98elise]

el stovey said:

Composite Guru said:

Good job. One less tosser on the planet!!!

I found that You Tube video totally sickening. How can you do that to defenceless animals.

I would of prefered him to have been mauled slowly to death by a lion or something.

Edited by Composite Guru on Monday 27th July 09:50

I agree.

I wonder though on the sliding scale of 'which animals are OK to kill' does it become OK to kill animals? Most people like whales and elephants or dolphins but are perhaps less concerned if someone kills a fly or a rabbit.

Is it just whether you see the animal as food or a pest it's OK to kill it? e.i. any killing for sport is wrong?

I suppose I think it's OK to kill animals as part of pest control or to eat, unless they are endangered or something I think is a nice animal, like a dog etc.

Food or pest is ok as long as it's done in a humane way. I'm not bothered if they are fully or cute.

Fun is not ok.

[rxe]

ATG said:

Yes to the first. No to the second. Hunting provides vital revenue. Reserves are not unmanaged wild spaces. We don't have that luxury. The ecosystems are managed to compensate for their restricted sizes and species imbalances, and to artificially favour the most endangered species. Within these frameworks animals are going to be culled, so why on earth wouldn't you make as much revenue out of that process as you can?

This is exactly the point.

The animals have to have a value to survive. It's unpleasant but true. We see elephants and say "ooooh, nice elephant", then go back to eating our factory farmed food in front of the telly. The locals see a big grumpy gray thing that eats their crops and stops them planting more crops. If the locals don't see a value in the elephants, then they will get rid of the game reserve (easy, it has no money), slaughter the elephants and plant crops there.

There is value in people coming to look at elephants. Not much directly, but there is value. Airlines make money, hotels make money, and the game reserve gets a cut. There is a truck load of value in hunting elephants. People will pay large amounts of money to shoot something, and because they need to be a bit more remote, they will probably spend another load of money on "incidentals".

If done right, they will be killing animals that don't add anything to the herd (males who will never make it), or animals that have added a lot to the herd but now need to make way (avoiding too much inbreeding). If no one did the hunting, the reserve would have to do it themselves, losing money every time they did it.

Although I will cheerfully shoot deer (and eat them), I have zero desire to shoot anything for the hell of it. However, I'd have no moral qualms about doing it on the basis that the money was going into conservation (and the locals got to eat the body).

[BlackLabel]

*bump*

It’s a shame the same didn’t happen in this case.

https://mobile.twitter.com/yashar/status/105305221...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6289579/E...