Can we hunt him using an Apache?
Discussion
el stovey said:
Do you have any evidence this dentist's money helped pay for rangers or protect animals?
In this case it sounds like he was had. Thats called corruption. Fact is, the parks are Gov't controlled, its those that decide via the professionals , the management of the reserves. Reserves are finite ares, they need to be managed, thats what they do.
Camoradi said:
OK, we'll try it your way. 100,000 lions left, so get 100,000 dentists to pay 50,000 dollars to shoot one each. Problem solved...
OR: limit it to 100. Spend the 5mil on keeping the poachers out. What how fast the numbers rise.Here's a good read. http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy...
Article says said:
However, it might just be worth having a quick look at some numbers. 745 rhinos were killed due to illegal poaching in 2012 in Africa, which amounts to approximately two rhinos each day, mostly for their horns. In South Africa alone, 461 rhinos were killed in just the first half of 2013. Rhino horns are valued for their medicinal uses and for their supposed cancer-curing powers. Of course, rhino horns have no pharmacological value at all, making their harvest even more tragic. The five non-breeding rhinos that Namibia allows to be hunted each year seem paltry in comparison, especially since they are older males who can no longer contribute to population growth.
Wrathalanche said:
MrBarry123 said:
Sorry but that has to be the biggest lie people tout nowadays.
Take tigers for example... The number in the wild had decreased from over 100,000 in 1990 to less than 3,200 in 2010 - almost entirely down to human causes.
AFAIK there's no legal tiger hunts. Tiger numbers are dropping because of poaching, not trophy hunting. Not in the modern day, anyway.Take tigers for example... The number in the wild had decreased from over 100,000 in 1990 to less than 3,200 in 2010 - almost entirely down to human causes.
Trophy hunting, where sanctioned, is not poaching. There appears to be a big misunderstanding here for a lot of people.
In most cases, it is the people who's day job is to keep these animals cared for an protected which are allocating animals for the legal hunts. This money goes towards stopping poaching.
What doesn't help, in this case, is this idiot (the dentist) has blurred the line between hunting and poaching.
Come on, you don't really believe that do you? A large number of the countries who legalise the poaching of animals do so only because the land isn't suitable for tourism and/or farming - it's an economic move. They're cash strapped already and to believe that a proportionate amount of the trophy hunting spend returns back into the conservation pot is ludicrous. It isn't about population control or anything of the like, it's about countries who are up s
t creek selling whatever resources they have to whoever has money.Then the same governments have the audacity to report an increase in "total" animal numbers - saying this proves their conservation efforts are working - however include the number of animals bred in captivity for hunting in this figure. Given poaching (legal or illegal) is on the rise, this is hardly surprising as the governments will continue to breed more and more animals as long as the money floods in.
Trophy hunting does nothing to help the plight of these animals. It's purely a legalised poaching scheme that takes more from this earth than it gives back - benefitting poor, and often corrupt, governments as they sell their native animals' lives to rich, typically overweight, Westerners.
Wrathalanche said:
So the only hope for these animals is for wealthy foreign benefactors to give up large sums of their money for nothing in return?
So killing a lion is "something in return"?ETA: http://qz.com/465691/cecil-the-lion-didnt-have-to-...
https://www.facebook.com/notes/stop-trophy-hunting...
Edited by MrBarry123 on Thursday 30th July 16:50
Alfa numeric said:
I'd say it's more likely to be the tens of thousands of tourists who go there every year to photograph the animals.
Aparently not, without paying hunters, there wouldn't be enough money to pay the wardens etc . Cheesy said so. He hasn't any evidence at all but he posted links to the internet showing there are rangers that protect animals, in case anyone didn't know the parks actually have Rangers.
The BBC have listed some of the for and against: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-33699347
Alfa numeric said:
I'd say it's more likely to be the tens of thousands of tourists who go there every year to photograph the animals.
That will also be part of the funding. That still leaves the fact that the parks have to be correctly managed. The density of particular species of wildlife within those parks , is a key part of that management. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/18/opinion/saving-l...
Not saying this is conclusive by any means, but it's surely worthy of discussion. The fact is whatever level funding is currently at - whether paid for by photography, hunting etc, it's not working.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27972-lions...
Not saying this is conclusive by any means, but it's surely worthy of discussion. The fact is whatever level funding is currently at - whether paid for by photography, hunting etc, it's not working.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27972-lions...
Wrathalanche said:
Here's a good read. http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy...
Thanks for that. An interesting read as you say. I guess the two telling factors are levels of funding (from whatever source), and how effectively it is applied.I still think our dentist should have been more careful in his choice of guide, and his past record suggests he may not be much more than a poacher himself (or just unlucky in his choice of guide). I wonder what he, his family and his staff would have to say at the moment.
Interesting debating with you
From the same link -
http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy...
"According to a 2005 paper by Nigel Leader-Williams and colleagues in the Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy the answer is yes. Leader-Williams describes how the legalization of white rhinoceros hunting in South Africa motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than one hundred individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies."
http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy...
"According to a 2005 paper by Nigel Leader-Williams and colleagues in the Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy the answer is yes. Leader-Williams describes how the legalization of white rhinoceros hunting in South Africa motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than one hundred individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies."
MrBarry123 said:
So killing a lion is "something in return"?
As someone with no interest in hunting personally, I wouldn't say so. The important thing is that hunters do. And the reserves see it as a net gain. If the bounty of one suitable lion pays for the conservation of 5 then they'll see it continues.If trophy hunts are banned, how would you make up for that loss of income? Genuinely asking because that would obviously be the ideal solution.
And for what it's worth I agree with the point of view that this does boil down to treating the animals as a resource to be sold off. But I'd say that's up to that country's government. We might not like it but it's in their right to do so.
If the money doesn't go back into protecting the species, then I'd say it's all bulls
t. That's my main worry. But Africa is a fked up place. My concerns are the least of their's. Edited by Wrathalanche on Thursday 30th July 19:02
Wrathalanche said:
As someone with no interest in hunting personally, I wouldn't say so. The important thing is that hunters do. And the reserves see it as a net gain. If the bounty of one suitable lion pays for the conservation of 5 then they'll see it continues.
If trophy hunts are banned, how would you make up for that loss of income? Genuinely asking because that would obviously be the ideal solution.
And for what it's worth I agree with the point of view that this does boil down to treating the animals as a resource to be sold off. But I'd say that's up to that country's government. We might not like it but it's in their right to do so.
If the money doesn't go back into protecting the species, then I'd say it's all bullst. That's my main worry. But Africa is a fked up place. My concerns are the least of their's.
Just wait a second what do you think this is? This isn't some kind of discussion where you can talk rationally and calmly this is a witch hunt damn it!If trophy hunts are banned, how would you make up for that loss of income? Genuinely asking because that would obviously be the ideal solution.
And for what it's worth I agree with the point of view that this does boil down to treating the animals as a resource to be sold off. But I'd say that's up to that country's government. We might not like it but it's in their right to do so.
If the money doesn't go back into protecting the species, then I'd say it's all bulls
t. That's my main worry. But Africa is a fked up place. My concerns are the least of their's. fwiw I agree completely and if this guy did indeed kill it illegally I say let him think about it for a few years in an African jail
Dr Jekyll said:
Very sobering. I have a friend from Zim , she's a maths teacher here. She is underwhwelmed by the entire thing. She see's our (western) attitudes to many things as nothing more than hysterical. Dr Jekyll said:
I'd love to know how Tempe Anerican press are reporting it!I'd imagine that both sides are doing it rather differently!
Cheese Mechanic said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Very sobering. I have a friend from Zim , she's a maths teacher here. She is underwhwelmed by the entire thing. She see's our (western) attitudes to many things as nothing more than hysterical. Makes sense
TheJimi said:
Cheese Mechanic said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Very sobering. I have a friend from Zim , she's a maths teacher here. She is underwhwelmed by the entire thing. She see's our (western) attitudes to many things as nothing more than hysterical. Makes sense
I think to put it in perspective, they have much bigger things to worry about than the odd lion. We apparently do not.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff