Prince William: 'We must do more on illegal ivory trade'

[Burwood]

Jasandjules said:

s3fella said:

Oh do fk off you toffee nosed tt, William.

Really? How can it not be admirable to be concerned about wildlife and what the human scum are doing to hunt them to extinction?

or the scum who buy it. No different to the Japanese killing Whales. Monkey meat. There are some right nasty people out there. Humans eh, mostly assholes

[AJL308]

Halb said:

AJL308 said:

So why is it that countries which allow managed hunting don't seem to have a significant problem with illegal poaching?

Gestation times are irrelevant. You only shoot old animals who won't be reproducing anyway. Nor do you need to have a large supply of huntable animals. It isn't like producing broiler chickens or keeping a sport fishing lake stocked. It's extremely expensive so one animal brings in a lot of cash.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/11/151715-conservation-trophy-hunting-elephants-tusks-poaching-zimbabwe-namibia/
"Trophy hunting isn’t stopping poaching, especially in countries that have a poor record of protecting their wildlife.

Six countries—South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique, Namibia, and Tanzania—have many of the remaining savanna elephants. Along with Cameroon and Gabon, these nations allow sport hunting regardless of the level of decline in their elephant populations. (Botswana, which has more than 130,000 elephants by one recent estimate, has banned trophy hunting.)

According to the latest figures, Tanzania’s elephant population has fallen from nearly 110,000 in 2009 to just over 43,000 at the end of 2014—a 60 percent drop. Mozambique’s elephants declined from an estimated 20,000 to 10,300 during the same period. In Zimbabwe, a recent survey shows massive losses in some parks."

Conservation Magazine appears to take a different view:

http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy...

"[i]
Is there such evidence? 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.[/i]

It does mention that badly run hunting schemes don't work very well, no surprise there then, but I did refer properly regulated hunting.

I don't believe for one minute that South Africa and those other countries mentioned in the NG allow animals to be hunted without regard to their numbers - well, Zimbabwe under it's current psychotic leadership may do. However, even they point out that this lot also thinks that properly run hunting is a perfectly reasonable way to further conservation.

https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_ssc_guidin...

[Cotty]

Elderly said:

Cotty said:

Always makes me wonder what will happen if they all get hunted to extinction

I was told by a guide in Tanzania that natural selection means that elephants with the smallest tusks are becoming the most plentiful (because they are not poached) and that their progeny have smaller and smaller tusks and hence will become even less attractive to poach.

That's one way to solve it elephants with no tusks

[Halb]

AJL308 said:

Conservation Magazine appears to take a different view:

http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy...

"[i]
Is there such evidence? 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.[/i]

It does mention that badly run hunting schemes don't work very well, no surprise there then, but I did refer properly regulated hunting.

I don't believe for one minute that South Africa and those other countries mentioned in the NG allow animals to be hunted without regard to their numbers - well, Zimbabwe under it's current psychotic leadership may do. However, even they point out that this lot also thinks that properly run hunting is a perfectly reasonable way to further conservation.

https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_ssc_guidin...

That article quotes Zimbabwe as a success, when it isn't, as shown in the article I posted from a later date.
http://www.herald.co.zw/jumbo-population-down-40pc...
Do the hunter needs to pay more for bodyguards for the elephants to stop the poachers?
Poaching isn't going to disappear, and from the looks of things, hunting isn't helping much.

[Jasandjules]

AJL308 said:

I take it that you also consider all the Chinese people who are buying the illegal poached Ivory and Rhino horn to be 'retards' as well then? No one ever seems to make that point.

More like scum. Who ought to be hunted down and removed from society.

[Tonsko]

A long read, but a good one.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/2...

Shooting poachers won't help. Changing the culture of the Far East will do, except it's not that easy. Not strictly about Ivory per se, but the dangers to all wildlife.

[Cotty]

Jasandjules said:

AJL308 said:

I take it that you also consider all the Chinese people who are buying the illegal poached Ivory and Rhino horn to be 'retards' as well then? No one ever seems to make that point.

More like scum. Who ought to be hunted down and removed from society.

Same scum who eat shark fin soup.

[Digga]

Cotty said:

Jasandjules said:

AJL308 said:

I take it that you also consider all the Chinese people who are buying the illegal poached Ivory and Rhino horn to be 'retards' as well then? No one ever seems to make that point.

More like scum. Who ought to be hunted down and removed from society.

Same scum who eat shark fin soup.

There is a collective, cultural, monolithic ignorance which is staggering.

[Cotty]

Digga said:

There is a collective, cultural, monolithic ignorance which is staggering.

Statement kind of misses the mark if you don't explain the meaning behind it.

[Digga]

Cotty said:

Digga said:

There is a collective, cultural, monolithic ignorance which is staggering.

Statement kind of misses the mark if you don't explain the meaning behind it.

There are some nations who have a very, very different worldview. It will be a near impossibly task, in the short term, to change attitudes.

[Colonial]

I'm still not sure how hunting animals for ivory is going to save them while stopping hunting will mean they will become extinct.

[Cotty]

Digga said:

There are some nations who have a very, very different worldview. It will be a near impossibly task, in the short term, to change attitudes.

I get your point, especially when you consider the amount of whaling that still goes on.

One of these days one of the endangered species will become extinct and I don't think the people that buy, sell or eat it will give a crap.

[Digga]

Cotty said:

Digga said:

There are some nations who have a very, very different worldview. It will be a near impossibly task, in the short term, to change attitudes.

I get your point, especially when you consider the amount of whaling that still goes on.

One of these days one of the endangered species will become extinct and I don't think the people that buy, sell or eat it will give a crap.

The recent mania for globalism and multiculturalism ignores the fact that there is an enormous gulf of culture and empathy between humans from different parts of the planet. As you rightly point out, the degree of geographic isolation does not always have any bearing on the extent of these differences.

[durbster]

Cotty said:

One of these days one of the endangered species will become extinct and I don't think the people that buy, sell or eat it will give a crap.

I imagine all the pricks collecting ivory will care, since its value would go up considerably if elephants went extinct.

Digga said:

Cotty said:

Digga said:

There are some nations who have a very, very different worldview. It will be a near impossibly task, in the short term, to change attitudes.

I get your point, especially when you consider the amount of whaling that still goes on.

One of these days one of the endangered species will become extinct and I don't think the people that buy, sell or eat it will give a crap.

The recent mania for globalism and multiculturalism ignores the fact that there is an enormous gulf of culture and empathy between humans from different parts of the planet. As you rightly point out, the degree of geographic isolation does not always have any bearing on the extent of these differences.

Might be worth pointing out that it's only a generation ago that we (i.e. white westerners) were relentlessly plundering African wildlife. We shouldn't get too high-horsey about it but it does also show attitudes can change quite quickly if there is a will.

[Digga]

durbster said:

Might be worth pointing out that it's only a generation ago that we (i.e. white westerners) were relentlessly plundering African wildlife. We shouldn't get too high-horsey about it but it does also show attitudes can change quite quickly if there is a will.

Whilst I agree with most of what you say, and would also point out that, WRT to whaling, 'white westerners' (e.g. Faroe Isles) are still guilty, I think it is very difficult with a culture like China, to achieve dynamic changes in attitude, until or unless (at the very least) it comes from the top down.

[durbster]

Digga said:

Whilst I agree with most of what you say, and would also point out that, WRT to whaling, 'white westerners' (e.g. Faroe Isles) are still guilty, I think it is very difficult with a culture like China, to achieve dynamic changes in attitude, until or unless (at the very least) it comes from the top down.

Yep, true. I suppose it was just the most optimistic spin I could put on it

I don't know Chinese culture too well, so have no idea if this stuff is even in the public consciousness.

[Cotty]

durbster said:

I don't know Chinese culture too well, so have no idea if this stuff is even in the public consciousness.

Neither do I but it appears that its Japan who consume whale meat. I can't see a reference to China consuming it. And of the Japanese it appears it is the older generation that eat it, the youth don't touch it. It might just be a generation thing, once the older generation die off and there is no call for it they might stop whaling.

Edited by Cotty on Tuesday 27th September 15:36

[Matthen]

Solution is simple; flood the market with synthesised ivory. As long as you can't tell the difference between fake and real, the price will plummet.

[Halb]

Matthen said:

Solution is simple; flood the market with synthesised ivory. As long as you can't tell the difference between fake and real, the price will plummet.

Is that possible?
If so, I'll start cranking up the 3d printer!

[Digga]

durbster said:

I don't know Chinese culture too well, so have no idea if this stuff is even in the public consciousness.

A lot of the public would neither know, care or be able to afford ivory (or tiger's cocks or whatever other barbaric trinkets they harvest to the detriment of the planet's wild species, for that matter) but what you need to know generally about China is there is one hell of a lot of them. If you go there, it is evident and it is staggering. Cities you've never heard of, with populations the size of London, so even though the market for such nonsense is rarefied, in relative terms, it is still huge, because the top few percent are conspicuously wealthy, even in a lot of the (huge) cities you've never heard of.