-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Yay ! We can now resume the elephant slaughter for trophies !
- Thread starter RubberToe
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Your rationalization is a crock.
Killing fees are a pittance for one, and second there is absolutely no reason to think that the pennies will go towards reducing poaching.
What we can do, is shut down demand for Western illegal poaching and body part souvenirs.
Remember that scum dentist from a few months ago who killed on a sanctuary ? Lock him up and throw away the key. Then extradite him back to Africa and let him face local punishment.
thegruf
Active Member
I had a bit of spare cash to I changed out of ICE to a Tesla S85D
I was then lucky enough to have a bit more spare cash so I bought a P100D.
Strangely enough using my spare cash to shoot big game in Africa never crossed my mind which struggles to comprehend just how sick and twisted you have to be to do such a senseless thing.
I was then lucky enough to have a bit more spare cash so I bought a P100D.
Strangely enough using my spare cash to shoot big game in Africa never crossed my mind which struggles to comprehend just how sick and twisted you have to be to do such a senseless thing.
deonb
Active Member
Elephants aren't endangered because of hunting. They're endangered because of urbanization.
Elephants breed faster than humans and don't have significant natural enemies. In any given space-constrained park, once you put in any number of elephants, in a years you will inevitably have to cull them because they'll destroy the park otherwise.
The real problem with poaching/hunting vs. culling, in culling you kill the weak ones of the heard. Poachers and hunters want the best ones.
But if selling legal hunting rights for one premium bull can fund 10 rangers for a year that will prevent 10 other premium bulls to be poached, isn't it worth it?
On the other hand, a legal ivory trade makes it more difficult to enforce an illegal ivory trade. What to do...
I've never hunted and don't understand the thrill some people get out of it, but it can have its place in a healthy preservation ecosystem.
deonb
Active Member
Trophy fee alone for an Elephant is about $40'000. That will easily fund 10 rangers for a year.
I've met many rangers in Africa over the years (I grew up there). Each one of them are more committed to preservation than everybody on this thread put together. This should be their decision, not ours.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
That is ass-backwards. Extradite the illegal killers, then the locals will have decision making power.
All you are saying is "hey, we paid, so any local atrocity is their fault."
My point was that people need to understand this topic a bit more before coming up with solutions. I see a lot of well-meaning posts (and some insulting ones), but all this won't amount to much.
I do not have a practical solution, and I don't think anyone has one. All "solutions" proposed have been tried and are failing, and that was what I was trying to say.
rxlawdude
Active Member
Sure. And trickle down economics work, too. Right? (NOT!)
SDRick
Active Member
That's brilliant! All you have to do is extradite! I am surprised no one has come up with this idea earlier.
Wait a minute. To extradite, there needs to be a force to enforce the law and capture armed poachers. I wonder how you could get someone to pay for that?
deonb
Active Member
Tell you what. Let's stop killing all animals in this country first. No more killing of cats, dogs, deer, bears, cows, pigs etc. THEN we can go around and tell other countries what they can and cannot do with theirs.
Oh, and before you reply that there is no moral equivalency between a cow and an elephant, I'm going to refer you to about a billion people in South Asia who disagree with you.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Ah, yes. Let our local scum poach freely the world over, because of local hypocrisy.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Then you have not been paying attention to the gun lobby, the "hunter' lobby, the Trump-types, etc
As I understand things, the poverty and corruption in Africa out-competes conservation for the most part. The least we can do is not give sanctuary to domestic scum who poach in Africa and then run home with their "trophies."
SDRick
Active Member
For a smart guy, you are kind of mixed up. While you are completely correct in your first sentence above, the next sentence is contradictory.
I'm not aware of any place on the planet that gives sanctuary to poachers.
SDRick
Active Member
Not exactly sure how you find this relevant to poaching and extinction of these great animals. But go ahead, tell me your brilliant idea that solves this problem.
Merrill
Merrill
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Not a done deal yet, which is to say that it would appear that the winds of change these days are especially politically fickle.
rxlawdude
Active Member
Your argument is the same as how trickle down economics supposedly benefits those in the middle and lower classes, by cutting taxes on the wealthy.
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Not for nothing, but it sure is curious that this canard continues to be promulgated when it didn't work 30 years ago worth a damn.
The rich get richer for a variety of reasons, and TDE is one of those reasons.
As with many things, absent right-wing, lobbyist-supported rhetoric (see link above), an optimal solution may include elements of both arguments. If ever there is a day that the elephant herds become too populous, then culling those herds through limited trophy hunting with the stipulation that the meat and other products go to local villages may be a sensible option. However, whatever the fee is today for that trophy hunting? Increase it significantly, *and* increases the penalties for poaching to such an extent that turning in poachers becomes more lucrative than supporting the black market. Given the economic disparities, the largesse of a single billionaire for a pilot effort would get the ball rolling.
Anyone can poke holes with edge cases. It's harder and considerably more intellectually honest to craft a solution that increases the number of rangers while simultaneously reducing the need therefor - with a multi-pronged approach - especially in the absence of resources and a stable government. You'll know the solutions work when that number is met somewhere in the middle.
Xenoilphobe
Well-Known Member
I don't get this. They should issue the Park Rangers AK-47's and let the hunters go up against them like in this short story.
Why kill helpless Elephants when you hunt the top level game. Boring Boring Boring.
Also I don't get the stuffed animal thing, I would never keeping a stinking lyme, flea, tick infested stuffed animal in my house.
I do understand culling the herd, but endangered species shouldn't be on the list. Feral pigs, deer and any other vermin should be game on.
Humans on the other hand should - issue licenses and game on - there are thousands of dirtbags who need a bullet.
Makes me sick to think we waste good ammo on animals who can't defend themselves. I too am ashamed to be an American, what a shameful waste of good ammo that could be put to good use on bad guys.
Why kill helpless Elephants when you hunt the top level game. Boring Boring Boring.
Also I don't get the stuffed animal thing, I would never keeping a stinking lyme, flea, tick infested stuffed animal in my house.
I do understand culling the herd, but endangered species shouldn't be on the list. Feral pigs, deer and any other vermin should be game on.
Humans on the other hand should - issue licenses and game on - there are thousands of dirtbags who need a bullet.
Makes me sick to think we waste good ammo on animals who can't defend themselves. I too am ashamed to be an American, what a shameful waste of good ammo that could be put to good use on bad guys.