Trump wildlife board stuffed with trophy hunters

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: howtonhawky
For the record as if it really matters my family owns and manages a successful game ranchin texas

THERE IT IS! Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Your family financially benefits, and greatly I'm sure, from laws and regulations that discourage if not outright prevent American hunters from going outside the US to participate in exotic hunts. This is called a conflict of interest. Your position on this now makes perfect sense.

care to stake something other than your ignorance on your accusations?

If you are so sure then put something on it other than your desire for an escape goat.

I like you much and respect you much and will tell you that you just dropped into a great trap of your own making.

You should spend some time thinking on your accusation before going further down into the trap.

point one there are no endangered species on the ranch.

I will give you time to review your false accusations.

An escape goat?

There is a big difference between looking, and seeing, my friend.
The fact that you actually and sincerely believe that you have won some type of argument against Burdy does bring into a bit clearer focus, and also makes me feel a bit uneasy.

I would sincerely ask you to take a minute, and read back through the thread one more time. You may be looking, but I'm not convinced that you are seeing.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Hunters ARE your conservation. Its us hunters who actually spend time out with these animals.

Non hunters, typically, are the city dwellers who just want to pay someone to come and get those wild animals out of their city as "pests". Hunters don't see them as pests...we see them as part of an ecosystem, and then wonder why they are coming into town.

Your game management folks that work for the government are typically hunters, too.

In fact, the easiest way to get caught poaching is to let a hunter know you are doing it. We just don't take kindly to people who cheat the conservation.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

good job

I agree that the funds should not be for hunting and pray that they are not used that way.

I think that we should recognize the base of the success in the usa for our wildlife programs and start there.

It was the game wardens seemingly unlimited search and seizure powers that kicked it all of for us.

As pointed out now fences and protected wildlife areas have created pockets of positive numbers but overall we are much lacking.

Is there any part of the rules the usa imports go by that state to only hunt in those positive areas? no not that i am aware of

so that point is moot and mute both until such regulation exist.

We have to empower the wardens down there to deal with poachers.

Keep in mind that i am pro hunter regardless of what your personal feeling for me are.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree with all that and i am purposing a logical approach of something similar to cleaning your rooms before you go out and play.

There has to be some type of rules that govern the boundaries and goals of the new team.

My greatest thought imo is that we have to give the wardens down there the power and resources in much the same manner we gave them here in the usa when our conservation efforts began.


I can see the future headlines now

Trumps team bags another wildgame animal on fact finding mission trip to sa.

then an investigation and millions of dollars we find out that the team used private funds to bag the animal.

LET US COVER ALL THE BASES

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: Ksihkehe


What is your point?

I believe that there are many factors including corrupt governments corrupt conservation organizations.

This is the biggest hurdles we face.

The group appointed has many great challenges ahead of them so there first move is too kill more animals?

Give me logic please.

Sounds to me like you just wanted to crap on Trump. You don't really seem to have even a rudimentary grasp of ecology or wildlife population dynamics.

I know how difficult it must be running a game ranch in Texas, what with the dearth of game animals and all. In Africa with exotic animals you can't just buy 500 acres and throw up a fence.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

that provided nothing to help the real problem the topic covers.

if you have legit solutions to add of legit specific flaws in my logic then please state them.

your pathetic attacks lacking substance does not help anything or anyone.

I am here to gather logical aspects on the situation so please take a deep breathe and help.

I think we likely have the same goals here.


eta ones mans crap is another mans fertilizer

a reply to: howtonhawky

Something to consider: we don't live in Africa.

In Europe and North America we have, in the millenia prior, hunted to extinction almost any predator able to cause any real damage to humanity. We've reintroduced some wolves into Yellowstone, and stuff like that...but the giant deadly beasts that would stampede are no more.

Africa cannot really say that. They have to worry about elephants and other wide ranging animals. Added to this is that in Africa, the human standard of living is terrible.

What gives you and I the right to tell them that they must suppress their standard of living in order to conserve animals that we view from a position of nostalgia? Why do we get to tell them that they can't build cities because elephants migrate through those areas? Why do we get to tell them that the lions and hyenas cannot be touched, despite how dangerous they are and will continue to be to the worlds fastest growing population?

At what point do we set aside our own desires for someone else's country, and instead let them make the same decisions that we made thousands of years ago?

originally posted by: howtonhawky

Is there any part of the rules the usa imports go by that state to only hunt in those positive areas? no not that i am aware of

Well that must mean there are no rules since you're not aware of them. As we've seen here in this thread you are obviously a legal expert as well as an accomplished biologist.

You're just making s#%t up to suit your argument.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

At what point do we set aside our own desires for someone else's country, and instead let them make the same decisions that we made thousands of years ago?

That was done in the obama admin.

It did not workout well.

Perhaps we could just retrieve much semen and eggs and let the people and animals perish together.

imo the most thought provoking post yet

lol might makes right

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: howtonhawky

Is there any part of the rules the usa imports go by that state to only hunt in those positive areas? no not that i am aware of

Well that must mean there are no rules since you're not aware of them. As we've seen here in this thread you are obviously a legal expert as well as an accomplished biologist.

You're just making s#%t up to suit your argument.

false

there are rules

you infer too much

a reply to: howtonhawky

I was going to mention this, but forgot.

I'm in Alabama, and down here everybody hunts Whitetail deer. The deer population really has to be micromanaged. Hunters are the tool used.

Otherwise the deer population can absolutely EXPLODE in only one or two seasons. If that happens, it can be extremely dangerous for traffic. So in that case, pretty drastic measures are necessary, and you have "Doe days" or even Doe seasons. It's the only way to get the population down to normal levels.

The point I'm trying to make is that these guys actually DO care very much about these animals. They don't have some kind of uncontrollable instinct that just drives them to be killers.

These guys (and girls) are very much in tune with what's going on with these animals. I would be MUCH more comfortable having these guys making policy, as opposed to some bureaucrat or activist. I tend to get a bit upset when someone mouths off or argues about a subject they really know nothing, or very little about.

Oh, you mentioned "Exotic species", and I'll submit this question for the floor. Just out of curiosity, would African Elephants still be "Exotic" when they are actually IN Africa? Just wondering, as I really don't go on a lot of elephant hunts nowadays. Especially in Africa.

a reply to: MteWamp

I am in agreement with your points on the hunting in ala. and have been thinking that the best approach for the new team is too realize what got places like alabama to the point they are at now with conservation. It was the introduction of the wardens and their power that created the system today you speak of.

It is only exotic because of the availability to come into presence of one of these animals

a reply to: howtonhawky

How do we tell another country what to do?

Game management worked so well here that when the activist stay out of it, the herd numbers are greater in most area's than they were before Europeans even hit North America's shores. Sadly many people are ignorant of that fact and those are the exact same people running things like the WWF. Our government can only control regulations here.

What you seem to want, the group you are castigating can't do. Only the local governments can deal with poachers and illegal buyers.

As to money, have you ever looked at the WWF?
In 2017 the spent $86,822,491 on salaries and benefits and $7,102,878 on staff travel and expenses. $250,000 is a nothing budget.
LINK

The head of the WWF earns $953,130 which is more than the POTUS.
LINK

With their huge resources, what can anyone do more than they are doing, or should I say trying to do and not accomplishing?

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

At what point do we set aside our own desires for someone else's country, and instead let them make the same decisions that we made thousands of years ago?

That was done in the obama admin.

It did not workout well.

Perhaps we could just retrieve much semen and eggs and let the people and animals perish together.

imo the most thought provoking post yet

lol might makes right

When you say "it did not work out well" can you expand on that?

What measurement is being used for that judgement? Is there data?

a reply to: Blaine91555

You have hinted at one of the top problems and that is the capture and squandering of good deed contributions.

The new group would have to tackle the whole system from top to bottom.

As far as telling another country what to do i suppose that is between heaven and hell. and yes i know that is a cop out answer in most minds.

justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger



i have been witness to some sic events lately all in the name of non intervention and it is only adding up to a silencing of voices on the subject.

For some strange reason i have always looked up to logic backed by strength.

i will tell you what i think the solution is if we fall back to the principle that we should not do anything and that is a total blackout on anything related to animals and feelings from other countries.

otherwise if i have to have a front row seat via msm of such atrocities then i will send out my personal will in all directions in an overwhelming devastating action.

in other words if you tell me my neighbor is molesting and killing my mentality and and i find evidence of that then i will annihilate accordingly.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

sure by it did not end well that is in reference to us being here now having to deal with a problem that was incorrectly swept under the rug all while kicking the proverbial can down the road.

by creating false ban on the import he only exacerbated the problem of poaching by not addressing the points we are discussing here.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Im just not sure how much concern we should have with a problem unless we are invited in by the sovereign government to help.

I don't want extinctions. But I know folks in Africa, and I don't think its fair that we tell them that they can't do the things that they need to do to make their nations more livable.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I'm confused. Are you saying you want to force other countries to comply?

a reply to: Blaine91555

If i have to be witness to such atrocities then yes i would choose to intervene.

As a citizen i am responsibly inclined to keep up with current events. If those events include genocide then yes i say might makes right in that case.

Would you not step in if your neighbor was killing peoples or destroying themselves out of creation?

If you step in and realize that nobody cares about facts and hide behind failed policies and totally reject meaningful solutions that all can live with then perhaps that is the time to take action.

That is the point we are at now with this new group appointed. If they find solutions by way of logic and well being for all but that is rejected then you know the next step is one on serious decision to act accordingly or remove itself completely from the equation. By allowing the import we have collectively chosen to be a part of the situation.