Trump wildlife board stuffed with trophy hunters

a reply to: howtonhawky

you aren't being witness to anything. You get biased reports made by people with their hair on fire.

As an animal lover and conservationist, I used to share your viewpoints on Africa's animals. Then I looked at the side of the story that the media isn't showing: how the money used from allowing a hunter to kill an animal that is in the dying process is used to keep poachers from killing healthy animals that keep the herd viable. Without that money, the governments are not able to afford conservation.

And since the US will not give money without a whole bunch of caveats (like the mob would), its not like we can help them pay for conservation without asking for a pound of flesh in return.

We can either help fund it, or we can get out of their way and let them fund it. But beyond that, it just isn't right to tell them what to do. And lord knows we can't afford to send them any freedom and occupy their country.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

we are either in or out

by allowing imports we have chosen to be in

we at this point have to be responsible for all aspects or remove ourselves from the situation completely

i am for the choice of removing ourselves if that is the will of our people.

we can not however allow money to overcome our morals in this manner

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

we are either in or out

by allowing imports we have chosen to be in

we at this point have to be responsible for all aspects or remove ourselves from the situation completely

i am for the choice of removing ourselves if that is the will of our people.

we can not however allow money to overcome our morals in this manner

Zero sum thinking is not logical or rational. We are not either/or.

We can acknowledge the sovereign rights of other nations, or we can choose not to. But we KNOW there is a problem there. So sticking our heads in the sand isn't the right thing to do, either.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Then I looked at the side of the story that the media isn't showing: how the money used from allowing a hunter to kill an animal that is in the dying process is used to keep poachers from killing healthy animals that keep the herd viable

yep i was down that path too and then dug deeper and found much corruption.

it sounds good on paper but falls short in most cases.

it was during the obama yrs when that line of thought come to live in our minds but that too is misreported

outside of a few fenced in retreats the corrupt governments squander most of the profits

many will not believe but i have actually studied much into this subject and we have to deal with all aspects of the problem or as you say not intervene at all in other countries.

The line of reasoning you just purposed is why i suggest a great need for powerful wardens that can root out corruption in the field and in the controlling powers that seek to hide and undermine efforts simply by applying a bandaid to a serious wound.

again look to the foundation of our own systems for the factors of growth on conservationism.


eta the claim that i am not forced to be witness to the slaughter of both people and animals is false because i am a citizen of which my country has decided to intervene into the problem. The choice of me having to be a witness has been made for you and i.

a reply to: howtonhawky

OK, that makes it clear. We will have to agree to disagree and thanks for the conversation.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Zero sum thinking is not logical or rational.

unless you are trying to get something done.

i do wonder what the numbers will be before youy statement is considered incorrect by you.

how many white people in africa should there be?

how many elephants in africa should there be....

at some point it does become a zero sum event

after the new pres down there decides to slaughter both then how long will we wait to act if any action is to be taken

do we even have a redline policy on these situations in our government?

if not then we are not prepared

a reply to: howtonhawky

Im not talking about humans.

Different topic.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

are you completely sure bout that?

tell that to the Indians and Buffalo of the ole great plains

since we can not see the connections then i suppose they do not exist

sarc

The way I see it, it's a waste of time to try and prevent extinctions and so forth. Let trophy hunters do what they want. Gazillions of species have gone extinct. The only reason people care is they don't know for sure what the impact will be on humanity if this species or that one goes extinct.

Well, here's my thinking. Human beings are a freak of nature and we do all sorts of things that other life forms don't but we're here and we are what we are. And trophy hunting is just in our nature. It's part of what humans do when conditions are right. If we cause an extinction, it's no more unnatural (for us) than it would be if termites ate all the wood there was to eat.

If we are doing things that will eventually cause our extinction, so be it. Maybe that's the reason trophy hunters exist. Nature is trying to get rid of us by making us want to do bad stuff to the environment.

Anyway, in all seriousness, human nature is to try and defeat nature. It's not enough for us to walk or run from place to place. Nope. We have to drive or fly or build a ship and go across the ocean. You don't really see that too in nature outside of humans. Birds fly because they're supposed to. Fish can go wherever they want in water because they're supposed to. Humans look up and say "I want to go there" and so they start working on a plan to cheat. To get there using our noodle.

The trophy hunter is just the same old story in a different package. Humans being able to do whatever we can think of. Because we can.

national Geographic

The much anticipated results of the largest ever continent-wide wildlife survey, the Great Elephant Census, will be released tomorrow at the World Conservation Congress in Hawaii. The worrying finding: Africa now has 352,271 savanna elephants left in 93 percent of the species’ range. The aerial survey covered 18 African countries. In 15 of those, where information on previous populations existed, 144,000 elephants were lost to ivory poaching and habitat destruction in less than a decade. The current yearly loss—overwhelmingly from poaching—is estimated at 8 percent. That’s about 27,000 elephants slaughtered year after year.

8% loss due to poaching

“We’re now armed with the most robust and accurate scientific data in history to give these animals a second chance.”

A study 2 yrs old but seems to be most accurate i can find.

To me this shows that there is no single fix to cover all areas cause it not only is an elephant loss problem but a human problem. Meaning that often the economics climate changes in concatenated areas along with corruption of governments by way of usurping wildlife funds and conservation efforts along with encroachment into farming lands and encroachment of human habitats along with a sustained decision to continue to hunt species in the name of conservation while not addressing the major factors i have mentioned along with empowering wardens and putting unique pressure on china's purchasing of ivory.

If you truly want to make a difference then before you make your next kill take time out first to create sustainable efforts to combat these problems. Give before you take and recognize that simply throwing money at the problem does not help unless you specifically target a destination for those funds and follow that up with accountability.

It will take both a certain amount of will,force and tact.

For goodness sakes quit using the back door unless you clean up after yourself cause we do care about the longevity of all species. The strength,stability and wisdom of our leaders permeates throughout a society and do not use an others fountain and expect to maintain your own will.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

Q the militant conservationist

Your post just outlined the creation of the next great trophy.

The Trophy Hunter

a reply to: howtonhawky

Correct. They are no longer here, amd its allowed us to grow food in the most expansive grain farm in the world.

Not to mention allowing us to quell insurrectious Comanche.

Whether you appreciate all that or not the fact is we are on the internet today due to a chain of events. Some of which involved the US cavalry killing lots of buffalo.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

o i c

let's kill the elephants so that africans can get a better wifi signal while ignoring the lives of the people that will be killed along with the animals simply cause the spiritual connections are invisible to most.

If you do not believe in the unseen connections i speak of and want a first hand account of such then just go kill a protected animal out of season without a license and watch as the universe answers the ignorance.

The African Professional Hunters P.H.'s, are our trophy hunter's guides. They are highly trained to protect their clients' life and limbs. But these guys are the first line of defense for the survival of so many species of African game and non game animals. Nobody is going on a hunt to deliberately kill a Lioness. But a poacher with a wire snare can't pick and choose, between these Lions' sexes.

There has to be some money on the table, to persuade the local tribes, to let Elephants to tear up their food crops. Only the P.H.'s can fill this slot, by hiring "helpers", and making sure that these same tribes get all the meat from hunting. Some tribes don't believe in eating an Ele's flesh. Ele's and Rhinos are poached for their ivory, not for their meat. But a herd of tuskless elephants will tear up just as many farmer's fields, and destroy those crops. Even African Elephants get gun shy, and run off when they hear a rifle shot.

Personally, I don't think trophy hunting will suffice to save these magnificent animals. Only getting the Orientals to stop buying Rhino horns and Elephant Tusks, will change this dire outcome. And even if China chokes this trade off, there's plenty more apothecaries spread around the S.W. Pacific, who would still buy these items.

a reply to: howtonhawky

You are missing the point that has been stated over and over: what right do you, sitting there with your wifi, comfy home, and food to eat, have to tell people in Africa that they cannot do the same?

Should the "good things" be reserved only for the northern hemisphere and australia?

At what point do the african nations get to have any say in how they manage THEIR country? And when will the US get its big, fat nose out of everyones business?

double

The outgoing president of Botswana has said overturning the US ban on the importing of hunting trophies was "encouraging poaching in this country"

Mr Khama said that his government had "actually banned hunting" but that Mr Trump's lifting of the trophy ban was "encouraging poaching in this country".
Mr Khama was speaking at the Giant's Club Summit in Kasane, which is discussing efforts to tackle the poaching epidemic which is killing tens of thousands of elephants every year.
Although the number of animals being poached for ivory has been dropping over the past few years, more elephants are being killed for their tusks than are being born, leaving them in danger.
www.bbc.co.uk...

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

At what point do the african nations get to have any say in how they manage THEIR country? And when will the US get its big, fat nose out of everyones business?

either we are in or out

my country of which i am a citizen has chosen to be a part of africa by allowing for the import of trophy animals.

they get to remove themselves from my will when they quit accepting monies from trophy hunting and such

i am not opposed to having no problems with them having fun by slaughtering animals and people but i will not be silent partner to the corruption by way of big money joining in on the fun.

either we are in or we are out

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Sure, put the fox in charge of the henhouse the fox has plenty of experience so he must be right for the job