nmlongbow
Member
Cecil the lion may be dead but Anthony the antelope can rest a little easier.
Well, just what makes the money that trophy hunters pay for their hunt so much better than any money that conservation organizations allocate to try to preserve the same species without killing them. A rich Westerner that pays a ton of money to kill an animal so the local poachers can't just doesn't sound like conservation to me. Donate that same money to an organization that works in the area (on a local level) that is working to install positive change to ensure the longevity of these animals. Saying that you pay $50k to hunt a lion because you're concerned about their future and want to help in the conservation effort is just a convenient excuse to legally kill a lion.
Nom de Forum said:Scientific culling of a species to maintain a viable number of species for habitat conditions is Conservation.
Nom de Forum said:Don't bet on it.
Nom de Forum said:Of all the tourists from around the World who today visit these game areas what percentage of them are there to trophy hunt? A very small percentage I'd guess.
leadcounsel said:I bet that would immediately halt poaching and hunting activities. And the "conservationists" here should applaud such a measure, since they are altruistically trying to save these species (or at least that's their argument).
You know, just out of curiosity I Googled just how much a photo safari would run and found out it would be under $5,000... or, roughly 1/11th of what this hunter paid. Ouch.
I never said any of that...LC Said-
That is the $64 question. It is a question that may begin to be answered through a successful social media campaign and end with successful political activism to convince the U.S. Government to intercede. The history of the United States is filled with examples of money being raised from millions of small contributions and politicians seeking the good will of the electorate to save one thing or another simply because of the pleasure of having it in the World. Another source of revenue would be the elimination of U.S. government funding for one or two F-35s so that the money could be used for conservation and management. I am sure African governmental officials could be enticed to accept money for this if other enticements were provided, one of which would be increased revenues from eco-tourism.
So now the US military should sell off fighter planes to give corrupt African governments money? You really think they could be "enticed" to take it? You sure?
I see another source of funding. Your posts are comedy gold. Pure gold I say.
You apparently didn't read my suggestion of severe criminal penalties as a solution. The willingness of people to die to poach will narrow that market quite quickly.Leadcounsel none of your ideas have taken the Chinese interest into consideration. Pretending this story is 100 percent reliable, it still is nothing compared the Chinese encouraging formal poaching in Africa. Again pretending this guy is worthless, and the worst example of a American big game hunter in Africa, his actions are not even affliated with the actual threat.
From any perspective, including NPR, the threat to African wildlife is poaching and other economic instabilities. It has realisticly nothing to do with Americans paying a top honest dollar top to participate in African culture. If you want to blame somebody, blame the faulty cause.
Don't blame us for doing what Humans have always done.
What on earth did I say for you to lun\mp me in with the animal rights kooks?leadcounsel and X-Rap are very passionate about these animals.
CraigC said:Secondly, they are not endangered species. I don't know where this comes from, although it's almost always spewed by anti-hunting activists.
It comes from projections that they will extinct in my lifetime and that the US Fish and Wildlife service is actively trying to add them to the Endangered Species act.
That wouldn't stop anything in Texas either.this is a line fence and very few african animals can not jump over it, i saw a 3/4 ton eland clear this fence by two feet minutes before the picture was taken. eastbank..
leadcounsel said:A photo safari is MUCH more sustainable. You can take 50 people through PER DAY - that's an endless resource at $5,000 per person... so that's $50,000 per day for endless days, in my example.
leadcounsel said:Versus killing one out of 20,000 remaining, for a one-time fee. Ethics aside, it makes no economic sense.