• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Your social media outrage didn’t save the white rhino in South Africa, assholes like Walt Palmer did.

As far as hunting itself goes, when done legally, it is low on my list of concerns. How many animals die in slaughter houses every year? How many die in the combines of farm machinery when plants are harvested? How many deer and birds are hunted every year?
*explode*

Shit, now I have to clean off my laptop because my head exploded after reading someone comparing hunting non-endangered animals with endangered animals. How many non-endangered animals do we kill every year? So why not endangered, I mean as long as it is legal.

Poaching is not legal. It wouldn't be called poaching. People are complaining about poaching and you cut and paste about non-poaching. OI!!!

Apart from the legality, many people seem to think the dentist committed some kind of morally outrageous act. What is the morally relevant difference between killing a wild animal that belongs to a protected species and killing a farm animal that doesn't? The animal doesn't know or care what species it belongs to, and thousands of chickens suffer worse conditions than Cecil had to endure. I'm not defending the killing, I'm just pointing out that it's hard to be upset about it while also perpetuating the far worse misery that befalls far more animals on a larger scale.
 
That’s at least $100,000 that he’s personally put into African economies, money that wouldn’t have been spent if there weren’t lions to hunt. That’s money which is a specific economic motivation for conservation. How much money have you and your Facebook friends contributed directly to big game conservation in Africa? I’m guessing that for most of you, it’s much, much less.

Walt did not 'contribute' $100,000 to conservation. He contributed $0 to conservation. He paid $100,000 for a service that enabled him to hunt and kill a specific animal.

If I bought a car from somebody and they donated that money to charity, I have not 'contributed' to that charity. I paid money for a car and I received a car.

But a big chunk of that $100,000 will go towards paying expenses, upkeep and breeding efforts for more such big game animals, multiplying their numbers and giving them more habitat to live in.

I agree that this isn't a direct contribution to conservation. However, those who claim that hunters like Palmer threaten such species are in error.

I don't think so. Why is there no discussion of ethics, only discussion about money? Without ethics no amount of money paid will reduce killing by those who want to kill. Demand will always outstrip supply.
 
Just to get this straight...

The argument is that the luxury hunting trade provides enough money to restrict large amount of land for the exclusive use of rich people and wild animals, and is therefore a good thing. I'm broadly familiar with the arguments, since they're the same used to argue in favour of fox hunting in the UK, and basically boil down to keeping the land for the exclusive use of a small number of rich people.

Of the obvious alternatives,
-Ecotourism is acknowledged as better, but not suited to remote locations, for reasons that aren't fully described. It looks like only the low end of the tourist trade is considered there.
-Involving local communities is undesirable, because they don't have the expertise, apparently.
-National Parks just don't do it right, allegedly, even though the lion that started this whole thread was lured in from a national park.

Basically the argument is that tourism in Africa only works if it is a private concern, reserved for the rich. They pay money to kill animals rather than preserve them, but that's ok because we can overcharge them.

I'm not convinced. One obvious end point of this reasoning is commercial lion ranching, because that's more profitable and most people can't tell the difference. That's was happened when something similar was tried in the UK, and you ended up with tame animals driven into the hunters guns by beaters in camouflage. And what happens to the people driven off these large private estates?
 
Let begin with a really good article on elephant hunting, where the hunt is done legally and you are only allowed to shoot the oldest elephant who will die of starvation as it is on its last set of teeth.

http://www.gq.com/long-form/who-wants-to-shoot-an-elephant?
In addition to million-acre leases in Botswana, Rann has a hunting concession in Tanzania and a 5,500-acre rare-game ranch outside San Antonio. The economic downturn did not put much of a bite in Rann’s business, a happy fact he credits to the addictive nature of hunting’s elemental pleasures: “Our clients might not buy a new car as often, or buy a second or third home, but they’re still going to go hunting.” But this new hunting ban is poised to do to Rann’s elephant-hunting business what economic calamity could not.

There’s been a regulated hunting industry in Botswana since the 1960s. Before the ban took effect, the government was issuing roughly 400 elephant-bull tags per year, of which Jeff Rann was allowed to buy about forty. And counterintuitively, even in the presence of an active bullet-tourism industry, Botswana’s elephant population has multiplied twentyfold, from a low point of 8,000 in 1960 to more than 154,000 today. These healthy numbers, as people like Rann are keen to mention, mirror elephant populations in other African countries where hunting is allowed. Despite a recent uptick in poaching problems, both Tanzania (with 105,000 elephants) and Zimbabwe (with 51,000) have seen similar patterns of population growth. Kenya, on the other hand, banned elephant hunting in 1973 and has seen its elephant population decimated, from 167,000 to 27,000 or so in 2013. Some experts predict that elephants will be extinct in Kenya within a decade.

But Satsumo, the Department of Wildlife and National Parks employee who’s tagging along on the Waldrips’ safari, believes that Botswana’s hunting ban may ultimately turn out badly for the elephants. “There will be more poachers,” she says. “More elephants will get out of the reserve. They will go to people’s crop fields. The hunters pump the water for them, but now they will have to move to the villages to find it. It’s a bad thing. It’s a very bad thing.”

Amid the spare parts lying in the grass is the elephant’s jaw, from which we can know the elephant’s age. An elephant gets six sets of teeth in its lifetime. This one was on its final set, and judging from its condition it was probably about 53. The sand of the savanna is hard on an elephant’s dentition. Five to seven more years and it’d have blown through this set and starved to death, assuming neither Jeff nor the poachers got him first.

As for the proposed law, does it really change existing laws?
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/international-activities.html
 
The lion community sends a message to Dr. Walter Palmer

11893904_984232051640278_1208005657534213748_o.jpg
 
Lion-Killing Dentist Returns To Work: I Acted Legally And Did Nothing Wrong

http://www.joemygod.com/2015/09/07/...-i-acted-legally-and-did-nothing-wrong-video/

After hiding out for nearly two months, Minnesota’s infamous lion-killing dentist is going back to work tomorrow. Via the Associated Press:


Walter Palmer, who has spent more than a month out of sight after becoming the target of protests and threats, intends to return to his suburban Minneapolis dental practice Tuesday. In an evening interview conducted jointly by The Associated Press and the Minneapolis Star Tribune that advisers said would be the only one granted, Palmer said again that he believes he acted legally and that he was stunned to find out his hunting party had killed one of Zimbabwe’s treasured animals. “If I had known this lion had a name and was important to the country or a study obviously I wouldn’t have taken it,” Palmer said. “Nobody in our hunting party knew before or after the name of this lion.” Some high-level Zimbabwean officials have called for Palmer’s extradition, but no formal steps toward getting the dentist to return to Zimbabwe have been publicly disclosed. Friedberg, a Minneapolis attorney who said he is acting as an unpaid consultant to Palmer, said he has heard nothing from authorities about domestic or international investigations since early August.
 
When I read Axulus's posts, it makes me think of positions like these:

Slavery is much better than free labor, and is absolutely great for the slaves
Crime is good for crime victims
King George III was the greatest leader that the North American colonies ever had
Nazism was very good for the Jewish people
...
 
Worried about the middle class disappearing?

Then start letting wealthy people hunt them!

This will ensure a continued and growing middle class as crafty entrepreneurs set up middle class farms to keep a healthy supply of middle class targets flowing to the wealthy middle class game hunters.
 
When I read Axulus's posts, it makes me think of positions like these:

Slavery is much better than free labor, and is absolutely great for the slaves
Crime is good for crime victims
King George III was the greatest leader that the North American colonies ever had
Nazism was very good for the Jewish people
...
How do you feel about environmentalists that fought for the reintroduction of wolves in America? Isn't that just as ironic letting wolves kill animals yet the species they prey upon become healthier?
 
When I read Axulus's posts, it makes me think of positions like these:

Slavery is much better than free labor, and is absolutely great for the slaves
Crime is good for crime victims
King George III was the greatest leader that the North American colonies ever had
Nazism was very good for the Jewish people
...
How do you feel about environmentalists that fought for the reintroduction of wolves in America? Isn't that just as ironic letting wolves kill animals yet the species they prey upon become healthier?
Point 1: With reintroduction you mean saved from extinction, right?

Point 2: No. Irony is when you do X to avoid Y, but then Y ends up happening. The ironic thing would be the reintroduction of the wolves making it easier for a super virus that a few existing wild wolves had to spread around like wildfire and then cause their extinction.
 
http://www.joemygod.com/2015/09/07/...-i-acted-legally-and-did-nothing-wrong-video/

After hiding out for nearly two months, Minnesota’s infamous lion-killing dentist is going back to work tomorrow. Via the Associated Press:


Walter Palmer, who has spent more than a month out of sight after becoming the target of protests and threats, intends to return to his suburban Minneapolis dental practice Tuesday. In an evening interview conducted jointly by The Associated Press and the Minneapolis Star Tribune that advisers said would be the only one granted, Palmer said again that he believes he acted legally and that he was stunned to find out his hunting party had killed one of Zimbabwe’s treasured animals. “If I had known this lion had a name and was important to the country or a study obviously I wouldn’t have taken it,” Palmer said. “Nobody in our hunting party knew before or after the name of this lion.” Some high-level Zimbabwean officials have called for Palmer’s extradition, but no formal steps toward getting the dentist to return to Zimbabwe have been publicly disclosed. Friedberg, a Minneapolis attorney who said he is acting as an unpaid consultant to Palmer, said he has heard nothing from authorities about domestic or international investigations since early August.
I find it hard to believe that luring an animal out of a reserve in order to kill it is ethical, let alone, legal. I find it hard to believe that an experienced hunter does not recognize this.
 
I find it hard to believe that luring an animal out of a reserve in order to kill it is ethical, let alone, legal. I find it hard to believe that an experienced hunter does not recognize this.

It's the big game hunter's version of the "She didn't say no" defense. Hwange National Park didn't have signs posted everywhere saying "Don't lure park wildlife into crossing park boundaries so you can hunt them", so that means it was okay.
 
http://www.joemygod.com/2015/09/07/...-i-acted-legally-and-did-nothing-wrong-video/

After hiding out for nearly two months, Minnesota’s infamous lion-killing dentist is going back to work tomorrow. Via the Associated Press:


Walter Palmer, who has spent more than a month out of sight after becoming the target of protests and threats, intends to return to his suburban Minneapolis dental practice Tuesday. In an evening interview conducted jointly by The Associated Press and the Minneapolis Star Tribune that advisers said would be the only one granted, Palmer said again that he believes he acted legally and that he was stunned to find out his hunting party had killed one of Zimbabwe’s treasured animals. “If I had known this lion had a name and was important to the country or a study obviously I wouldn’t have taken it,” Palmer said. “Nobody in our hunting party knew before or after the name of this lion.” Some high-level Zimbabwean officials have called for Palmer’s extradition, but no formal steps toward getting the dentist to return to Zimbabwe have been publicly disclosed. Friedberg, a Minneapolis attorney who said he is acting as an unpaid consultant to Palmer, said he has heard nothing from authorities about domestic or international investigations since early August.
I find it hard to believe that luring an animal out of a reserve in order to kill it is ethical, let alone, legal. I find it hard to believe that an experienced hunter does not recognize this.

I find it impossible to believe.

And I find his "I didn't know the lion had a name" whine to be pathetic. So he thinks it is fine to lure protected animals off the preserves so he can kill them as long as they don't have names?
 
I find it hard to believe that luring an animal out of a reserve in order to kill it is ethical, let alone, legal. I find it hard to believe that an experienced hunter does not recognize this.

Zimbabwe wants to prosecute them. The question is whether he realized where the lion came from.
 
I find it hard to believe that luring an animal out of a reserve in order to kill it is ethical, let alone, legal. I find it hard to believe that an experienced hunter does not recognize this.

Zimbabwe wants to prosecute them. The question is whether he realized where the lion came from.
Experienced hunters know where the lures are which should indicate where the prey is coming from.
 
That tells him the direction. It doesn't tell him that it came from a reserve.
No experienced hunter should be that stupid.

Does anyone know how far Cecil was lured outside of the park before Palmer shot him? Initial reports indicated he was only about 100m from the boundary, but I can't find anything reliable.

Also, it's been reported that the bait used to lure Cecil was a dead animal the hunters tied to a vehicle. The hunters, or perhaps just the guides, drove inside the park and left a scent trail leading right to the killing ground. Was the animal tied to a fender and dribbling blood, or was it being dragged behind the car?

I'm thinking Palmer could see the Hwange National Park boundary from where he waited, could see the tire tracks and drag marks coming from the park, and see the lion was coming out of the park to investigate the bait. I'm thinking Palmer knew exactly what his guides had done in order to provide him with the opportunity to kill a lion.
 
No experienced hunter should be that stupid.

Does anyone know how far Cecil was lured outside of the park before Palmer shot him? Initial reports indicated he was only about 100m from the boundary, but I can't find anything reliable.

Also, it's been reported that the bait used to lure Cecil was a dead animal the hunters tied to a vehicle. The hunters, or perhaps just the guides, drove inside the park and left a scent trail leading right to the killing ground. Was the animal tied to a fender and dribbling blood, or was it being dragged behind the car?

I'm thinking Palmer could see the Hwange National Park boundary from where he waited, could see the tire tracks and drag marks coming from the park, and see the lion was coming out of the park to investigate the bait. I'm thinking Palmer knew exactly what his guides had done in order to provide him with the opportunity to kill a lion.
I don't know if it happened that close to the boundary (no solid information and I doubt any of those involved will ever admit all of the details) but there is simply no way I will ever believe that Palmer didn't know. The lions wear radio collars. I realize that male lions have big manes that might partially hide the collar, but an experienced hunter should have LOOKED before he shot.

Moreover, what kind of namby pamby asswipe of a "big game hunter" needs the prey to be lured right to him. That's not freakin' "hunting". What an asshole.
 
Back
Top Bottom