Lion slaughtered by "hunter" (1 Viewer)

[Coronatus]

<Interestingly, most of the moorland that supports red grouse in the UK was artificially created and maintained for grouse shooting.>
Of course it is and we specially imported the Willow Grouse from Scandinavia to stock it. Or were the Red Grouse and the moors here all the time and it was only the invention of the Flintlock that changed things? If things were 'natural' why do they need all those Gamekeepers? Maintained yes, created no!

 

[string boozel]

This thread and other ones discussing conservation issues demonstrate how large a role both money and apathy play in environmental protection. Morally, hunting is regarded as wrong by many people but for those living in areas where opportunity is limited the chance to earn life changing amounts of cash can be hard to resist. Unless an alternative that gives people hope and offers them a viable future can be proposed can we expect those in Africa or elsewhere to turn down the chance to secure their family's future? What measures would we take to protect our family? For a farmer that loses his crops or livestock to wild animals without hope of compensation or a social welfare system to sustain him the view of fauna may be different. Ecotourism may earn money for governments but how much filters down to the population? I truly hate hunting but I live in a stable and affluent society where ambition and effort are the limiting factors, I've had the benefit of an education (of sorts), a welfare system and with a reasonable chance of employment, many in the world to not.

To guarantee the long term survival of our fauna we, the human race must ensure that those living in contact with threatened wildlife benefit from their continued survival. We can extend the argument to poachers, if they can earn a living through legitimate means would they be prepared to risk their lives?

What we can do is to try and stop our citizens from going to other countries and indulging their taste for blood. We should petition our governments to stop hunt-tourism, prevent hunters from waving their dirty blood money in the face of the desperate. As private citizens we must let them know how much such activities sicken us whether the trophies are named celebrities or not. I've signed petitions and written letters, joined various charities ( 6 I believe at the last count ) and talked to as many people as possible. Sometimes it seems a forlorn hope but if people who care lose hope then there truly will be no hope.

I can't lecture those who lack my relatively comfortable way of life but I can and will continue to put pressure on my government ( in a small way) and let the hunters know that their love of killing should have no place in a developed society. We must take away the cause of the disease if we want to find a cure.

James.

 

[pratincol]

If you google 'wildcru oxford' this leads directly to the Oxford University website fundraising for the conservation project for lions.

Time spent getting on to this website and sending some money would be far better spent than trying to justify the dubious contention that killing animals for pleasure is a great way to conserve species and habitats.

 

[Coronatus]

Well put string boozel. We can but do little but we MUST do that!

 

[Had.enough]

I am only guessing, but I suspect the hunting industry out there is just like any other in the world.. the people on the ground will get very little payment/reward, and likely get the prison sentences.. There will be some "Management" higher up the chain mopping up all the profits. Driven by greed and excess.

Same way as your ecosystem money stays with the government.

So I'm not sure the life changing amounts of cash is there for everyone who chooses the hunting industry as a career. But I agree with everything you subsequently say.

(Replying to StringBoozel)

 

[Coronatus]

I am getting 'page not found' for your link Pratincol! Can you pls check it?

 

[pratincol]

I am getting 'page not found' for your link Pratincol! Can you pls check it?

Sorry!
The link did not work so I googled 'wildcru oxford'
This led straight to the official Wildcru website which is organising the fund raising.
Thanks

 

[Coronatus]

Thanks. Done !

 

[Mysticete]

Scimitar-horned Oryx are effectively extinct in the wild...I believe their might be some quasi-captive populations in parts of Tunisia.

Currently, most of the world population now exists on Game ranches in Texas...a news report I found says about 11,000...far more than any zoo could support. Without Trophy hunting, there would be no private incentive to breed this species. There are several other endangered species on game farms in Texas that are now more abundant there than they are in their native range...IIRC, there are more wild and semi-wild Nilgai roaming South Texas than there are in India. The same thing I believe is present for several antelope species in South Africa. It's all well and good to be against trophy hunting, but at least for antelope and deer, it does more good than harm. In a perfect world we wouldn't need economic incentives to breed endangered animals or keep habitat in good shape. We do not live in a perfect world.

 

[Robin Edwards]

Scimitar-horned Oryx are effectively extinct in the wild...I believe their might be some quasi-captive populations in parts of Tunisia.

Currently, most of the world population now exists on Game ranches in Texas...a news report I found says about 11,000...far more than any zoo could support. Without Trophy hunting, there would be no private incentive to breed this species. There are several other endangered species on game farms in Texas that are now more abundant there than they are in their native range...IIRC, there are more wild and semi-wild Nilgai roaming South Texas than there are in India. The same thing I believe is present for several antelope species in South Africa. It's all well and good to be against trophy hunting, but at least for antelope and deer, it does more good than harm. In a perfect world we wouldn't need economic incentives to breed endangered animals or keep habitat in good shape. We do not live in a perfect world.

I don't disagree for the species mentioned here but we should all be aware that many species are predicted to become extinct in the wild if pressures continue and I see no evidence that trophy hunting of polar bears, lion, elephant, rhino, giraffe to name but a few, is creating a net increase of these species in the wild. If Trophy Hunting is acceptable for some species ist is likely to make if more prevalent for others.
In the game of supply & demand, those creating the demand for their actions that they would want the world to think is part of conservation with them having any personal accountability, must be challenged by governments, NGOs and everyday folk alike. Raping and abuse is not acceptable to any society, nor should destroying wildlife for selfish gratification.

 

[nick scarle]

There is a flip side to this. Across vast areas of land in southern Africa, land owners have come together to create private hunting reserves. In many of these areas, the land was previously agricultural range land relatively poor in terms of large mammal species. These land owners carefully restocked the land native large game species and predators and generated their incomes not through agriculture, but hunting safaris. Many of these reserves are managed in full compliance with the law and to very high conservation standards - the end result being a far richer ecosystem than ever occurred when the land was generating income through agriculture.

No hunting, no income. No income, no incentive or even possibility to manage such areas for the overall benefit of wildlife. Simple wildlife tourism is never going to be sufficient to maintain all these areas. Any move to ban or discourage big game hunting in Africa would have to be done very carefully indeed to ensure well-intentioned actions don't actually have negative overall results.

All well and good when it's properly funded and managed - not that I would ever condone a killing under any circumstances. However, this hunt was NOT properly managed, the lion was lured out of a National Park where it was a huge draw for wildlife tourists. The dentist allegedly paid $50,000 for the privelege, so all it takes is for 10 people out of all those currently booked to visit to change their minds about a $5000 safari to Zimbabwe and go elsewhere and the tourist industry loses out. Cecil must have brought in millions of tourist dollars over the past few years and could reasonably have been expected to bring in millions more over the rest of his life had he been allowed to live on. The people of Zimbabwe have been fleeced financially and the whole world is a much poorer place on many levels.

 

[Jos Stratford]

All well and good when it's properly funded and managed - not that I would ever condone a killing under any circumstances. However, this hunt was NOT properly managed, the lion was lured out of a National Park where it was a huge draw for wildlife tourists.

I completely agree, I would not defend this particular action. My post was merely pointing out that the uncomfortable truth that hunting does serve a conservation end in Zimbabwe and elsewhere in Africa. Like it or not, vast tracks of superb wildlife habitat exist purely due to private landowners not just preserving land in order to permit hunting, but actively recreating habitat, restocking with game and managing the land to enhance its wildlife value.

Irresponsible outfits need to be clamped down on, any illegal exceeding of quotas, etc, should see stiff penalties. However, quite a number of the hunting reserves are operated on a responsible basis, even if the likes of me find them distasteful. If hunting were to be prohibited on these reserves, there would be no incentive (or financial possibility) for the land owners to manage the land, to attempt to prevent poaching, etc. Indeed, I would say quite a number would revert back to former use as ranch land, etc. Not much call for lions on cattle ranging territory.

 

[locustella]

In some cases trophy hunting disturbs social structure, because animals with precious trophies play important role in herds. After shooting, they are replaced by younger ones, what does not occur normally.
Trophy hunting is probably also selection being reverese of natural selection, because hunter kills animals bearing given features, usually the strongest ones. Such effect presumably depends on numbers of killed animals.

 

[KC Foggin]

Delta Airlines will no longer allow "trophy parts of the animal" on their flights.

 

[kawwauser]

that's a start

 

[KC Foggin]

And also Air France, KLM, Iberia, IAG Cargo, Singapore Airlines and Qantas will no long ship animal trophies.

 

[Coronatus]

<In many of these areas, the land was previously agricultural range land relatively poor in terms of large mammal species. These land owners carefully restocked the land native large game species and predators and generated their incomes not through agriculture, but hunting safaris. >

The plain truth is those farmers were not making as much money as they could. By getting rid of 'unprofitable' domestic stock and replacing them with "Game" farmers could make more money. There was no ambition to 'do good for the environment' or to 'preserve wildlife'. It was a hardnosed business decision in the vast majority of cases.
And I now repeat my question to Mysticete in post#77 (which was studiously ignored.)
< Ask yourself WHY was the Scimitar-horned Oryx endangered in the first place? Did they simply run out of food or habitat? > No! They were shot for trophies.
Same goes for the other 'exotics' roaming enclosed land in Texas and South Africa.
We don't live in a perfect world when that world condones slaughtering wildlife for personal aggrandisement.
Animals rarely become extinct through natural causes. They become extinct due to being shot so some lame brain can hang their head on a wall or make a rug for the lounge.

 

[Jos Stratford]

The plain truth is those farmers were not making as much money as they could. By getting rid of 'unprofitable' domestic stock and replacing them with "Game" farmers could make more money. There was no ambition to 'do good for the environment' or to 'preserve wildlife'. It was a hardnosed business decision in the vast majority of cases.

It makes no difference to the wildlife, everything from birds up to the apex predators, what the motives are or were. Facts on the ground are that the areas are now managed in a far better way for wildlife.

Additionally, it simply not the case that many of these landowners care simply about the profit - running alongside the hunting business, there is often a deep passion to enhance the environment. Take the one example that Mike mentioned earlier - Black-footed Cat is one of Africa's rarest cats and one of the biggest issues facing it is habitat denudation through overgrazing. One of the most important areas for them is a game farm and the owners are extremely proud of their cats and are actively involved in study and conservation projects related to this.

http://www.wildcatconservation.org/black-footed-cat-project/

These landowners are not alone in their genuine care about the environment. There are hundreds of thousands of hectares across several southern African countries that are under the protection of landowners with game interests. Many, probably most, are not purely motivated by money ...and, as said at the start, even if they were, so what?

 

[saluki]

Animals rarely become extinct through natural causes. They become extinct due to being shot so some lame brain can hang their head on a wall or make a rug for the lounge.

That's interesting. I always assumed the main reason animals became extinct was through habitat destruction. Out of interest, can you tell me what the last five species of animals made extinct by trophy hunters are, say within the last 100 years? Pyrenean Ibex perhaps? Bubal Hartebeest? I think the Western Black Rhino was poached out of existence, the Javan rhino seems to be heading the same way unfortunately.

Cheers
Jonathan

 

[Coronatus]

<It was a hardnosed business decision in the vast majority of cases.>
Note the words "vast majority". Of course some good can come to 'lesser' wildlife by the shelter unintentionally provided by other land use. Look at Salisbury Plain in UK, and the habitat on the numerous disused military establishments around our Islands. The Little Ringed Plovers on gravel pits c. 1950, BeeEaters in Sand Quarries c. 2015. How many of those proud Black-footed Cat 'owners' actually created the reserve for them?
Don't misunderstand. I am not knocking their care, just not attributing any acclaim for the alleged motive.
Saluki. If not extinction then near extinction (before preservation steps were taken by conservationists) you could make a start on your five with the Indian, Chinese and Malayan Tigers.