Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been consistently clear in my *take* on this controversial situation:
(1) I oppose "trophy" hunting for both (A) "ethical" and (B) sound biological reasons, even though/when "trophy" hunting is "legal" …
(2) I oppose "trophy" hunting everywhere it is practiced -- not only in Africa …
(3) I accept hunting for food as both acceptable and, for some, necessary …
This is not rocket science …
Many people do no accept hunting for food as acceptable. Why is your perception more correct than theirs? To carry that further why is someone else's perception less correct than yours if they see nothing wrong with trophy hunting?
PS - many deer and bear hunters who "hunt for food" do anything but. They just want a trophy too.
Many people do no accept hunting for food as acceptable. Why is your perception more correct than theirs? To carry that further why is someone else's perception less correct than yours if they see nothing wrong with trophy hunting?
PS - many deer and bear hunters who "hunt for food" do anything but. They just want a trophy too.
Just because it is a trophy does not mean the meat can not be eaten.
All of are "trophy" deer and bear have also been dinner.
I think most people definitely do care about trophy hunting and are disgusted by it.
Many years ago, a neighbor I had just met invited me over to her house for coffee and her family room wall was covered with animal heads which her husband killed and had stuffed, and they were referred to as trophies.
I was very uncomfortable (and disgusted; the place gave me the creeps), and told her that although she seems very nice, herself, that I could not be comfortable in her home and knew that I could not be friends with her husband and that would put a damper on any friendship we might have, so I excused myself and left right away. She said that I wasn't the only one who felt this way, and that her husband's hobby caused her to have few friends. I really felt sorry for her (and truthfully, I silently questioned her judgment in choice of husbands and her meekness); however, feeling sorry for someone is not the basis for a good friendship.
That could have been our house...........but, all the meat was eaten.
I'll ask again. Why do you and other exclude human beings from being a part of "Nature"?
Ummm …
Human beings are indeed part and parcel of Nature …
Unfortunately for all the other living things on the Earth, however, too many of us arrogant humans operate as if we are above the rest of Nature and feel free to abuse and exploit Nature in ways that are sick and ultimately destructive of Nature, including us (the ongoing global climate change problem being just the most obvious instance) ...
Many people do no accept hunting for food as acceptable. Why is your perception more correct than theirs? To carry that further why is someone else's perception less correct than yours if they see nothing wrong with trophy hunting?
PS - many deer and bear hunters who "hunt for food" do anything but. They just want a trophy too.
A "trophy" hunter preferentially tries to take an animal that is big, strong, healthy and (almost certainly) most successful at differential reproduction … That is a fact, not just an opinion based upon a perception ...
This is not a good thing for the survival and prospering of that population of that species … That is a fact, not just an opinion based upon a perception …
"Trophy" hunting is bad wildlife "conservation" practice ...
A "trophy" hunter preferentially tries to take an animal that is big, strong, healthy and (almost certainly) most successful at differential reproduction … That is a fact, not just an opinion based upon a perception ...
This is not a good thing for the survival and prospering of that population of that species … That is a fact, not just an opinion based upon a perception …
"Trophy" hunting is bad wildlife "conservation" practice ...
Not always or even usually depending on species. Based on years of drought and food a 2 year old Buck can be a spike or have many tines. Here in S Cal a 5 year old Buck can easily be a 2 x 2. I've shot a five point Bull Elk that was 3 years old. It was tagged. In the local Mts there is a spike with horns almost 2 feet long and it grows the same set year after year and it's at least 6 years old. Since it's illegal to shoot it gets to pass that gene on and there are a LOT of spikes that are many years old.
Nice try at deflecting from true meaning of posts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
