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.
Palmer didn't give two ****s about what happened to Cecil or any of the other animals he killed after they were dead. He got the head to hang on his wall and maybe the hide to walk on.
THAT is trophy hunting. Don't even bring up that 'the natives got the meat'. Palmer and those like him DON'T CARE about that. They DON'T CARE about where their thousands of dollars go or who gets them. They are NOT hunting out of a sense of altruism.
I have nothing against people who hunt for food.
Trophy hunting and hunting for food are two separate things.
TROPHY HUNTING is the topic of this thread. Remember?????????
Interesting conclusions you have drawn. What is your experience with African hunting that would lead you to those conclusions?
The article is less than forthright about this event.
It was a cull hunt. Animals are regularly culled all over Africa in areas where the populations are too large for the habitat to support, or in the case of Elephants in particular when they engage in too much crop destruction.
In some countries, game officials do the culling. In South Africa, this is all done on private ranches, where the game is owned by the landowner, not the state. While the article talks about indiscriminate klling, nothing of the sort is happening in a cull hunt. Only specific species are killed, and only up to a maximum quota. If any non-cull animal is killed, the hunter will pay a hefty trophy fee for his action.
Cull hunts are not typically done in a drive format, but having a drive doesn't change what is happening. The culling is a VERY important management tool for these game ranchers.
As to why they are hiding their faces, it is pretty easy to understand. There are people worldwide who don't understand anything about the game management that is actually happening, and those people will go to great lengths to destroy these peoples lives. I'd hide my face too, but not out of shame.
A Most Unusual (Super)Predator: Effects of Human Hunting and Fishing Differ Fundamentally from Those of Other Predators, by Boris Worm.
" … on land, hunters put much greater pressure on top carnivores than on herbivores.
… human hunters and fishers focus heavily on adults rather than juveniles, the preferred prey for most nonhuman predators. Probably this relates again to our technological means, which, for example, allow killing from a safe distance, and specific culture, for example, hunting for trophy and status. This unique preference, however, has implications for the sustainability of exploitation and even the course of evolution. Adult individuals provide the 'reproductive capital' of a population, akin to the financial capital in a bank account or retirement fund.
Trophy hunters and fishers, in particular, often target the largest, healthiest, and fittest organisms. This produces a strong selection pressure away from certain traits, such as the ability to grow rapidly to large size. As a consequence, the gene pool of many exploited populations changes in ways that compromise their potential to recover from previous depletion."
IOW, "trophy" hunting of creatures like "Cecil" is emphatically not a good thing for the population of his species ...
When you first posted this, I downloaded the article. I skimmed it, but didn't read in detail. I've now gone back and read the article in detail, and my response is, SERIOUSLY? This is the one bit of "evidence" that you put forth to support your position? It is a thought and philosophy piece written by a marine ecologist. It contains no research. There are no conclusions supported by any evidence.
That this was apparently your big "gotcha" that would support your anti-hunting (trophy or otherwise) agenda is laughable. That you think this supports your position really calls into question your credentials/qualifications to speak to this subject. I don't doubt that you have a degree in biology. However, I seriously doubt that you have done much, if any, meaningful research (on anything) if you actually believe this article makes your point.
Go ahead, keep posting. But I'd be surprised if anybody is going to care what you post on this subject going forward, as you have really killed your credibility.
The article is less than forthright about this event.
It was a cull hunt. Animals are regularly culled all over Africa in areas where the populations are too large for the habitat to support, or in the case of Elephants in particular when they engage in too much crop destruction.
In some countries, game officials do the culling. In South Africa, this is all done on private ranches, where the game is owned by the landowner, not the state. While the article talks about indiscriminate klling, nothing of the sort is happening in a cull hunt. Only specific species are killed, and only up to a maximum quota. If any non-cull animal is killed, the hunter will pay a hefty trophy fee for his action.
Cull hunts are not typically done in a drive format, but having a drive doesn't change what is happening. The culling is a VERY important management tool for these game ranchers.
As to why they are hiding their faces, it is pretty easy to understand. There are people worldwide who don't understand anything about the game management that is actually happening, and those people will go to great lengths to destroy these peoples lives. I'd hide my face too, but not out of shame.
When you first posted this, I downloaded the article. I skimmed it, but didn't read in detail. I've now gone back and read the article in detail, and my response is, SERIOUSLY? This is the one bit of "evidence" that you put forth to support your position? It is a thought and philosophy piece written by a marine ecologist. It contains no research. There are no conclusions supported by any evidence.
That this was apparently your big "gotcha" that would support your anti-hunting (trophy or otherwise) agenda is laughable. That you think this supports your position really calls into question your credentials/qualifications to speak to this subject. I don't doubt that you have a degree in biology. However, I seriously doubt that you have done much, if any, meaningful research (on anything) if you actually believe this article makes your point.
Go ahead, keep posting. But I'd be surprised if anybody is going to care what you post on this subject going forward, as you have really killed your credibility.
LOL …
No, it just happened that it is a recent article about population biology that was exactly germane to the discussion ongoing …
It was published in "Science," one of a handful of top peer-reviewed scientific journals globally … (hint: not in a hunting and fishing magazine) …
The author, Prof. Dr. Boris Worm, is a professional population biologist …
The article is a brief summary of current knowledge …
I *get* it … You're not into the natural sciences, but some of us are ...
No, it just happened that it is a recent article about population biology that was exactly germane to the discussion ongoing …
It was published in "Science," one of a handful of top peer-reviewed scientific journals globally … (hint: not in a hunting and fishing magazine) …
The author, Prof. Dr. Boris Worm, is a professional population biologist …
The article is a brief summary of current knowledge …
I *get* it … You're not into the natural sciences, but some of us are ...
Can you post a link????
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.
