Tourist Trophy Hunters

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Have to say this is disgusting - to kill an animal just to get a trophy.

http://cnnphotos.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/30/tourist-trophy-hunters-chase-african-wildlife/?hpt=hp_c2

It's one thing to kill for food or clothing.  To kill a magnificent beast just so you can hang its head in your den is revolting to me.

[Tom62]

Horrible pictures. Slaughtering animals for fun or for a trophy is disgusting.

[xSilverPhinx]

My father's greatest hobby. Collected quite the inventory, including some of those African animals.

We (his children) never really agreed 100% with him, but his reasons were complex.

[The Magic Pudding]

It's one thing to kill for food or clothing.  To kill a magnificent beast just so you can hang its head in your den is revolting to me.

I wouldn't do it or want to listen to someone's tales of daring do.

There is the argument that charging hunters big money gives the locals a reason to value the animals.  It would need to at least be sustainable or coordinated with necessary culls required for wildlife management.

We've got some feral species, water buffalo would be the most obvious one which trophy hunters value, I don't think many people argue against that.

[Siz]

My father's greatest hobby. Collected quite the inventory, including some of those African animals.

We (his children) never really agreed 100% with him, but his reasons were complex.

Reasons, or justifications?

[xSilverPhinx]

I'm going to repost an old topic I started, because I'm terribly lazy at the moment to retype some of the basic arguments he gives to justify licensed hunting.

While I was growing up, my father liked hunting wild game for sport, everything from birds to antelope, basically anything that he could pay for.

Being the type with, for as long as I can remember, an intense interest in animals, I would at first try to convince him to stop doing this, but he always came up with arguments that I couldn't really refute. For one, the animals were kept in large private reserves, and that the income obtained from selling licenses would revert to the reserve. Endangered animals were obviously protected. With the money, new measures could be implemented to try to ward off poachers, a huge problem in huge reserves...they're the ones who cause the most harm.

Secondly, licenses were sold depending on the number of animals available. In some cases population control was necessary, since there were some animals who ultimately unbalance the ecosystems they're in. Between having to kill part of a population of one type of animal and controlled hunting, better to sell a hunting license.  

He told me that he only hunted the old and sick animals and so put them out of their misery, but I don't believe him.

Thirdly, hunted animals were not left to rot (except for the carnivores, but vultures make short work of them) but instead sold as meat to either the hunter or the local population.  

Basically those are his reasons. Feel absolutley free to pick them apart. 

[OldGit]

When I shoot a pheasant or a pigeon, I'll often stick a feather in my hat.  But I don't shoot them to get feathers.  It's to eat the pheasant and to cull pigeons, which are vermin.  And it's sport, too - I make no apologies for that.  But I wouldn't shoot a non-vermin species just to display chunks of it.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

When I shoot a pheasant or a pigeon, I'll often stick a feather in my hat.  But I don't shoot them to get feathers.  It's to eat the pheasant and to cull pigeons, which are vermin.  And it's sport, too - I make no apologies for that.  But I wouldn't shoot a non-vermin species just to display chunks of it.

Those are different reasons and justifiable, IMHO.  It's one thing to add "sport" to a justifiable reason, another to use that as the sole justification. Again, just my opinion.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

I'm going to repost an old topic I started, because I'm terribly lazy at the moment to retype some of the basic arguments he gives to justify licensed hunting.

While I was growing up, my father liked hunting wild game for sport, everything from birds to antelope, basically anything that he could pay for.

Being the type with, for as long as I can remember, an intense interest in animals, I would at first try to convince him to stop doing this, but he always came up with arguments that I couldn't really refute. For one, the animals were kept in large private reserves, and that the income obtained from selling licenses would revert to the reserve. Endangered animals were obviously protected. With the money, new measures could be implemented to try to ward off poachers, a huge problem in huge reserves...they're the ones who cause the most harm.

Secondly, licenses were sold depending on the number of animals available. In some cases population control was necessary, since there were some animals who ultimately unbalance the ecosystems they're in. Between having to kill part of a population of one type of animal and controlled hunting, better to sell a hunting license.  

He told me that he only hunted the old and sick animals and so put them out of their misery, but I don't believe him.

Thirdly, hunted animals were not left to rot (except for the carnivores, but vultures make short work of them) but instead sold as meat to either the hunter or the local population.  

Basically those are his reasons. Feel absolutley free to pick them apart. 

I don't like to attack other people's family members. I have some pretty questionable folks in my family tree, so other people's kin are off limits.  In the abstract, if there is a legitimate reason for an animal kill, such as over-population, that's a different subject. But the one photo that I posted of the dead giraffe just broke my heart.  No reason for that, other than human ego.

[Guardian85]

I am not against hunting, but hunting exclusively for trophies is one of the things I really don't agree with. I prefer to hunt food animals when I have the opportunity. If I am to participate in the hunt for other types of animals, there has to be a good conservation reason.  Population control, for instance.

My grandfather owns some land where Grouse nest and my dad and I used to hunt there. There was some sport in it, but it was always about bringing some unusual and delicious meat home.

[OldGit]

It's one thing to add "sport" to a justifiable reason, another to use that as the sole justification.

I agree on the whole, though I wouldn't be dogmatic about it.  Certainly I take no pleasure in killing things which do no harm and don't taste good.

At the risk of being thought liberal, I will add that it's a quiet and relaxing pleasure to stroll round a farm with a gun under my arm, but it's a long time since I've let shooting considerations spoil the walk. I'm just as happy to come back with nothing, and it saves rodding the gun through.  Some old habits stay strong - I am mortified if anyone sees or hears me before I know they're there, but that's just being a countryman.

[Tank]

Horrible pictures. Slaughtering animals for fun or for a trophy is disgusting.

I can see what you are saying. But how would they die if left to 'natural causes' I.E. disease, starvation, thirst or hunted down and ripped apart as prey. Wild animals don't die in hospices; unfortunately. Almost all wild elephants that make it to maturity die of starvation after their third(?) set of teeth wear out. I think I'd take a quick shot to the head rather than get slower and slower until a pack of hyenas ripped my guts out while I could still feel it happening.

[OldGit]

^  Right!  In the UK the town councils trap loads of urban foxes.  Instead of just killing them, they have to release them in the countryside, thanks to the animal-rights mob..  Thanks a lot, bunny-huggers.  But anyhow these foxes don't know how to cope without dustbins to raid, they don't have territories and starve to death if they don't get killed in fights.  How much better if they were put down painlessly in the trap - but oh, no!  That's barbaric.

[xSilverPhinx]

I don't like to attack other people's family members. I have some pretty questionable folks in my family tree, so other people's kin are off limits.  In the abstract, if there is a legitimate reason for an animal kill, such as over-population, that's a different subject. But the one photo that I posted of the dead giraffe just broke my heart.  No reason for that, other than human ego.

There are few reasons for many of the animals there. One thing at least that my father never did was hunt a carnivore such as a lion because they're uneatable, just trophy animals. Last time I checked, lion populations were actually starting to dwindle rather than grow out of control, so it's likely that they were killed just to be stuffed and displayed in some big guy with a gun's (read: hunter or warrior status or whatever) trophy room. Which is sad.

It's not the case for the elephant population though. People have been protecting them for years, and now due to their large numbers they endanger other animals because young males (especially) vandalise trees by ripping them off the ground. For a while they would pay lots of money to transfer the elephants to other reserves, but that just transferred the problem. In that case there are solid population control reasons there, even if people take only their ivory.

[Stevil]

As a small child I used to love going "hunting" with my air rifle and shoot birds, but I grew out of that.

I don't see what is so "brave" or skillful to shoot an animal. Target shooting requires similar shooting skills, photography requires similar stalking skills.
If a person really wants to test themselves against nature they ought to go bush for a few months and see if they can survive. Guns seems like cheating, Maybe just a small knife, the clothes on their backs and that's it, see what they can make of it. Might need to run or climb a tree when the lions, tigers, elephants, hippos are near though.