110 replies to this topic

[Hula]

go daddy CEO is an ass to shoot an elephant. with his money he could have helped that village far more than just letting them have the scraps to eat of his trophy kill. I will never use go daddy again.

Excellent point, if he was so concerned about the welfare of the locals he could have shipped in some food, and helped protect the farmer's fields.

I'd also add I have never heard of people eating elephant until I'd seen and heard of a few places in the US serving "exotic" meats. It just isn't done. There are a few animals considered special, or sacred, and people there just don't eat them. Elephant, rhino, lion, cheetah, and leopard especially.

I don't think I have ever heard of people eating elephant until this very day in that sick thread

[Timothy]

Since over population is a problem I'm going hunting for Asians.

[cousin it]

In 1925 at a vert paleo conference in London, Mastodon steaks were served that had been retrieved from a frozen carcass that was found in Siberia. I don't know how old it was, but that shit had to have been frozen at least 5000 years and probably considerably longer... bet those were some tough ass steaks.

[PERM BANNED]

go daddy CEO is an ass to shoot an elephant. with his money he could have helped that village far more than just letting them have the scraps to eat of his trophy kill. I will never use go daddy again.

Excellent point, if he was so concerned about the welfare of the locals he could have shipped in some food, and helped protect the farmer's fields.

I'd also add I have never heard of people eating elephant until I'd seen and heard of a few places in the US serving "exotic" meats. It just isn't done. There are a few animals considered special, or sacred, and people there just don't eat them. Elephant, rhino, lion, cheetah, and leopard especially.

I've never been to an African nation that had elephants, but I do subscribe to various hunting magazines. For obvious reasons, it is impossible to take meat harvested in Africa back to the US. In all of these magazines, there is always images of villagers coming to the kill sight to harvest and strip the elephant of meat. If elephants are scared, why are they poached for their ivory? With the exception of lion, all those animals you listed are poached/killed by african natives to fill some spiritual niche or sells in the international black market. Again, I'm not condoning trophy hunting of African elephants or any other big game species that faces population threat. But the CEO states at the beggining he was after a problem elephant. What is most interesting is the elephant he killed isn't even a trophy elephant. Look at its tusks.

For some to suggest that tranqing the elephant is a realistic solution for these problems, I think some people forget how poor these people are. They can barely afford clothes and food and they're going to pay someone to come in and tranq and elephant and have it moved to another area? That's just not realistic. The same practice is followed in the United States when a grizzly repeatedly enters a populated area. Maybe the first time it is darted and moved, but the 2nd time it is destroyed and is automatically destoryed if it attacks a human. We also have the luxury of a budget and department capable of doing that.

Wedjat, you said you support re-introducing wolves. What you mentioned in your article is that ranchers oppose this cause they lose livestock. Would you be opposed to reintroducing wolves into downtown Chicago or San Francisco? Or is it limited strcitly to locations where your average american will never see them?

[PERM BANNED]

In 1925 at a vert paleo conference in London, Mastodon steaks were served that had been retrieved from a frozen carcass that was found in Siberia. I don't know how old it was, but that shit had to have been frozen at least 5000 years and probably considerably longer... bet those were some tough ass steaks.

I read that in a magazine a while ago. I heard some dogs came across the carcass and were eating it. I'm sure it was an interesting thing to do, but probably tasted lousy.

[Hula]

the villagers wouldn't be paying to tranq the animal there are elephant sanctuaries and other organizations that would gladly bear the cost to save the animal. this CEO is more into the trill of the hunt on an endangered animal no less than he is about helping the local population. elephants may be scared to some but that would not stop a poacher killing it for it's ivory

[PERM BANNED]

You have any evidence to back that up?

[Hula]

seriously? evidence to which statement? 1. you need me to find a link for you to elephant sanctuaries that would relocate an elephant? pretty much common knowledge, they have even been known to move an entire herd over a period of years. it isn't easy or cheap but there are people who do that and have plenty of experience. 2. it is far more likely the CEO was into the trophy kill rather than 'helping" the village, if helping the village was truly his goal he could have paid to build a water well, paid for health care, gave clothes to children or just filled what ever need was most paramount. this man is a trophy hunter and to add to his slime he films it and tries to promote it as something it isn't. 3. ivory has been poached for more years than I could count and still is. huge market for ivory. there was pre ban and still is.

[wedjat]

Wedjat, you said you support re-introducing wolves. What you mentioned in your article is that ranchers oppose this cause they lose livestock. Would you be opposed to reintroducing wolves into downtown Chicago or San Francisco? Or is it limited strcitly to locations where your average american will never see them?

Do you think it would be realistic to introduce wolves into a highly populated urban area? What do you think would happen? Do you think the wolves chances of survival would be virtually nil? That's what I think so no, I would not support that

[PERM BANNED]

1. you need me to find a link for you to elephant sanctuaries that would relocate an elephant? pretty much common knowledge, they have even been known to move an entire herd over a period of years. it isn't easy or cheap but there are people who do that and have plenty of experience.

I don't deny that sanctuaries exist. But in your own statement above, you mention it isn't cheap and moving elephants is a lengthy process. If an elephant is causing immediate damage to a food source, should starving people have to wait for outside assistance, which even at a quick pace could take days or weeks to arrive, thus allowing greater damage to occur and additionally pay money they don't have for the safety of this animal. I'm willing to bet most people in that situation wouldn't ponder calling a game reserve and deal with the problem themself.

2. it is far more likely the CEO was into the trophy kill rather than 'helping" the village, if helping the village was truly his goal he could have paid to build a water well, paid for health care, gave clothes to children or just filled what ever need was most paramount. this man is a trophy hunter and to add to his slime he films it and tries to promote it as something it isn't.

Paying for healthcare as one of the ideas you mentioned is unrealistic. Healthcare implies long term care and may cost many times over what he was willing to donate. You mention needs that are paramount. The famous socilogist Max Weber states that survival is the primary function of all humans. As starvation plays directly against their survival, protecting a food plot and providing additional food seems to be helping with their paramount needs.

3. ivory has been poached for more years than I could count and still is. huge market for ivory. there was pre ban and still is.

I don't see what your point is with this. I agree ivory is desireable. I simply mentioned to discuss the comment by Zimbo that these people held these animals as sacred and (inferred) that they wouldn't cause them harm.

[PERM BANNED]

Wedjat, you said you support re-introducing wolves. What you mentioned in your article is that ranchers oppose this cause they lose livestock. Would you be opposed to reintroducing wolves into downtown Chicago or San Francisco? Or is it limited strcitly to locations where your average american will never see them?

Do you think it would be realistic to introduce wolves into a highly populated urban area? What do you think would happen? Do you think the wolves chances of survival would be virtually nil? That's what I think so no, I would not support that

No I don't think it's realistic, but I also don't fault people who are opposed to reintroducing animals that will kill their pets and livestock to appease the hopes and dreams of people who aren't willing to make any sacrifice to restore wolve's to limited areas where they themselves won't be affected. To me, it seems that some people value the lives of a wild animal more than they do other humans.

[Zimbochick]

I've never been to an African nation that had elephants, but I do subscribe to various hunting magazines. For obvious reasons, it is impossible to take meat harvested in Africa back to the US. In all of these magazines, there is always images of villagers coming to the kill sight to harvest and strip the elephant of meat. If elephants are scared, why are they poached for their ivory? With the exception of lion, all those animals you listed are poached/killed by african natives to fill some spiritual niche or sells in the international black market. Again, I'm not condoning trophy hunting of African elephants or any other big game species that faces population threat. But the CEO states at the beggining he was after a problem elephant. What is most interesting is the elephant he killed isn't even a trophy elephant. Look at its tusks.

He killed it for sport. Elephants are seldom killed for being a pest. If that were the case elephants would be killed all the time. They are very naughty, and don't forget in these areas they live in and among the people. The people are used to shooing them away. They keep on mentioning encroachment int the article. Bullshit. These people and elephants have been living and farming together for thousands of years.

Poaching is a whole different discussion. Most poachers are not from the areas where poaching occurs. Poachers are held in much disdain is these areas. Most are from other regions, or even other countries. They are ruthless, and will kill anyone who gets in their way, so the native people absolutely hate them. Poaching is organized crime, plain and simple.

For some to suggest that tranqing the elephant is a realistic solution for these problems, I think some people forget how poor these people are. They can barely afford clothes and food and they're going to pay someone to come in and tranq and elephant and have it moved to another area? That's just not realistic. The same practice is followed in the United States when a grizzly repeatedly enters a populated area. Maybe the first time it is darted and moved, but the 2nd time it is destroyed and is automatically destoryed if it attacks a human. We also have the luxury of a budget and department capable of doing that.

Elephant relocation is very common. In the early 2000's there was a huge relocation of over 1,000 elephants from South Africa to Mozambique.

I honestly don't care that this man went to Zimbabwe, paid however much, and shot an elephant. I care that he made himself out to be the saviour of the people, doing them a favor, solving their life woes. He posed in a traditional trophy kill photo, and then tries to tell us it wasn't a trophy kill. Does anyone seriously imagine there are not thousands of people living in the region that are infintely better qualified to handle this situation, be it relocation or culling of this elephant?

[wedjat]

Wedjat, you said you support re-introducing wolves. What you mentioned in your article is that ranchers oppose this cause they lose livestock. Would you be opposed to reintroducing wolves into downtown Chicago or San Francisco? Or is it limited strcitly to locations where your average american will never see them?

Do you think it would be realistic to introduce wolves into a highly populated urban area? What do you think would happen? Do you think the wolves chances of survival would be virtually nil? That's what I think so no, I would not support that

No I don't think it's realistic, but I also don't fault people who are opposed to reintroducing animals that will kill their pets and livestock to appease the hopes and dreams of people who aren't willing to make any sacrifice to restore wolve's to limited areas where they themselves won't be affected. To me, it seems that some people value the lives of a wild animal more than they do other humans.

LOL, really? How about yes, I value the life of an endangered or close to endangered animal more than I do the cost of a rancher losing an insignificant amount of their livestock. And you yourself just admitted introducing wolves to an urban area is not realistic sooooo, what's your problem then? Why would you introduce an animal into an area that is not their known habitat & knowing the chances of its survival are incredibly low? That's just idiotic.

[PERM BANNED]

You fail to realize that many of the areas some wish to restore wolf populations have been absent of wolves for more than a century. Introducing them there is no different then putting them in a populated area as neither is "their known habitiat." Just because a bunch of people built up a bunch of buildings doesn't negate the fact that every piece of land was once roamed by wild animals. My point is that you obviously have no problem making the lives of others poorer to fill some mental pleasure of your own. You yourself are not willing to change your lifestyle to accomodate these changes. This is a common theme among people who wish to place rules and changes on to areas by which they never visit or have any vested interest in. This is the 2nd time you've called an animal endangered that is not. The American wolf is classified as "least concern" where all other animals in healthy populations are. You earlier called the african elephant endangered, but it is classifed as vulnerable. I'm not advocating harming either for sport, but you discredit your argument when you deflate their numbers to invoke an emotionally charged reaction.