Backlash over hunt

[Kramodlog]

What's more dangerous to wildlife: A hunter's bullet or a developer's excavator?

Shouldn't the question be "what is best for wild life"?

A photo safari might bring in less money per capita, but it being less expensive means more people can afford it, thus counter balancing the big hunter dollars.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

Shouldn't the question be "what is best for wild life"?

Of course. Currently that answer is one you don't like. Srsly, you can't see the good in safaris even considering how much land and therefore wildlife they're responsible for protecting?

A photo safari might bring in less money per capita, but it being less expensive means more people can afford it, thus counter balancing the big hunter dollars.

Great. Now you've only got one problem: Not enough people do it. If you don't generate the same money you won't be able to own the same amount of land.

And that's something that we don't have now. What do we do for now?

 

[Bedrockgames]

This thread is getting way too political.

 

[Kramodlog]

Of course. Currently that answer is one you don't like. Srsly, you can't see the good in safaris even considering how much land and therefore wildlife they're responsible for protecting?

It is not about what I like or dislike, it is that hunting is not the only option. But I am not bias toward hunting.

Great. Now you've only got one problem: Not enough people do it. If you don't generate the same money you won't be able to own the same amount of land.

And that's something that we don't have now. What do we do for now?

Did you read what I wrote?

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think the relevant concern is about hunting in general; this is simply a very visible example.

At one point in history, humans were hunter gatherers who were dependent on the flesh of animals for food. This is no longer the case (for most of us anyway). Recreational hunting is something very different. Over time, we've also developed a variety of moral structures that define violence as morally wrong, and we've developed a great deal of knowledge about animals, most of it leading us to conclude that sentient nonhuman creatures are a lot more human than we give them credit for.

Conversely, hunting remains a tradition.

The present issue is simply a collision between modern society and its roots, of the sort that happens all the time and in many ways. Most behaviors that any of us think of as being morally wrong are perfectly fine given another time or another social context. To some of us, killing an animal for sport is barbaric. To others, it's normal.

 

[Bedrockgames]

She's a guest and allowed to do what she was because of the laws that country has in place. As she was there legally and was legally allowed to do what she did, I can't really see a reason why she wouldn't be surprised by what some said about it. They live there - it's on them what goes down in their country, not her.



All I'm saying is that a lot of people commenting on this don't have the first clue as to what really happened or what hunting is. I never said she should be given an award, what I'm saying is that if you want to criticize I think you'd better know all the angles before you open your mouth. It's not nearly as simple as 'some foreigner shot a lion'sk?

Just to be clear here, i wasn't being critical of her. I was responding to the OP, basically saying I dont understand the OP's outrage. She may well have been invited or whatever, but the point is if the locals decide they don't like her there shooting wildlife, that's their choice (even if the government or tourist office said it was okay). This is a local issue, in a country that isn't mine, your's or this woman's. If they arrested her or something, then sure I'd share the outrage, but when you go into another country, you ought to have a grasp of the internal political cultural issues. So it isn't that I am critical if her at all (I know nothing about safari and have no strong opinion on it one way or the other) but I am not moved by the woman's story at all.

 

[Umbran]

If that were the case then there would be a different solution in place, no?

Goodness, no! The existence of a better solution by no means guarantees the implementation of that solution. Humans are not machines that automatically take optimal choices.

In most cases this just isn't true.

So you say. My understanding is different. I'm not trying not change your mind on the matter. If you want to change mine, you'll need to provide evidence, not assertions. If you don't care about changing my mind, then we can agree to disagree, and the matter ends there.

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

We also have conservationists that are uncaring about how their actions impact people and communities.

BINGO!

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

This thread is getting way too political.

Then report it.

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

To some of us, killing an animal for sport is barbaric. To others, it's normal.

Very, very few hunters kill for sport.
98% of the people I know what hunt do so for the meat.

You seem to be implying that hunting is nothing more than killing for sport.