Page 5 of 8

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 2:55 pm
by K9s
I don't think any real consensus is going to happen here except: It is a choice based on a lifetime of different experiences.

We used to hunt and fish to eat. Yes, we did. We didn't "buy" meat because we were poor people in a rural conservative evangelical area. We grew and canned/froze almost all of our own food and bought the rest from neighboring farms. We did buy milk from a real dairy farm and, sometimes, from a store. I never liked the deer head trophies that some hunters had hanging at home (wild deer, no staged hunt). I never saw a mounted fish or other animal except in a museum. I never met a "trophy hunter" who wasn't despicable and wealthy (compared to everyone I knew).

Your life experience is different. You make different choices? OK.

https://www.humanesociety.org/news/new- ... hy-hunting
69 percent of Americans say they oppose trophy hunting, including 79 percent of Democrats, 61 percent of Republicans, and 67 percent of non-partisan voters.

The survey of 3,011 registered voters was conducted by the Remington Research Group from December 2–December 3, 2017. The survey was weighted to match expected turnout demographics for the 2018 General Election. Margin of Error is +/-2.2% with a 95% level of confidence.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:14 pm
by Marlene
someone could actually offer a defense of it in this thread rather than elaborate versions of "I'm ok with it. so there!" hasn't happened yet, but it could

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:40 pm
by Maccabee
Marlene wrote:someone could actually offer a defense of it in this thread rather than elaborate versions of "I'm ok with it. so there!" hasn't happened yet, but it could
“mUh PeRmIt AnD gUiDe FeEs HeLp CoNsErVaTiOn” seems to be the only defense of killing animals for sport.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:10 pm
by Marlene
Don’t forget tEh NeTiVEz EaT tEh LiOn MeAtZ

Edit to add: in berating our failed explainers I should be clear; I’m not generally opposed to trophy hunting so much as I’ve almost exclusively met trophy hunters who really suck and have no meaningful thoughts about hunting beyond the joy of doing something they think makes them special.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:04 am
by TEXGunny
in an effort to curb the strawmen I'm reading, I'll attempt to actually give a defense of modern sport hunting. I'm not a trophy hunter, and will eat whatever I shoot, including lions (it would be fascinating you must admit).

what is the economic value to a Masai tribesman of a lion? exactly zero, assuming the best case scenario in which the lion isn't actively hunting and munching on his cattle, in which case it would be less.

now let's say a poacher comes along. the same lion worth nothing to the tribesman is worth a lot of money in illegal Chinese folk medicine markets, enough to make it worthwhile to illegally take the lion for parts. in this world, trophy hunting doesn't exist. there is no infrastructure or game wardens, and so poaching is very successful and not very risky. lion populations dwindle under unregulated hunting pressures as they always do.


imagine a separate scenario that currently exists in Africa, one where old mature animals, mostly males, are sold in order to make way for younger individuals to thrive. this money is distributed to the local economy and is used to hire game wardens and guards. the meat is distributed to local villages, who are routinely plagued with malnutrition. what is the economic value of the animal now? certainly not zero. its created a cottage industry supporting many jobs in the local economy all dedicated to protecting the new cash cow.

is sit perfect? no. there will always be the threat of corruption. however, it benefits the animals and people. how is it not the best solution to an imperfect problem?

many people focus on the people paying the enormous fees to go on the hunts. that is entirely not the point. the people of the local communities and the local fauna are the reason why this system exists. the dbags taking the photos are the people ensuring that we'll have elephants for a very long time, since they give people a reason for people to care about their safety

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:23 am
by K9s
The discussion of a lion's economic value is as far as I could go. What is the economic value of an autistic child in that calculus, I wonder?

If malnourished people have to rely on fees and meat from wealthy hunters, the problem is not the economic value of the lion.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:32 am
by TEXGunny
K9s wrote:The discussion of a lion's economic value is as far as I could go. What is the economic value of an autistic child in that calculus, I wonder?

If malnourished people have to rely on fees and meat from wealthy hunters, the problem is not the economic value of the lion.
the lions economic value is what keeps the guards employed. while you may object to this reality on moral grounds, it is still the reality you must deal with. no one is guarding vulnerable animal populations for free

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 1:15 am
by Bisbee
K9s wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:23 am
The discussion of a lion's economic value is as far as I could go. What is the economic value of an autistic child in that calculus, I wonder?

If malnourished people have to rely on fees and meat from wealthy hunters, the problem is not the economic value of the lion.
Well stated.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:09 am
by YankeeTarheel
Bisbee wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 1:15 am
K9s wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:23 am
The discussion of a lion's economic value is as far as I could go. What is the economic value of an autistic child in that calculus, I wonder?

If malnourished people have to rely on fees and meat from wealthy hunters, the problem is not the economic value of the lion.
Well stated.
I'm not a hunter but it seems to me that there are 4 reasons to hunt:
1) Food. I've known plenty of people who fed their family for a year on venison.
2) "Varmint" control. Pests that destroy fields, crops, or prey on herds. Animals that cannot successfully be relocated and are dangerous to people.
3) Environmental control to strengthen herds, reduce over-grazing.--mainly to offset our killing off the apex predators.
4) Trophy hunting. To make guys feel more manly by killing some big animal minding its own business. Like Uday and Qusay Trump showing off the poor leopard they killed.

Trying to mix these up, chopping these up and throwing them together to justify trophy hunting doesn't cut it for me. If I'm going to kill an animal, from a mosquito to, well, anything, it's going to be for a damn good reason, and not to prop up my ego.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:55 pm
by K9s
TEXGunny wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:32 am
K9s wrote:The discussion of a lion's economic value is as far as I could go. What is the economic value of an autistic child in that calculus, I wonder?

If malnourished people have to rely on fees and meat from wealthy hunters, the problem is not the economic value of the lion.
the lions economic value is what keeps the guards employed. while you may object to this reality on moral grounds, it is still the reality you must deal with. no one is guarding vulnerable animal populations for free

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
We disagree and that is OK.

To frame a discussion of malnourished and impoverished people as the reason for trophy hunting is, in my view, placing the problem and solution in a colonial cookie cutter argument.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 1:08 pm
by lurker
"soylent green, it's people"

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:27 pm
by BungalowBill
Marlene wrote:
Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:14 pm
someone could actually offer a defense of it in this thread
Well, not really. My original point was that any defense of “trophy hunting” is going to be meaningless because what people who oppose trophy hunting think trophy hunting is doesn’t really exist much in the real world of hunting.

It’s a little like defending “assault rifles” against opponents who think they know what “assault rifles” are but really don’t, and then they tell you that defining an assault rifle is beside the point.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 7:42 pm
by K9s
This same sort of "trophy hunting" thread seems to appear on every other gun forum from time-to-time. I am usually the only dissenter, so I usually don't engage.

Usually, the thread is just a way to grunt, act manly, and bash the crybaby liberals.

If you didn't want to hear our views, why did you start this? You ended your original post with "End rant. Flame away." So, I assume you were just trying to stir it up. You did. Now what?

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 7:59 pm
by YankeeTarheel
K9s wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 7:42 pm
If you didn't want to hear our views, why did you start this? You ended your original post with "End rant. Flame away." So, I assume you were just trying to stir it up. You did. Now what?
Yeah, I'm wondering that, too.
I don't object to hunting, and I don't object to being willing to kill the meat you eat. I don't even object to enjoying the tracking, and even the expertise to take down your prey with one shot. What I don't get is actually enjoying killing. I enjoy fishing for dinner from time to time, but I don't enjoy actually killing the fish, and try to do it as quick as possible. But most hunter societies recognize JUST what it means to take this animal's life and have their rituals and rites to both apologize and thank them. I don't believe there's some post-death spirit, nor a "Rainbow Bridge", but I recognize this keeps them from wantonly killing animals or squandering their lives.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 9:11 pm
by TEXGunny
YankeeTarheel wrote:
K9s wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 7:42 pm
If you didn't want to hear our views, why did you start this? You ended your original post with "End rant. Flame away." So, I assume you were just trying to stir it up. You did. Now what?
Yeah, I'm wondering that, too.
I don't object to hunting, and I don't object to being willing to kill the meat you eat. I don't even object to enjoying the tracking, and even the expertise to take down your prey with one shot. What I don't get is actually enjoying killing. I enjoy fishing for dinner from time to time, but I don't enjoy actually killing the fish, and try to do it as quick as possible. But most hunter societies recognize JUST what it means to take this animal's life and have their rituals and rites to both apologize and thank them. I don't believe there's some post-death spirit, nor a "Rainbow Bridge", but I recognize this keeps them from wantonly killing animals or squandering their lives.
I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 9:45 pm
by K9s
TEXGunny wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 9:11 pm
I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway
Image

Image

Image

Image

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:49 pm
by YankeeTarheel
TEXGunny wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 9:11 pm
YankeeTarheel wrote:
K9s wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2019 7:42 pm
If you didn't want to hear our views, why did you start this? You ended your original post with "End rant. Flame away." So, I assume you were just trying to stir it up. You did. Now what?
Yeah, I'm wondering that, too.
I don't object to hunting, and I don't object to being willing to kill the meat you eat. I don't even object to enjoying the tracking, and even the expertise to take down your prey with one shot. What I don't get is actually enjoying killing. I enjoy fishing for dinner from time to time, but I don't enjoy actually killing the fish, and try to do it as quick as possible. But most hunter societies recognize JUST what it means to take this animal's life and have their rituals and rites to both apologize and thank them. I don't believe there's some post-death spirit, nor a "Rainbow Bridge", but I recognize this keeps them from wantonly killing animals or squandering their lives.
I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Two sons of Trump.

BTW, that guy with the dead baboons better not have hunted them in South Africa, where they are protected. I took this 10 years ago, south of Cape Town.
Baboons.jpg

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:23 pm
by Maccabee
TEXGunny wrote:I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway
From the original post in the thread: Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:35 pm
by TEXGunny
Maccabee wrote:
TEXGunny wrote:I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway
From the original post in the thread: Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
what's wrong with stalking? it's the most basic form of human hunting. that's been with us since we started being human

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:58 am
by Marlene
Lowered

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:39 am
by lurker
want to stalk? get a camera. nobody dies, unless you inadvertently back off a cliff framing the shot.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:43 am
by Maccabee
TEXGunny wrote:
Maccabee wrote:
TEXGunny wrote:I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway
From the original post in the thread: Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
what's wrong with stalking? it's the most basic form of human hunting. that's been with us since we started being human

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Did you finish reading the sentence before you replied? “stalk and kill”




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:52 am
by TEXGunny
Maccabee wrote:
Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:43 am
TEXGunny wrote:
Maccabee wrote:
TEXGunny wrote:I've never heard of any hunter that enjoys killing per se. none that didn't turn out to be clinical psychopaths anyway
From the original post in the thread: Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
what's wrong with stalking? it's the most basic form of human hunting. that's been with us since we started being human

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Did you finish reading the sentence before you replied? “stalk and kill”




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Stalking and killing, not just killing. Besides pigs (roaches with hooves), no one is out there gunning animals from helicopters. Killing per se is not the point. The art is in stalking an animal without being detected and placing the perfect shot. If people were gunning giraffes from orbit, you'd have a point. As it is, I'm not really sure you understand hunting, or agree with killing animals in general. If that's so, at least be honest. You'd not be against trophy hunting, you'd be against the killing of animals, an entirely separate position.

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 10:48 am
by Maccabee
TEXGunny wrote:
Maccabee wrote:
Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:43 am
TEXGunny wrote:
Maccabee wrote: From the original post in the thread: Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
what's wrong with stalking? it's the most basic form of human hunting. that's been with us since we started being human

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Did you finish reading the sentence before you replied? “stalk and kill”




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Stalking and killing, not just killing. Besides pigs (roaches with hooves), no one is out there gunning animals from helicopters. Killing per se is not the point. The art is in stalking an animal without being detected and placing the perfect shot. If people were gunning giraffes from orbit, you'd have a point. As it is, I'm not really sure you understand hunting, or agree with killing animals in general. If that's so, at least be honest. You'd not be against trophy hunting, you'd be against the killing of animals, an entirely separate position.
As pointed out by Lurker, you can stalk and track animals without the need to kill them. Get a camera.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: In defense of “trophy hunting”

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:47 am
by lurker
i've said this before.
obviously, i enjoy beating dead horses.

i understand hunting, especially the stalking aspect, full well. as a teenager, i was an avid spearfisher. you're very much in their element, and out of yours. you have to get close, and you have to shoot straight, and if you're snorkeling, you don't have much time.

and then one day it occurred to me that i don't really enjoy eating fish. or cleaning fish. killing for fun is wasteful of life. killing to eat, while inefficient, sustains life. it is a question of empathy. get a camera and trophy hunt to your heart's content. nothing gets hurt, nothing dies.