Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53
  1. #21
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    45
    Posts
    12,151

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    If the world was full of nerdy engineers that understand the economic principles of this debate then I would not need to say anything.

    The world is not full of them, the world is full of people that does NOT understand the topic and never will. The topic is hence not one of economics but one of human nature. If the economics of the debate did not win people over by now it's because it cannot.

    Focus on the game here, not the ball or the player.

  2. #22
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    45
    Posts
    12,151

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    Quote Originally Posted by Pirate View Post
    ... giving a new guy chance to spread his genes, thereby NOT thinning out the gene pool...
    In nature the strongest genes are determined by battle, not by random new guys, the second animals determine this hunters shoot them.

  3. #23
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Philippolis
    Posts
    4,733

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    Quote Originally Posted by Pirate View Post
    We've agreed many times that modern hunting isn't "normal". Similarly, fenced farms isn't normal. Similarly, completely destroying the natural vegetation to grow mielies isn't normal. By extension, it's silly to attempt to even follow a line of argument trying to pass hunting off as normal.

    The line of argument should always be about the benefit. And the benefit is crystal clear, when comparing game numbers today against game numbers before wild animals had value; also, comparing game numbers in countries that stopped legal (trophy) hunting today, agains when it was allowed. And that's just the number of animals. The economic value, direct and indirect spending, all contributes to the business of hunting, farms getting re-stocked = more animals again. "Normal" has nothing to do with it.

    The moment something loses mainstream economic value, it'll either get replaced with something hat has value (game farms will turn into cattle farms again) or it'll gain black market value, and get exploited until extinction (rhino's being he prime example here). Again, "normal" in a nature sense has nothing to do with it, but it's SO normal in an economic sense that even a nerdy engineer can grasp it...
    1. I agree with the above.
    2. Trophy hunting is a conservation tool, like all tools it can be used or abused. Unfortunately, it is occasionally abused.
    3. For the past twenty years I have been guiding trophy hunters, often many in one year. There was a time, many years ago, when both me and my wife hunted for trophies. Trophy hunters are people, like other people they are not all the same.
    There are those who measure the quality of the hunt in inches above all else, the end justifies the means kind of hunter. These are the people you can blame for the rise of artificially improved, through supplements and selective breeding in small areas, trophy industry.
    In my experience the average trophy hunter attaches a lot more value to the quality of the hunt than the size of the head against his wall. Most trophy hunters are happy with a fairly hunted average sized mature animal. I make a point of measuring nothing, unless a client insists. This very rarely happens. For most trophy hunters a trophy against the wall is a reminder of an experience and that is the way, I believe, it should be.
    5. Hunting, all forms of hunting, is a very emotional subject and logic is seldom applied.

  4. #24
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Rustenburg
    Age
    53
    Posts
    1,248

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    FIrst they came for trophy hunting, then they came for the rest! Pack away your guns and ship in the cattle, goats or sheep to make a living off your land.

    You cannot reason with Don, Alan Michler, Ricky, Mansfield and neither can you with their supporters. Ensure the economics stay, ensure the the right message get to the decision makers.

  5. #25

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    Quote Originally Posted by Messor View Post
    No, you are dealing with the human aspect, stating correct conservation numbers have little to do with human perception.

    But first, there are two aspects to this, trophy hunting on open land with free roaming animals definitely weakens the gene pool, fact. Trophy hunters does not spend days looking for animals on their last legs, they look for the best trophy, so they don't skip the one with the best horns or body size to look for the vintage model past it's expiry date. If you get 1 person that does this, the other 99 does not, they shoot the best trophy. Animals in the wild works the opposite of this, to conserve energy they often target the weakest animals, the stragglers, spending less energy with a smaller chance of getting injured. Nature is designed to get rid of the weak, humans breed the weak by taking out the strong.

    Secondly, animals bred for trophy hunting.
    If hunters cannot understand that there is something seriously wrong with trying to breed the animal with the biggest horns just so that someone can shoot it dead then they don't understand humans at all. Creating something beautiful ONLY to shoot it dead, and then trying to convince the world that it's conservation, yeah good luck with that.

    We must not act like the eff and dismiss the whole article because we cannot see further than the writers bias. If you claim to be a hunter and you do it "to get in touch with nature", why the hell do you do something that is the complete opposite of nature? What leg do you have to stand on when you cannot even keep your own side of the argument rational? Look, that writer with his "rich white man" arguments makes me want to puke, but we should all just sit back and read behind the scenes. We must understand the concept behind the outcry instead of dismissing it outright.
    Yup.

    But trophy hunting pays for a lot of conservation as well. Economics counts too.
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit: occidentis telum est.

    Seneca (4 BC - 65 AD)

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1,261

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    Quote Originally Posted by Messor View Post
    No, you are dealing with the human aspect, stating correct conservation numbers have little to do with human perception.

    But first, there are two aspects to this, trophy hunting on open land with free roaming animals definitely weakens the gene pool, fact. Trophy hunters does not spend days looking for animals on their last legs, they look for the best trophy, so they don't skip the one with the best horns or body size to look for the vintage model past it's expiry date. If you get 1 person that does this, the other 99 does not, they shoot the best trophy. Animals in the wild works the opposite of this, to conserve energy they often target the weakest animals, the stragglers, spending less energy with a smaller chance of getting injured. Nature is designed to get rid of the weak, humans breed the weak by taking out the strong.

    Secondly, animals bred for trophy hunting.
    If hunters cannot understand that there is something seriously wrong with trying to breed the animal with the biggest horns just so that someone can shoot it dead then they don't understand humans at all. Creating something beautiful ONLY to shoot it dead, and then trying to convince the world that it's conservation, yeah good luck with that.

    We must not act like the eff and dismiss the whole article because we cannot see further than the writers bias. If you claim to be a hunter and you do it "to get in touch with nature", why the hell do you do something that is the complete opposite of nature? What leg do you have to stand on when you cannot even keep your own side of the argument rational? Look, that writer with his "rich white man" arguments makes me want to puke, but we should all just sit back and read behind the scenes. We must understand the concept behind the outcry instead of dismissing it outright.

    For example, I get your point, you did not even have to type it, which means you did not address the elephant in the room.
    I don't think we're dismissing the article more that he leaves out a significant number of fact which provides an unbalanced point of view, which from a person who is an investigative journalist, is almost off sides.

    We breed the biggest animals for eating, mess with genetics to get the best crops, so is this really any different barring the fact a hunter kills it?

    On free roaming land, that's an interesting question as to whether that land is "managed" by a farmer / operator in which case I would think that they would be shooting themselves in the foot by removing breeding animals in their prime (See Pirate's point) but on a general farm this could happen if the hunter happens across the animal, he probably will.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yellowfever View Post
    FIrst they came for trophy hunting, then they came for the rest! Pack away your guns and ship in the cattle, goats or sheep to make a living off your land.

    You cannot reason with Don, Alan Michler, Ricky, Mansfield and neither can you with their supporters. Ensure the economics stay, ensure the the right message get to the decision makers.
    This is the challenge and Africa is an easy target. The States has a massive number of the population that hunt on their public land system.

  7. #27
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    45
    Posts
    12,151

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    Quote Originally Posted by DaavG View Post
    I don't think we're dismissing the article more that he leaves out a significant number of fact which provides an unbalanced point of view, which from a person who is an investigative journalist, is almost off sides.
    No no no, despite whatever he is in real life his credentials put towards the specific article is :

    Don Pinnock is a freelance environmental writer who works with the Conservation Action Trust

    This guys was not going to be objective nor factual in any way, he was going to write his narrative from the start no matter how much investigation was done.

    I feel I repeat myself so much on the forum, but here goes again, it's easy to understand his point of view, very easy for the ordinary person that lives in a city and does not hunt. It's damn hard for that same person to understand a hunters point of view, you simply cannot grasp what hunting means if it's not in your blood, when you live far removed from such reality. You can point out the economical and conservational value of hunting to any hunter, you simply won't be able to do that to the average ordinary person that does not even know what happens in an abattoir.

    We humans gravitate away from hunting with our modern civilized culture, hunting will most definitely come to an end sometime, it will stay that for some time and rise again with the fall of those cultures. Look at all the first world countries, look at their citizens, growing fatter and weaker by the day, they simply will not be able to compete with those coming for them, europe already in deep trouble with immigrants, the states to follow, because all the libtards hate the notion of closing borders and trump is evil. Strength is build by strength, human and animal, in nature the strongest animals fight for breeding, in humans people just select a suitable mate with no combat nor genetic selection.

    There was a thread in the general section about what to do to build up the country, banned for some reason. By the responses of some of the members is was clear that they knew very well what needs done. If you sit and ask the question but why are these ideas not implemented then you get closer to the truth, most of humanity are morons, you sit with a people problem not a lack of solutions problem. Same goes for this debate, you can point out the economic and conservation data as much as you like, wont do anything, you sit with a people problem.

  8. #28
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Rustenburg
    Age
    53
    Posts
    1,248

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    I read the article, and it would be fruitless to try and argue with Don. He clearly has a wobbly leg to stand on hence he is playing the race/patrichy card. Appealing to militant, SJW and mostly black population-perhaps he thinks Juju will be president. He is trying to whip up a frency where you may see people crashing Huntex (not!!!!)

    What is very interesting is the NPO he is writing for has to white males in charge and the contributors are lily white albeit with a few more females than his targeted Professional Hunters.

    I agree excessive prestige for winning can be a bad thing. But this has also lead to the improvement of Springbuck genetics in Southern Africa to pre-1900 and Rinderpest days.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1,261

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    Quote Originally Posted by Messor View Post
    No no no, despite whatever he is in real life his credentials put towards the specific article is :

    Don Pinnock is a freelance environmental writer who works with the Conservation Action Trust

    This guys was not going to be objective nor factual in any way, he was going to write his narrative from the start no matter how much investigation was done.

    I feel I repeat myself so much on the forum, but here goes again, it's easy to understand his point of view, very easy for the ordinary person that lives in a city and does not hunt. It's damn hard for that same person to understand a hunters point of view, you simply cannot grasp what hunting means if it's not in your blood, when you live far removed from such reality. You can point out the economical and conservational value of hunting to any hunter, you simply won't be able to do that to the average ordinary person that does not even know what happens in an abattoir.

    We humans gravitate away from hunting with our modern civilized culture, hunting will most definitely come to an end sometime, it will stay that for some time and rise again with the fall of those cultures. Look at all the first world countries, look at their citizens, growing fatter and weaker by the day, they simply will not be able to compete with those coming for them, europe already in deep trouble with immigrants, the states to follow, because all the libtards hate the notion of closing borders and trump is evil. Strength is build by strength, human and animal, in nature the strongest animals fight for breeding, in humans people just select a suitable mate with no combat nor genetic selection.

    There was a thread in the general section about what to do to build up the country, banned for some reason. By the responses of some of the members is was clear that they knew very well what needs done. If you sit and ask the question but why are these ideas not implemented then you get closer to the truth, most of humanity are morons, you sit with a people problem not a lack of solutions problem. Same goes for this debate, you can point out the economic and conservation data as much as you like, wont do anything, you sit with a people problem.
    I have read you mentioning that is a people problem, so I'll ask if you have any thoughts then on to tackle the people problem?

    I ask this as tempted to respond since I think it's important that his message is not the only message seen on DM and likes..

  10. #30
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Witbank
    Age
    59
    Posts
    4,120

    Default Re: Trophy Hunting, Part One: The nasty colonial sport of shooting wild animals

    During a buffalo hunting course we participated in at the Southern African Wild life College , Dr.Kevin Robertson explain to us the following:
    A lot of PH /hunting guides let their clients shoot a "Dagga-bull" , that is the benchmark of trophy hunting...what they do not realise is that most of these 'Dagga boys " they shot are breeding bulls that was chased out of the herd by a stronger bull ..why? because this breeding bull/herd bull through his effort of defending his cows to sire good genes loose weight and condition ,,thus is chased out of the herd...this bull take on a role of a "Dagga boy" at eight years ..the prime of his life..and genes..this is the bull that is usually shot as a "trophy" bull, much too early, this is why there is only 12% of genes left in our South African buffalo herds..

    This is where "Trophy hunting" is done incorrectly...
    Here is a photo of what a real Trophy buffalo bull looks like ( this is what Doc Kevin Robertson like the norm to be, and this makes a lot of sense to ensure we have strong Buffalo genes in our herds)

    This is what a "trophy dagga boy /herd bull " looks like still in his prime with lot of great genes to pass on if he just get the chance by PH and hunting guides..the lack mof knowledge and an unhealthy want for money is the cause of this...

    I do not do "trophy hunting " since I do not have the money for this sport , all I say is that this is base on facts ...you can not argue with facts...
    In this article this person made one mistake by saying Ron Thompson shot thousands of different species as trophies..which is totally wrong..Ron Thompson was working in the Tsetse fly corridors where they had to kill all these animals thinking it would eradicate the "ngana sickness/sleeping sickness...which was question by a extremely knowledgeable hunter/Game ranger , conservationist like Richard Harland who probably killed twice more animals than Ron Thompson in the corridors..

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •