The .600 Overkill

[CB Jones]

Hunters also do more to cause extinction in animals than people who are anti hunting

 

[Headhunter]

Ah yes the typical way of not being able to say anything back trying to hard to be funny

 

[Streetfighter2]

Only cowards use guns

 

[CB Jones]

Ah yes the typical way of not being able to say anything back trying to hard to be funny

How bout this then.

Everything you said is complete Bull****

nothing funny about that.

 

[Streetfighter2]

Ah yes the typical way of not being able to say anything back trying to hard to be funny

Yeah it seems that guy does it a lot...well humours all he has because by looking at his posts his only form of martial art training is driving his kid to karate class and sitting and watching

 

[Headhunter]

How bout this then.

Everything you said is complete Bull****

nothing funny about that.

Again you can't actually argue with it. But okay you go carry killing innocent animals to fuel your ego whatever works for you

 

[CB Jones]

Hunters also do more to cause extinction in animals than people who are anti hunting

Here is why I claim what you say is bull****

---In 1907, only 41,000 elk remained in North America. Thanks to the money and hard work invested by hunters to restore and conserve habitat, today there are more than 1 million.

---In 1900, only 500,000 whitetails remained. Thanks to conservation work spearheaded by hunters, today there are more than 32 million

---In 1900, only 100,000 wild turkeys remained. Thanks to hunters, today there are over 7 million.

---In 1901, few ducks remained. Thanks to hunters’ efforts to restore and conserve wetlands, today there are more than 44 million.

---In 1950, only 12,000 pronghorn remained. Thanks to hunters, today there are more than 1.1 million.

---Habitat, research and wildlife law enforcement work, all paid for by hunters, help countless non-hunted species.

---Through state licenses and fees, hunters pay $796 million a year for conservation programs.

---Through donations to conservation groups, hunters add $440 million a year to conservation efforts.

---In 1937, hunters actually requested an 11% tax on guns, ammo, bows and arrows to help fund conservation. That tax, so far, raised more than $8 billion for wildlife conservation.

---11% tax on guns, ammo, bows and arrows generates $371 million a year for conservation.

---All together, hunters pay more than $1.6 billion a year for conservation programs.

---Avid hunter Theodore Roosevelt created our national forests and grasslands and forever protected 230 million acres for wildlife and the public to use and enjoy.

---With funding from hunters, conservation groups helped restore wild elk herds in seven states and provinces.

---legalizing hunting of the white rhino in South Africa had motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. "As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than 100 individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies,

---legalized hunting was also beneficial for Zimbabwe’s elephants. “Implementing trophy hunting has doubled the area of the country under wildlife management relative to the 13% in state protected areas,” thanks to the inclusion of private lands, he says. “As a result, the area of suitable land available to elephants and other wildlife has increased, reversing the problem of habitat loss and helping to maintain a sustained population

 

[Flying Crane]

Again....Thats more sit on a moral high horse and judge other peoples motives that you are just making assumptions about bull****

The idea that you are morally superior because you ate what you killed is non-sense.

Ok well, people come up with all kinds of excuses to justify heinous behavior.

 

[Flying Crane]

Hunters also do more to cause extinction in animals than people who are anti hunting

To be fair, hunters in the US at least have done a lot for conservation. But this is mostly different from pure trophy hunting. Deer, Elk, ducks, geese, pheasants, rabbits, squirrels, are all game animals that are regularly eaten, and I don't have a problem with that as long as it is done responsibly, and with conservation in mind.

What is heinous is the pure trophy hunt, whether those animals are exotic or local, and particularly when the animals may be threatened or endangered, and some of which are undeniably highly intelligent, like elephants. Safari, where the wealthy pay for the privilege of shooting one of these animals for the adrenaline rush and for the trophy, is despicable behavior. There is a special place in Hell reserved for those people. And I don't even believe in Hell.

 

[CB Jones]

To be fair, hunters in the US at least have done a lot for conservation. But this is mostly different from pure trophy hunting. Deer, Elk, ducks, geese, pheasants, rabbits, squirrels, are all game animals that are regularly eaten, and I don't have a problem with that as long as it is done responsibly, and with conservation in mind.

What is heinous is the pure trophy hunt, whether those animals are exotic or local, and particularly when the animals may be threatened or endangered, and some of which are undeniably highly intelligent, like elephants. Safari, where the wealthy pay for the privilege of shooting one of these animals for the adrenaline rush and for the trophy, is despicable behavior. There is a special place in Hell reserved for those people. And I don't even believe in Hell.

I disagree. Conservation in the US was led by trophy hunters. Same thing is happening in Africa. Trophy Hunters are a big part of conservation there and like in the US when done responsibly it will greatly benefit many African game and non-game species.

 

[Flying Crane]

I disagree. Conservation in the US was led by trophy hunters. Same thing is happening in Africa. Trophy Hunters are a big part of conservation there and like in the US when done responsibly it will greatly benefit many African game and non-game species.

Ok, disagree then.

There is certainly an incentive to conserve, if for nothing else than to ensure they can continue to get their rocks off and compensate for whatever other shortcomings they may have, by killing animals from a position of relative safety to decorate the man cave. Hey, whatever makes one feel strong and manly...

That does not negate the fact that the need to take conservative action in the first place was caused by human behavior: destroying habitat, and early hunting practices that nearly wiped out some species, did wipe out others, and still has others on the brink. Yes, some species have rebounded, but others have not, and many have disappeared altogether and it is too late for them. To then turn around and point to conservation as a justification of trophy hunting, is pathetic.

Sure, safari and trophy hunts can bring money into local economies, but that is blood money. Some jobs and some professions simply should not exist, they are heinous by their very nature. Ecology and nature tourism is a much better option in the long run. It provides more job opportunities for the local populations, and more stable and regular income.

 

[Steve]

You believe it to be heinous because you don't understand it.

You make broad assumptions about people you don't know based on something you don't understand and then try to act like you have taken some kind of moral high ground.

Hunters do more for conservation than most people who are anti-hunting.

I agree, but would qualify it a bit. SOME hunters (maybe even most).

The issue here I see is a common one. There are some few hunters who "get their rocks off" killing things. I think going to Africa and coaxing an animal off of a protected reserve in order to shoot it to be pretty sleazy.

I don't see a lot of value in breeding animals so that they can be hunted, which isn't conservation. I'm referring to businesses that breed animals and go around ahead of hunters, placing them so that they can be shot. That's not hunting, IMO.

I do understand that hunting wildlife is necessary and helpful to the ecosystem, and have no concerns at all about it. And I understand that the hunters I mention above, along with some others who engage in questionable behavior, are a subset of hunters.

I also don't have a problem with people collecting rifles or handguns, even if they aren't practical, provided they know how to use them. I have posted my opinions in past years on regulation, which I fully support.

 

[CB Jones]

Ecology and nature tourism is a much better option in the long run

And if these practices fail will you be ok with those species going extinct?

 

[CB Jones]

There are some few hunters who "get their rocks off" killing things.

Agree...What I have a problem with is making the broad assumption that all trophy hunters are heinous and immoral.

I don't see a lot of value in breeding animals so that they can be hunted, which isn't conservation. I'm referring to businesses that breed animals and go around ahead of hunters, placing them so that they can be shot. That's not hunting

I agree 100%

I do understand that hunting wildlife is necessary and helpful to the ecosystem, and have no concerns at all about it. And I understand that the hunters I mention above, along with some others who engage in questionable behavior, are a subset of hunters.

Agree

 

[Tez3]

Why were these animals going extinct in the first place? They weren't naturally becoming extinct because of weather conditions, predation by other animals etc. Taking lives just for fun is just always going to be wrong.
Saying trophy hunters conserve wildlife is strange considering that the wildlife was going extinct because of trophy hunters in the first place.

 

[Tez3]

Agree...What I have a problem with is making the broad assumption that all trophy hunters are heinous and immoral.



I agree 100%



Agree

How are they not though? They kill for the pleasure it brings them, they kill for the joy of killing, how is that not heinous and immoral?

 

[CB Jones]

Why were these animals going extinct in the first place? They weren't naturally becoming extinct because of weather conditions, predation by other animals etc. Taking lives just for fun is just always going to be wrong.
Saying trophy hunters conserve wildlife is strange considering that the wildlife was going extinct because of trophy hunters in the first place.

Were animals going extinct because of Trophy Hunters?

Or were animals going extinct because of a combination of loss of habitat and poachers killing for profit?

 

[Flying Crane]

Were animals going extinct because of Trophy Hunters?

Or were animals going extinct because of a combination of loss of habitat and poachers killing for profit?

It's all part of it. Of course poachers probably have a greater impact, but that is illegal, plain and simple. Trophy hunting may not be illegal, but it is immoral and heinous, and that's why there is debate around it. Some disgusting people want to do it. Other people say, wait a minute, there is a problem here...And the habitat loss is a consequence of human behavior. That's the real issue: humans caused the problem in the first place. Trophy hunters who claim rights based on conservation, have a twisted, bankrupt morality. They are opportunists who twist the conservation reality and use it to justify killing for fun. Special place in hell...

 

[Flying Crane]

And if these practices fail will you be ok with those species going extinct?

Ok, this is a bizarre, twisted form of logic..

 

[Xue Sheng]

OK, time for a musical interlude....I honestly have no idea why, unless its the bang bang line...other than that I have no clue....but this thread is causing this song to run in my demented little noggin

OK, I'll go now