Stone - here's an online preview of the book:

http://books.google.com/books?...c=frontcover#PPP1,M1

I read, perhaps incorrectly, the same paragraph to state that BOTH are acceptable in his opinion ("In addition…"), and that the old ousted male (again, what I was trying to refer to originally, a bull that was not breeding for whatever reason, not strictly biological) can be justified in a lesser population density, which sure makes overall selection of an area and specific bull easier. For this program to fly, my assumption is that they are shooting known target bulls, that are in fact "old post-reproductive males that have been pushed out of their territory". From a non-biological (emotional) perspective, I'd feel much better about shooting an old bull, I think they make better trophies, and if selected correctly a better option even if a "mature bull" can be justified in a given population, as the net would be one dead black rhino in a given period of time, versus two (one by "old age", the other by bullet!).

Back to the animal...just an awesome specimen. A beautiful trophy. I’m sure it was a great hunt too.

quote:

Originally posted by ravenr:
the line of corrections wasn't as long as i thought it would be and the responses civil.
i admit to not considering that the animal was past breeding age and its only use would be to generate income to further the rest of the populations.
thanks for the enlightment
they are magnificent animals and perhaps that stirred my heart before i got my brain in gear.

AFter reading your first post and objections, I found your final reply was more civil than I would have expected. Well done.

Here's to being polite to one another.

quote:

Now let's think again about the issue of being "past breeding age". Yes, there are males that no longer breed, but it is not because the can't, but rather because the competition is too strong.

I know that we ccan't always extrapolate but in the equidae family (horses) there is a "lot" of evidence that stallions become sterile but still have the ability to copulate and the desire long before they die of old age. Many stallions become poor breeders in there late teenage years and become sterile by 25. They may live to be 30.

Lane,

I'm sure that's true. But who's going to collect wild rhino semen for a sperm count and viability analysis?

My point is that anti-hunters can blow huge holes in the pretense that hunters are only allowed to take "non-breeding" males. Taking any male from a population where there is a surplus of breeding males is of no consequence to the reproductive capacity of the population, so that is the fact that game managers must hang their hats on when allowing the shooting of a rare or threatened species.

Not sure about the point Lane was trying to make, but, horses and rhinos evolved from the same base ancestor, along with tapirs.

It is highly possible/probable that rhino males, as they age do become less fertile or sterile even.

The biggest fact, the one that several have already mentioned is that by placing a dollar value on these animals, and demonstrating that some folks are willing and able to pay for the priveledge of shooting one of these surplus males, is going to make the efforts being put forth to manage them and increase their numbers, more important to more people.

I am sure this will sound really stupid to many folks on here, but during my career as a zoo keeper, I found out something that I take to be a fact of normal human thinking if you will.

The average human, when being told an animal, a painting, whatever is Priceless, and that no monetary value can be placed upon it, many times equate that with being WORTHLESS.

Some people in this world only understand the monetary value of things and if a monetary value can not be determined they feel it is of no value.

By placing an actual monetary value on in this case surplus male rhinos, and showing how that money equates into the amount of good it will do the economy, goes a long way toward getting folks interested in managing rhinos so that there will be more chances in the future for such animals to be available for hunters willing to foot the bill.

That economic stimulus, is not just in the area where the animal will be hunted, but all areas that are involved in putting the hunt together, travel expenses getting from the hunters home to the area, accommodations during and after the trip, firearms/ammunition/clothing purchases related to doing the hunt, taxidermy fees, and the list goes on.

I could be way off base on this, but starting with the $180,000 US, if I am reading correctly and that was what the hunter paid for the chance at this animal, then my estimate is that by the time all is said and done and that animal is in the hunters trophy room, the hunter is going to have put between $225,000.00 to $250,000.00 total into the worlds economy all for one surplus rhino.

How many poached rhinos does it take to equal that? JMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

Taking any male from a population where there is a surplus of breeding males is of no consequence

Stonecreek, have you been talking to my ex wife?

quote:

Not sure about the point Lane was trying to make

The point I was trying to make is that their is some science to support the fact that older males are reproductivly inefficient at best and that there territories are are probably best reoccupied by younger reproductively more efficient males ideally of genetic diversity.

Crazyhorse- A very well thought out and well written post. If you could keep all your posts to this standard you may not be thought of as such a borish old fart.

quote:

Crazyhorse- A very well thought out and well written post. If you could keep all your posts to this standard you may not be thought of as such a borish old fart.

Thank You for that thought.

Now if I could just get the point across, that contrary to many folks ideas/thoughts on the matter on the various forums around the world, emotionless words displayed on a computer screen, are just that and nothing more.

I see way too many folks passing judgement on other people, because of the words they use, instead of trying to understand the meaning the person is trying to convey.

We are all individuals, the way our parents raised us, the type school we attended, the way we have interacted with family/friends/co-workers our individual goals in life, all combine to influence how we respond to various topics on the forums.

Some folks are excellent wordsmiths, some are not.

To me the act of expressing my opinion on a subject, is dictated by my attitude/feelings toward and knowledge of the subject.

My intentions are never to offend any one, but since I have no guideline to go by, other than stating how I preceive the subject at hand, to many folks I come across wrong, not possibly with the thought I am trying to convey, but the manner or choice of wording I use.

The only thing I can attribute that to, is that for the majority of my 58 years, I have spent more time either alone, or in the company of animals, than I have around humans, and no matter how hard I work at it, I have found over the years, and especially over the last 5 years or so that I have been participating on Internet Forums, is that no matter how well or how crudely/borishly I state an opinion on any given subject, there will always be people that will find something wrong with the way I expressed that opinion, and give themselves a reason to judge me for that opinion.

Just my thoughts on that subject.