Bloody hypocrites!

Everyone and his dog was having a go at the hunter who shot "cecil".

Now, the silence is DEAFENING!!

Does anyone know what the word HYPOCRACY means??

Do, I don't suppose they do, living the bullshit state of PC!

Saeed:
I've asked this of you in the past when you make few passing comments on poaching and poisoning elephants but make hundreds against the Tanzania PH, MS. I would hope your anger would be directed towards poachers and the antis rather than toward a fellow PH and hunter.
Cal

Anyone who could do that to an animal should be summarily hung by a wire snare or shot. I'd be more than happy to carry out either.

From an anti-hunter's perspective, the major differences between poaching and trophy hunting are as follows:

(1) perpetrator isn't involved in either trophy poaching or canned poaching (vs. trophy hunting or canned hunting),
(2) perpetrator is probably a poor black South African or Mozambican (vs. a rich white American),
(3) perpetrator didn't feel joy when he set the snare (whereas a trophy hunter feels joy when he pulls the rifle's trigger),
(4) perpetrator is perceived as attempting to feed and/or financially support his family (vs. hunting for a hobby),
(5) perpetrator will not receive an award for killing the biggest or most trophy animals,
(6) perpetrator doesn't post trophy photos on social media, and
(7) Pieter K and Johnny R don't experience increased donations when they post photos of poached lion (vs. trophy hunted lion) on their social media.

Hey, please don't shoot the messenger! I am just sharing the anti-hunter's perspective (based on my many debates with rabid anti-hunters). Almost without exception, the common themes are trophy hunting, canned hunting, rich Americans, joy in taking an animal's life, awards issued by international hunting organizations, photos of trophy hunters posing next to dead animals, etc.

Oh, by the way, our ole friend, Pieter K, has doubled down by playing the "canned lion hunting" card (Bubye Valley Conservancy). Go figure!

Poaching is a two-tier problem. The big leagues are perceived to be the ivory and rhino horn poachers, and as is typical in Africa they are very small cogs in a much bigger wheel. The bushmeat poachers are probably worse in terms of sheer numbers.

Countries like Zimbabwe have hefty penalties for trafficking in ivory or horn - one guy was just sentenced to 35 years hard labor. But what are the motivations? I think it's mostly a "hey Fish and Wildlife, look what we're doing, now lift the ivory import ban" rather than a genuine concern for wildlife. The reason for this, of course, is that corrupt governments are behind or at least involved in the poaching cartels.

Therein lies the real problem; most African governments outraged against poaching would have to direct that outrage against themselves.

Painted with the same brush - no distinction between poachers and hunters.

"Park rangers believe hunters may have laid the snare in the hope of catching smaller animals for food."

It boils down to character and morality, and sadly enough these important traits are disappearing from our self centered society.

I mean, think about it........In the US the liberal democrat party, along with 40-50% of the population think nothing of supporting the murdering of millions of unborn babies every single year (thanks Planned Parenthood), and this practice is endorsed and commended by Hitlery and our bottom feeding POTUS. Given this fact, why would you believe anyone gives a ratsazzz about poached animals?

its called the liberal press

Selective Outrage.
With hunters they see the individual, there are pictures & names.
Poachers are anonymous.
Plus, the color of their skin makes condemnation not pc.

And hardly a whisper about the poisoning of the most photographed lions on the planet - the Marsh Lions of the Mara.

Funny how journalist cannot distinguish between legal hunting and illegal hunting (poaching) I am very sure that the ranger said poaching and not hunting, they know what it is all about. Guess freedom of speech is busy taking the wrong road by misleading the readers.

In the USA the press is mostly liberal and is quick to inflame the public when events fall into the liberal agenda (gun control, animal rights, immigrant plight, etc).

But when truly horrible events occur that support conservative agendas, the press mostly downplays or ignores these events entirely.

BH63

A known and affluent Minnesota dentist is an easy target.

Easier than anonymous and dirt poor African poachers.

Even easier than their anonymous and affluent Chinese masters.

The truth is, there is precious little enforcement against poaching in the third world.

No dent will be made against poaching unless and until the poachers at every level are apprehended, named, prosecuted and imprisoned.

I'm not holding my breath until that happens.

quote:

Originally posted by Jaco Human:
Funny how journalist cannot distinguish between legal hunting and illegal hunting (poaching) I am very sure that the ranger said poaching and not hunting, they know what it is all about. Guess freedom of speech is busy taking the wrong road by misleading the readers.

It is not just the idiots in the media either.

How about the idioms running the governments in the West making their own rules, and ignoring CITES??

quote:

How about the idioms running the governments in the West making their own rules, and ignoring CITES??

You're pissed because they ignore CITES & rightly so.
I am WAAAAAY more pissed because they ignore our constitution & try to diminish our rights as free citizens!

Andrew hit the nail on the head as always. What do we do about the pastoralists poisoning predators, or the poachers poisoning vultures? No one likes my solution -- the only solution.

It doesn't fit their agenda. Plain and simple.

Bowing to the baying masses does not lead to good outcomes. I can think of many examples. That right there is the problem with democracy ... too many ill-informed useful idiots voting. True in the developed countries and especially true in the undeveloped ones. The founders called it mob rule. We bankrupt ourselves trying to impose this silly system on other countries.

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:
From an anti-hunter's perspective, the major differences between poaching and trophy hunting are as follows:

(1) perpetrator isn't involved in either trophy poaching or canned poaching (vs. trophy hunting or canned hunting),
(2) perpetrator is probably a poor black South African or Mozambican (vs. a rich white American),
(3) perpetrator didn't feel joy when he set the snare (whereas a trophy hunter feels joy when he pulls the rifle's trigger),
(4) perpetrator is perceived as attempting to feed and/or financially support his family (vs. hunting for a hobby),
(5) perpetrator will not receive an award for killing the biggest or most trophy animals,
(6) perpetrator doesn't post trophy photos on social media, and
(7) Pieter K and Johnny R don't experience increased donations when they post photos of poached lion (vs. trophy hunted lion) on their social media.

This is spot on. And we should remember/understand this when we comunicate/conduct our sport.

Good Hunting

CF

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Jaco Human:
Funny how journalist cannot distinguish between legal hunting and illegal hunting (poaching) I am very sure that the ranger said poaching and not hunting, they know what it is all about. Guess freedom of speech is busy taking the wrong road by misleading the readers.

It is not just the idiots in the media either.

How about the idioms running the governments in the West making their own rules, and ignoring CITES??

Cannot agree more, Then you also have corrupt countries that are bribed by the antis to vote against hunting. Usually this countries do not have a stake in what is happening in Africa but they have a say. Since CITES allowed NGO's to join them the problems started, they might not have voting rights, but they have lobbying powers and lots of money to bribe corrupt officials.