quote:

If you want an argument about why someone shouldn’t shoot a large number of animals, my only ethical argument is not very realistic but runs along the line of the rich guy shooting large numbers is depriving the people of more modest means the opportunity to participate by buying up the quota and thus raising the cost to participate.

That’s an ethical argument that has the flaw that what keeps game around is the value the market gives it.

Two good opposing arguments.

Dogcat is just asking rhetorical question and good one at that and some of you pile up on him
Why?
And I totally get his point
Never a stupid question, only stupid answer

Dogcat and I have often disagreed but his arguments have never lacked logic.
This is a very personal philosophical question deserving some thought, rather than a simple "f... off" reaction.
Call me a Karen or holier than thou, or any of the more abusive terms I have been called on this forum but there are many things which are perfectly legal which I would now be ashamed to admit to, despite having done many such things in my youth.
When I was a culler for the New Zealand Forest Service I just took the tails from the deer I shot and left the meat to rot as I was ordered to. I couldn't stomach doing that now.
In this social media age it is perceptions which count not logic or common sense. If we want our grandchildren to enjoy hunting in Africa we must manage our image as hunters. While Saeed is in a position to tell anyone in the UAE to f.. off if they don't like his opinions, most of us live in democracies where hunters are a tiny minority and anti-hunting rhetoric is a certain vote winner.
Telling an audience of non-hunters that you shot a tuskless cow elephant and the meat fed a village will not create too much antagonism. Boasting that you shot a whole heap of elephants and buffalo on one hunt, no matter how legal or ethical the hunt will just piss people off.
They all have a vote and they outnumber those of us who hunt in Africa by 10,000 to one.
If you want a real adventure which is perfectly legal and great fun and don't care about the long-term consequences try having an affair with your wife's sister but don't ruin our grandchildrens hunting opportunities by killing huge numbers of tuskers on one hunt.

quote:

When I was a culler for the New Zealand Forest Service I just took the tails from the deer I shot and left the meat to rot as I was ordered to. I couldn't stomach doing that now.

Boasting that you shot a whole heap of elephants and buffalo on one hunt, no matter how legal or ethical the hunt will just piss people off.

Pom, By your own admittance, you were ordered by the department to leave the carcasses to rot.
Why? ... probably due to uneconomical costs in retrieving and disposing them in a beneficial manner as you very likely do not have the same village systems present of rural Africa in your neck of the woods.

As you and many others have gleaned from the numerous hunting reports, most but not all African hunting destinations supply the local villages with as much meat as possible as the practice falls within the conservation framework where as many people as logistics allow, benefit from a national heritage.

When a quota has been set, those animals are going to be eliminated, one way or the other and quite frankly, who does the job is quite irrelevant. The outfitter would prefer (I would imagine) to get it over and done with in the shortest time frame as possible regardless if it consists in a group of hunters or a single individual.

I guess a group of hunters splitting the quota among themselves is considered OK but not for a single individual.

WHY? ... Is that because he would be considered a bloodthirsty, insensitive individual who simply lusts for the pleasure of killing? Possibly and possibly not and what difference would that make in the eyes of someone who is anyway against the killing of wildlife?

You also have those repeat hunters who will visit African hunting destinations year after year hunting the same animals in multiple numbers each time; some will spend several months (or more) of the year hunting different destinations. Is it lust or lore?

Maybe such a person wants to experience the culling effect of wildlife and in particular, dangerous game; you would also need to be a shrink and interview that person in order to gain a better perspective.

I remember a time when one of these African states conducted an Elephant cull from helicopters where these pachyderms (young, old, male/female/calves) were unceremoniously dispatched by the hundreds.
Their carcasses were however retrieved by specialized butchering teams that processed the meat for consumption to villages, pet food, tanneries and the bones for fertilizer.

Oh yes there was hue and cry and gnashing of teeth over that "sortie" and it is possible that in preventing such a slaughter again on that scale, cull numbers have been "watered" down to staggered and smaller culls which will eventually attain the desired number as we witness in the current era through quotas offered to sport hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by the Pom:
Dogcat and I have often disagreed but his arguments have never lacked logic.
This is a very personal philosophical question deserving some thought, rather than a simple "f... off" reaction.
Call me a Karen or holier than thou, or any of the more abusive terms I have been called on this forum but there are many things which are perfectly legal which I would now be ashamed to admit to, despite having done many such things in my youth.
When I was a culler for the New Zealand Forest Service I just took the tails from the deer I shot and left the meat to rot as I was ordered to. I couldn't stomach doing that now.
In this social media age it is perceptions which count not logic or common sense. If we want our grandchildren to enjoy hunting in Africa we must manage our image as hunters. While Saeed is in a position to tell anyone in the UAE to f.. off if they don't like his opinions, most of us live in democracies where hunters are a tiny minority and anti-hunting rhetoric is a certain vote winner.
Telling an audience of non-hunters that you shot a tuskless cow elephant and the meat fed a village will not create too much antagonism. Boasting that you shot a whole heap of elephants and buffalo on one hunt, no matter how legal or ethical the hunt will just piss people off.
They all have a vote and they outnumber those of us who hunt in Africa by 10,000 to one.
If you want a real adventure which is perfectly legal and great fun and don't care about the long-term consequences try having an affair with your wife's sister but don't ruin our grandchildrens hunting opportunities by killing huge numbers of tuskers on one hunt.

. . . good post.

quote:

Originally posted by the Pom:
Dogcat and I have often disagreed but his arguments have never lacked logic.
This is a very personal philosophical question deserving some thought, rather than a simple "f... off" reaction.
Call me a Karen or holier than thou, or any of the more abusive terms I have been called on this forum but there are many things which are perfectly legal which I would now be ashamed to admit to, despite having done many such things in my youth.
When I was a culler for the New Zealand Forest Service I just took the tails from the deer I shot and left the meat to rot as I was ordered to. I couldn't stomach doing that now.
In this social media age it is perceptions which count not logic or common sense. If we want our grandchildren to enjoy hunting in Africa we must manage our image as hunters. While Saeed is in a position to tell anyone in the UAE to f.. off if they don't like his opinions, most of us live in democracies where hunters are a tiny minority and anti-hunting rhetoric is a certain vote winner.
Telling an audience of non-hunters that you shot a tuskless cow elephant and the meat fed a village will not create too much antagonism. Boasting that you shot a whole heap of elephants and buffalo on one hunt, no matter how legal or ethical the hunt will just piss people off.
They all have a vote and they outnumber those of us who hunt in Africa by 10,000 to one.
If you want a real adventure which is perfectly legal and great fun and don't care about the long-term consequences try having an affair with your wife's sister but don't ruin our grandchildrens hunting opportunities by killing huge numbers of tuskers on one hunt.

Most things hunters do piss people off.

Who cares??

I certainly don’t!

I don’t waste my time telling people off for doing things I don’t like, and there are plenty of things I see that I certainly do not like!

So I will continue to do what I like, and those who do object, can bloody well jump off BURJ Khalifa!

The highest tower in the world today!

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
I get it. Legal is legal and quota is quota…
No laws are broken, no one gets judged…
But is it right? Is it morally “ok”?

dogcat,

Is this any different than going out and shooting 1,000+ prairie dogs in a day.

I used to do this every weekend and it never got old.

The ranchers encouraged it, as a prairie dog will eat a 1 1/2 ton of grass a year.

is this any different than shooting quota of elephant or cape buffalo?

The land can only carry so many animals and when you have an abundance of animals they need to be reduced.

The question was raised “Why does someone do this?” and then add in the unstated “should you be able to?”

I think that it is pretty obvious that the reason why is going to be very much dependent on the individual. It is possible that some few might be a sociopathic need to kill, but you need to actually get in to your personal responses and be honest with yourself to find your rationale.

Most will feel that it is a matter of enjoyment and have varying reasons for it that make sense to them.

While I can appreciate the desire to look at it and try to understand yourself better, you start getting in a slippery slope when you try and understand others.

I think that the majority of the folks participating in this thread would be considered excessive by many (certainly including myself in that) and there are some that would consider even one game animal killed a sign of maladjustment (we usually refer to them as anti’s).

I agree with Saeed that trying to use these kinds of discussions internally is playing into the anti’s hands in that you are trying to condemn someone else for activity that you do yourself at a lower rate.

When it comes down to it, most everyone has issues with excess, but everyone has a different idea what excess means.

The western world being what it is, I agree that waving your high number bags will cause repercussions in the democratic world.

I personally have big issues with government policy where they hire a culling done, but do not allow hunting. The professional culler is getting paid by me for something that I can and would do myself if allowed to… and as a group hunters would likely do a better job of it. (Most cullers actually hunt on their own as well, so…)

The ethics are a juxtaposition of society and individual beliefs.

The law is a common practice of what is minimum expectation.

So while I might disagree with what an individual does, I try to avoid making ethics arguments because it is so individual, and frankly I like having freedom to choose what I do, within my own private ethics.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana338:

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
I get it. Legal is legal and quota is quota…
No laws are broken, no one gets judged…
But is it right? Is it morally “ok”?

dogcat,

Is this any different than going out and shooting 1,000+ prairie dogs in a day.

I used to do this every weekend and it never got old.

The ranchers encouraged it, as a prairie dog will eat a 1 1/2 ton of grass a year.

is this any different than shooting quota of elephant or cape buffalo?

The land can only carry so many animals and when you have an abundance of animals they need to be reduced.

Problem with people like dogcat is they like to tell people what they should and shouldn’t do!

Boils down do priceless jealousy!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana338:

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
I get it. Legal is legal and quota is quota…
No laws are broken, no one gets judged…
But is it right? Is it morally “ok”?

dogcat,

Is this any different than going out and shooting 1,000+ prairie dogs in a day.

I used to do this every weekend and it never got old.

The ranchers encouraged it, as a prairie dog will eat a 1 1/2 ton of grass a year.

is this any different than shooting quota of elephant or cape buffalo?

The land can only carry so many animals and when you have an abundance of animals they need to be reduced.

Problem with people like dogcat is they like to tell people what they should and shouldn’t do!

Boils down do priceless jealousy!

Well, seems I threw my pearls before the swine on this.

Saeed - I did not and do not pretend to tell you or anyone here what to do or not to do. I merely posed a question and logical thoughts. You seem to think I care about you personally or what you do. I do not.

As to anyone else here, please show me where I told someone what to do or not to do...

I am not sure what priceless jealousy is, but I feel no jealousy for anyone here. I can afford do to as I wish and as I choose, so I fail to see "jealously" or even envy or lust or whatever word you choose....


If you perceive that you are the target here, you are not... I have no issue with what you do or how you do it. I merely added to this thread a couple of questions that seem to have struck a cord.

I guess I wouldn't be held in high esteem. When I go hog hunting in Texas. My goal is to kill as many as I possibly can with no regrets and it's just raw killing. Granted, call it a double standard but that thinking doesn't apply to other game on quota or license.
Just saying....

A hunter goes hunting, shoots animals on legal quota.

Gets accused of just killing for the sake of killing.

Pure, unadulterated jealousy!

Some people just cannot help themselves!

Shows their true character!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Problem with people like dogcat

I don't see any problems with dogcat.

Saeed, you and I are in similar circumstances in that nothing we do while hunting will influence our lives. You can have the safaris you do, shoot lots of game and no amount of public acrimony will influence you in the slightest. I an the same. True, I am a Serf, a worker bee, an army ant while you are royalty, but I have shot wolves and Grizzlies, antelope and giraffe and there's no amount of acrimony aimed at me for my deeds that will matter to me at all.

For others, the public acrimony matters quite a bit. Jines doesn't post hunting g reports anymore, isn't that unfortunate? Doc Lane does not, nor does Mshy or Jtex. That's a bummer I think. You and I might be impervious, but most of our other friends here are not. That's not a choice they made, its a choice the "Information Age " made for them and we are all the poorer.

It’s all killing, just how you approach it.

We cull pigs, rabbits, roo’s etc., what’s the difference between an elephant and a pig?

About six tonnes……

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:

quote:

If you want an argument about why someone shouldn’t shoot a large number of animals, my only ethical argument is not very realistic but runs along the line of the rich guy shooting large numbers is depriving the people of more modest means the opportunity to participate by buying up the quota and thus raising the cost to participate.

That’s an ethical argument that has the flaw that what keeps game around is the value the market gives it.

Two good opposing arguments.

That's a classic conservation dilemma. Market value funds wildlife management, but equitable access matters too. Sustainable hunting needs both.

quote:

Originally posted by Charlie64:


I would say, if it is legal and you are ok with it then go for it. If it`s not your thing then you don`t do it. Simple.

.

Bought sums it up.

I would say it is just killing when you do it to get some sci award.

But even then I have no problem with it as hunting is killing in the end Hell I wish I had the money to do a hunt like that.

The whole concept of life revolves around killing.