Let's flip the question. Because I think game departments, governments, and conservation scientists take us for granted because we have always been there and are fighting to stay.

But what if the hunters stopped hunting.

Is there a demographic shift going on? Is the trend that trophy hunting is in decline?

So what would happen in Africa if the "great white hunter" decided not to.

Myself I think it would be catastrophic for the animals and in 30 years or less you would see all southern African countries look and awful lot like Kenya.

And you wouldn't hear a peep from the anti hunters. They would just deny all responsibility.

Thoughts?

John, I completely agree w/ your idea and rational thought process. The problem that WE have is that the antis do NOT look at it in a rational manner. It's just like the "idea" that socialism is some grand utopian way of life. They refuse to understand or admit that in reality, it just does not work. Unfortunately, it will have to fail completely b/4 some of them will admit they were wrong. The rest will just blame someone else.

When hunting is gone and the only animals left are in parks and zoos, the antis will still be sending out letters to try and raise money to support what is left, never admitting that the hunters were the one supporting wildlife all along

As I see it the difference between antis and us is that they are more interested in the individual animal while we are more interested in the long term population health.

465H&H

All true. How do I quantify it?

We need to continue hunting - period, and do all we can to maintain the priviledge. We must also increase the anti anti-hunter sentiment. Unfortunately the anti-hunters are the ignorant liberalists, not man enough to accept failure on their behalf, and mostly not worth the oxygen they breathe.

Agreed but if I was to write an essay on the subject it would help to have some real and verifiable numbers.

Any help?

I have never believed that anti hunting types really have any interest or concern for wild life. It's the fact that hunters carry guns that has them riled up. It's another part of a determination to disarm everyone (and the evidence of "massacres", as the media calls them, where a single shooter runs amok because of an unarmed group, means nothing to them)

You are absolutely right. I spend some time debating these people on social networking sites. They specifically do not like that people "enjoy" the process of hunting.

In some cases they would prefer that an animal goes extinct instead of allowing it to be sport hunted.
They don't seem to have a problem with animal control culling. It is just the sport hunters. No joy allowed.

JohnHunt:

I read your comment about your experience on network sites about people who had no problems with "animal culling". I guess they really mean that they want animals like rats eliminated (as interfering with their immediate personal comfort) -because I am quite sure that they would never consent to "culling" of ,say, elephants, in Africa. The whole problem with these people is that they don't remotely understand how "Nature" (what they always prattle about)really operates.

I don't meet many anti hunters. 22 years in the Alaska bush and now living in rural Wyoming I probably have been more insulated than most.

What antis I've met are as decribed. Their objection is to the fact that you kill animals for "sport". If their thought process even goes beyond that I think it is mostly "If you do not shoot the animals they will be fine" Of course that is BS but I think the majority of antis give the subject no more thought than that.

Going back to the original subject if we did not hunt I think wildlife would collapse in Africa very quickly. It simply would have no value other than food in any other place other than parks. Wholesale market hunting for the bush meat trade, exploding human population with expanding agricalture and domestic animal numbers would signal the end.

Mark

John,
If you google Pittman Robertson it will give you a fair amount of info on the millions (billions?) of dollars that have been raised voluntarily BY HUNTERS for the specific purpose of preserving wildlife. PETA doesn't even come close.