Hunting endagered species?

[Mike111 0]

In light of the Bonfire thread about the shark, do you think it is acceptable to hunt an endangered species, for whatever reason you may have?

Agreed sometimes population control etc etc means it is necessary, but personally, while knowing and appreciating nature a lot, i absolutely can;t stand people who do this without a reason. Poor farmers starving to death in Africa hunting animals, yes, that is understandable bt in USA?????

Im no tree hugger just care about the world we lvie i nbefore soem selfish fuckers completely whipe out left.

What do you think?

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Agreed sometimes population control etc etc means it is necessary

in that case it wouldn't be an endangered species.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Mike111 0]

Not necessarily, depends on the area- if thre are few of say, X in the world... but too many in one very small habitat where they live where their overpresence upsets the balance of the eco system there... that is different.

But agreed... generally population control doesn;t apply to endangered species.

Im not against hunting, but of endangered species.

[nigel99 625]

Hunting endangered species can be a good thing - as it can be driven by market forces.

If there is demand to hunt an animal, then hunting safaris will protect and encourage the local animal population to ensure supply. Secondly most hunters go for adult male trophies as these normally represent the macho "kill".

Certainly not an expert on the matter just grew up around hunting safaris in Africa where people from the west paid big money for these kinds of opportunities.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[lisamariewillbe 1]

I encourage you to read a book called "eating apes" Its a book on the bush meat trade. Do I think it is okay to hunt endangered species, or threatened species? Yes, I do, if you are native (eskimos, tribes in 3rd world countries ect) this is their way of life, the way they feed and clothe their families. However there is the line that I feel is crossed often and they (natives) will hunt and sell for money to those of us who are a bit higher on Maslows pyramid and who should know better. If in fact the hunted animal is used solely by the people who have for thousands of years depended on these animals for survival then I support it completley. Not to say that I still wouldnt shed a tear when reading of it or watching it on the discovery channel.

Alot of it comes down to education. Often times in third world countries, the natives are not aware of the impact it would be to lose a species and therefore they do not understand the importance of the elephant that tramples their crops, or the gorillas that sell for 500 (about what they recieve as payment for risking their life to kill off one of the most spectacular mammals) . Zoos of the western world actually now have taken a huge focus in education and helping them to see the good in conserving animals as well as their habitats. The rainforests of Guyanna is a prime example. They understand the vast amount of life that is inhabited within the canopy and several zoos support them in many ways and it was through that support that Guyanna and its natives learned about conservation. The zoos taught the children through toys, books and play and in turn the children taught their parents.

It doesnt stop with others that are in less fortunate curcumstances then us. It starts at home. In our own territory... with our own children. The animals that are on the SSPs lists today might be extinct tomorrow. The animals that are not on the list today will be if we dont take accountibility for the actions or lack of actions of yesterday.

I can not imagine a world without the variety of animals we have. It makes me sad to think of all the animals I will never see. Then again Im one of the few who will sit and stare at one enclosure for hours, just fasinated.

I have for years been a member of the AZA (www.aza.org) through them, many animal numbers are on the rise. Not only are we supporting an organzation that spends its money on our future and the future survival of wild animals , but as a member you get into zoos and aquariums (on the AZA lists, which most U.S.A. zoos are , and if it is not I would never support them with a entrance fee) for either free or very little cost after your membership fee (which varies depending on which zoo you recieve your membership through).

Okay I have gone off on a tangent but hey Im sitting at home, sick as a dog and am a zoology major. So there ya have it, my answer.

Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this
Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this

[Richards 0]

We should not hunt endangered species.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Michele 1]

Absolutely not. Once an animal is placed on the vulnerable list, I think that any hunting should be harshly punished. Yes, even those who do it as a tradition...because if the animal disappears, they won't have the tradition anyway!

Certain animals traditionally hunted, such as whales, have a long gestation period and in the humpback population, records show that there is a 66% chance of survival of the calf once it's born. That means 1 out of 3 die. Which means that the population will grow very, very slowly. It takes two to have a baby. Two of three survive. One female can have several calves over time, but will it be enough to replace her and the father, and still grow the population one more so there is growth rather than stasis? The cycle is a hard, hard one to break, and will take decades to repopulate from the early 19th century hunting, but it's happening.

Same thing with, say, Great Whites. It is unknown how long the gestation is, and it is also unknown it's survival rate of live young. Because of that, and because the repopulation has not occurred *(although there might be other reasons for that, such as the solitary aspect of the animal makes it hard to know for sure, et cetera), killing them - especially just for fins - makes it a potential issue. Once you take out the apex predators, there will be enormous repercussions down the line...

Same with rhinos, tigers (especially Sumatran), and elephants. Hunting is the primary reason for extinction...and thus the creation of vulnerable/threatened/endangered lists. And they should be absolutely honored and respected.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Mike111 0]

Very well said, i totally agree1.

[Richards 0]

I think you may have misunderstood me. I was not asking if we should, I was just stating that we shouldn't. I did not however support my position like you did. Nonetheless, I agree with you 100%.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Michele 1]

Morning, Richards. I didn't think you were suggesting we should...I just hit your post to reply to as it was the last in the line. Sorry if you thought I was bonking you. Not in the least.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Skyrad 0]

I belive a partial yes, for reasons of conservation. ie: Population control. Also if some big hairy german or some wanabe American dentist 'big game hunter' is willing to pay to shoot a animal in a game farm then that money can be put to good use in conservation and increasing stock in protected areas. It may sound sick but thats the world we live in.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Michele 1]

Quote

for reasons of conservation. ie: Population control

I don't think there's such an issue with overpopulation vis-a-vis threatened, vulnerable, and endangered species.

As for big game "trophy" hunting, I think that is atrocious as well. Hunt plentiful species for food? Sure...but not to just say "yeah, I rock! I killed that Grizzly from 400 yards away with a sniper rifle...ain't I grand!!!". And I don't care what nationality the "trophy" hunters are; it's unnecessary, creates an imbalance in the local environment, and I'd much rather see the breeding target those species on the edge of extinction.

Just my views though...

ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[billvon 3,120]

> I belive a partial yes, for reasons of conservation. ie: Population control.

Generally, species that are endangered are endangered because their numbers are too low, not too high. About the only valid reason for hunting such animals is to destroy one that's a threat to local people, or is diseased and is a threat to the rest of the herd.

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

Morning, Richards. I didn't think you were suggesting we should...I just hit your post to reply to as it was the last in the line. Sorry if you thought I was bonking you. Not in the least.

Ciels-
Michele

Cheers,

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[dorbie 0]

Before deciding to hunt an endangered species, one critical question must be asked. How good does it taste?

[Sockpuppet 0]

Quote

Before deciding to hunt an endangered species, one critical question must be asked. How good does it taste?

Well its about to be flame grilled based on that response

------
Two of the three voices in my head agree with you. It might actually be unanimous but voice three only speaks Welsh.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Also if some big hairy german or some wanabe American dentist 'big game hunter' is willing to pay to shoot a animal in a game farm

I thought only the Brits hunted on a closed 'preserve' where they drive him out in an air conditioned carriage, then the 'hunt' leader would then indicate the drugged animal be released. The 'hunt' leader would then shoot it once it reach the end of its tether, and, if the Brit 'hunter' chose to, he could put down his tea and go pose next to his 'prize' for photos (as long as it's not too dry or wet outside of the 'carriage'.

What's really nice, is the animal can be stuffed and hung on the Brit's wall before he even gets home.

Sometime, the 'hunter' doesn't even have to leave home at all. It's much less stressful.

These stereotypes are fun.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

I belive a partial yes, for reasons of conservation. ie: Population control. Also if some big hairy german or some wanabe American dentist 'big game hunter' is willing to pay to shoot a animal in a game farm then that money can be put to good use in conservation and increasing stock in protected areas. It may sound sick but thats the world we live in.

Hey now, J.!! Those big Germans are not hairy, they are fat, bald and surely have short dicks. I personally know 2 of these "hunters" paying to kill dispensable wonderful wolves in a hedged area in Germany. Same ppl shot lions in Africa (from the jeep, of course!) which were driven just in front of their muzzles But there are others, too: My French ex-brother-in-law paid a huge amount to kill a polar bear. I'd love to know where that money drained away .

Principally, I think you are right. There are too many places on earth which really have to "sell" their best on assets, their animals.

C'est la vie.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[steve1 5]

No endangered species can be legally hunted in America. Wolves and Grizzlies may be delisted soon in Montana. If that happens they might be hunted on a very limited basis to keep their numbers in check.

Wolves have made a tremendous come back. They were virtually extinct not many years ago. Now there are hundreds in Western Montana. Wolves are now moving to the Eastern part of the state.

This would be great, if there were no people, livestock, and pets. There lies the problem.
A single wolf went through a flock of sheep recently, here in Eastern Montana. It killed and crippled nearly every animal in the flock of about 35. Most of the crippled animals had to be destroyed. So, this particular wolf is being hunted hard, by a few Government hunters and trappers.

The hunting of elephants in Africa is now legal in some places. I see nothing wrong with this, if elephant numbers grow too large for a particular area. Of course it would need to be closely regulated. The money from a rich hunter can go to feed a lot of hungry mouths over there....Steve1

[cloudseeker2001 0]

I think some animals that are doing a little too well in an area should be hunted if over population is a problem....A few people mentioned bears....if bears over populate, they will do very nasty things to each other....unless of course you are a fan of Tim Treadwell! He had to learn the lesson of a very pissed off bear.......

I personally do not care for the trophy hunter. I know a guy who has a huge collection of probably 30 big game animals from all over the world and they are kept in a museum type viewing area, but I just cannot justify it.

I was on a trek through the Gila Wilderness a few weeks ago to see moutain lions and bears, but did not see a single one. And after seven days and 26 miles of hiking, I walk into a country store and tell the woman of my adventures-she tells me if I want to see big cats, set up my tent in her yard because every night she has at least three lions on her deck laying around like house cats!

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"