I saw an advertisement for a film called “Trophy” and thought I would share. The film is by CNN Films (yes CNN) and shows January 14th at 9pm.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPPlH_yKgr4&w=560&h=315]
Trophy Hunting
I saw an advertisement for a film called “Trophy” and thought I would share. The film is by CNN Films (yes CNN) and shows January 14th at 9pm.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPPlH_yKgr4&w=560&h=315]
If CNN is against it, it must be good, right?
Says who? Since I haven’t seen the film yet, I will be hoping for a unique/detailed look at both sides of the issue.
you’re looking in a place that that is never found.
What? Soooo, closed mind?
I’m expecting a hatchet job with no understanding of population management and hunting.
The first example I think of is the destruction of confiscated illegal ivory.
Destruction, instead of auctioning it off on the open market. WTF?
The sales could fill a need, bring the price down, and fund conservation and policing.
I would expect TBPers to at least be open minded.
we are open minded about facts and evidence , neither of which penetrates the fog of agenda at the Corupt News Network . surely you are trolling us.
Surely you’re an idiot. No trolling. Don’t watch it if you don’t want to.
Only elephants should wear ivory. There’s no “need” for ivory elsewhere. That’s a market that needs to be killed.
well go to china and kill it. then go to Vietnam and kill the demand for rhino horns and throughout Asia and kill the demand for tiger bones . The people who make this sort of blatantly bias and lying show know this .
They don’t really care about animals , they hate American hunters.
If it’s true that hunting is not the main contributor to true conservation. Then tell me why the scum that reintroduced wolves and grizzlies in the lower 48, as if there were none here already, used “hunting dollars” to do it and monitor their successful reintroduction? And all over the world for that matter.
If conservation was done their way all these animals would be extinct already. Because they are only willing to spend other people’s money to their ends. If it came out of their own pockets there would be none to spend. They are not conservationists. They are gaia worshippers. And like all religions that reject the true God, Jesus Christ, all their efforts ultimately cause only harm to it’s adherents and their so called beneficiaries.
Blessings:-}
Right … “if it’s true” … a myth perpetuated by the hunting crowd. Killing to conserve is counterintuive on its face.
You’ve got it backwards. We trapped out the wolves – partly to protect ranching and livestock interests, and partly to protect humans. However, removing the apex predator from an ecosystem brings the need to replace that apex predator – to hunt deer and so on, or let them boom / bust themselves as resources allow. Wolves kept the deer / wild sheep / other populations under control.
But urban sissified Sierra-Club types hate both the idea of hunting and the private ownership of firearms. Re-introduction of wolves was necessary to keep people from doing either, and to break the “privileged” lifestyle of rural men teaching their children how / where / why to hunt, so that the Sierra Club types could feed safe on their bi-annual treks through the wilderness.
YOU don’t have to hunt, and we’d all probably feel / be safer if you don’t. But for you to choose that OTHERS should not hunt – simply because YOU say so – is the peak of collectivist nonsense that dishonors the human race – no free men making free choices to hunt or not, just because YOU think you know better.
Take that shit and shove it.
How would you explain the success of livestock? We wouldn’t have the stocks of cattle, swine , goats, sheep and poultry we have today were it not for our consumption of them. In fact it could be argued that the most successful large mammal species on Earth are a direct result of human harvesting. If I’m mistaken I’m open to correction.
Once more for those who haven’t figured this out yet.
Every living thing on Earth requires the death of another living thing as sustenance. It’s a closed system, you can’t change that fact. 99.9% of every species that has ever lived are currently extinct. No matter how much you might wish to protect a species of animal, there simply aren’t enough human beings nor resources to prevent other determined species- mankind included- from doing their thing per axiom #1 above. And in the course of history no effort on our end will prevent their statistical chances of becoming extinct.
So a lion died-so what. It’s not like they’re on the endangered species list. I’m sure the villages who actually have to deal with this dangerous beast on a day to day basis, threatening their lives and destroying their livestock, won’t miss it. And the money from these hunts IS the main economic livelihood that many of these small, middle of nowhere villages depend on. Animals are great, I would never want any species to go extinct, BUT people come first.
The most dangerous beast on the planet, dude, is Man. If your caveman mentality has a “people first” attitude, there won’t be any freakin’ wildlife left on the planet. Pull your head out of your ass. Multiply your ignorance by the number of other folks who are equally ignorant and that’s why we’ve lost 58 percent of wildlife in just 40 years.
OK monica, here’s the situation here in Idaho. The wolves moved into the mountains and killed all or most of the elk calves and cows. Within 5 years you could not find an elk in the mountains or if you did, they were in a Big group being followed by a pack of wolves. Where did the rest of the elk go? The survivors moved down into the valley where we live. We had 4 come through our back yard this morning. They want to escape the wolves , too. So now the habitat(browse) is all chewed to the ground and they are being fed by the local ranchers. Fish & Game have increased tags for hunting cows here to minimize further habitat loss. If they didn’t, the elk (and deer) would starve themselves AND the ranchers out of business. So hunters do eat a few elk. This is not trophy hunting but there are a few trophies taken. I believe we should be hunting with primitive weapons to level the playing field. I use a bow and arrows. Have you ever been up close to a bull elk? They are BIG and smart.
You are correct, we have WAY too many humans on this planet so that is the place to begin with conservation. No immigration and ZPG!
dudette , you have school tomorrow , then after school go to Asia and fix the animal parts trade. Get that done, Then we will be more inclined to listen to your wisdom .
Yes Monica. Man is the most dangerous animal on the planet. So what. The fact that you don’t have the balls to hunt does not mean that you have been granted through divine decree the right to prohibit others from hunting.
Trophy hunting is an abomination. Hunt what you eat and eat what you kill.
For land trophies use a camera, for water prey, catch, camera and release so that they are there for others.
If you are not going to eat it don’t kill it.
[img
[/img]
Monica, how do you feel about this trophy hunt?
Oboy!! Habitat will only sustain so many animals per year. Anyone that gets paid to furnish trophy animals is smart enough not to kill off next year’s revenue. Simple economics! Trophy hunters spend a lot of time and effort looking for an acceptable animal, therefore wanton waste is not in their vocabulary. Senseless slaughter has nothing to do with the people that pass up a lot of animals for the right mature (old) animal.
58% of wildlife in 40 years??? What in the world would these figures have anything to do with legal Neanderthals practicing proper game management. We pay taxes on ammunition for what!! To insure game animals and habitat for future generations. Ducks Unlimited, wild turkey federation, and whitetail forever are just some of many to thank for plentiful wildlife. We have many agencies that keep track of wildlife, habitat,numbers, and harvest data, let alone keep track of wildlife disease.
Some people think just because someone has a gun, they are responsible for killing everything in sight. (Too much Disney).
If you want to know where the wildlife is going, look at habitat reduction, look at cats. Cats eat an average of 2.6 game animals per week. That was based on the 60 million cats in the U.S. that study was about a decade back. That is not counting songbirds, small rodents, amphibians and reptiles. People who know nothing about game management should not dictate policy. As for eating everything, would you rather see fur being worn, or just another roadkill?
I’d rather have less people.
If something is not done to help Africa control its population, this is all moot. there won’t be so much as a gopher left there in 50 years. In 1950 Africa had 250 Mil people hunting there was common and game populations stable. now Africa has 1,250 million people, and there is very little hunting . there’s dammed little habitat and game left . By 2075 they will have 3,000 million people and they won’t be anything at all left.
I’m sure the virtue signaling and moral preening about how much you “care” and “those Bad American men are ruining the world” makes you feel good .
Tigers are on the brink of extinction for all the same reasons as African game is . commercial poaching and habitat loss. Hunting of tigers has been banned in all of asia for 50 years. so It couldn’t be Sport hunting now could it .
In all those words, you said one thing I’m on board with….less people.