Sinners121
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 251
- Reaction score
- 4
Sinners121, my issue is not with ranching or breeding for trophy hunting (even though I personally don't agree with the ethics of it), it is when people use the conservation bandwagon as a false facade.
My examples of the elephants and lions was more to illustrate the possible snowball effect that can occur even though common mindset simply views it as one individual out of a population.
I do however disagree with some of your statements, Lions generally mature at around 3.5 to 4 years of age they do not usually have the strength to overtake a pride at this age though. Their longevity is 10-14 years and the older they are the more conspecific fights they engage in resulting in scars or more serious visible injuries. Trophy hunters do want the BIG guys but they also want the animals in pristine condition. So it is extremely realistic to expect the most sought after lions are in the 6-9 year old age bracket as they are at their fittest, big and strong with less fights over protecting a pride so they are the pinnacle of what a male lion should look like in it's prime. At 8 years of age the most likely best possible scenario is that male was able to take over a pride at 5 years of age, he has therefore sired 3 maybe 4 generations of cubs at best. Once he is removed and a new male takes over the cubs and adolescents are killed or forced out, so the most recent generations are removed. So it is very possible those males only pass their genetics on to 1-2 generations.
Also the illegal wildlife trade is only behind guns and drugs so of course it is happening even without the legal avenues, but opening legal avenues makes it easier for the illegal markets to move their products. Look at the elephant ivory trade example I mentioned earlier.
I am not saying trophy hunting should be stopped! It has many benefits which are mentioned above by many people, but it does also have negatives.
again dan i agree with some points and not others
i agree that there are ranchers that jump behind the conservation band waggon, however many times even if they themselves are not actually doing anything they have to pay someone to get behind that band wagon.
i can understand why you used them as an example and maybe lions be ok but i definitely disagree with elephants.
as to the hunters wanting them in pristine condition there is a truth to that however i think you will find an equal amount do not as a pristine condition lion does not look truly wild. going by your statistics within the domination of a single lion it will produce breeding size lions and just under, provided they are females they would be kept however if they were not they would be kicked out by the alpha anyway. what is also not being considered is that many of these game farms are buying there animals by the animals or pride's which means there genetics are still being passed on. And the difference for example between a property that buys and a property that leaves its lions is something like 6000 and 40 000.
aslong as these animals are worth money and people are paying for them they are not going to disappear.
as for the trade in illegal wildlife that will never be stopped and at least with legal avenues the parks are being able to pay for themselves And as has been seen due to PETA entire australian business's have been destroyed because of trying to stop illegal trades instead of encouraging legal.
i agree there are negatives, as there is a negative to everything however i believe they are already trying to tackle these to better legitimise themselves.
An example that can be used is Rhino they are being bred for a bigger horn and as i think everyone will agree the large horned rhinos were shot out by uncontrolled hunting so is that not in someways correcting a wrong? it is also worth noting that the people selling these animals do not care wether they are for hunting or conservation so many parks have been buying from breeders.