• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Elephant kills its hunter

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FairXchange

Member
Enron said:
The older males that are legal to hunt are going to have the larger ivory (elephants never stop growing). That's one of the ways they distinguish between which ones to take and which to leave.
Click to expand...

Does it seem like I care about the distinction between legal and illegal murder of elephants?

Hint: I don't.

I don't want to come off as angry or aggressive here, but I don't agree with hunting/poaching of these majestic creatures in any context.
 
G

Gr8one

Member
Leunam said:
Kind of a interesting situation. No surprise that people here show no sympathy for the hunter since on its surface hunting elephants seems like such a shitty thing to do. I can't blame them. But I read another article that goes into a little more detail:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...professional-big-game-hunter-in-Zimbabwe.html



Supposedly they were tracking a lion first, but decided to get a look at this elephant instead. Not sure if they're telling the truth. Shooting from ten yards at a charging Bull elephant with elevated levels of testosterone sounds terrifying.

The article also linked to this story about elephant population:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...or-funds-lost-from-ban-on-trophy-hunters.html





Sounds like controlling elephant populations is a monumental task and Zimbabwe in particular is having a hard time with it since one of their main sources of income for those operations (hunting) has diminished. Seems like donations aren't enough.

The whole ordeal comes off as nothing but difficult lesser-of-two-evil choices at every turn. Flourishing elephant populations in the wrong place means a spike in poacher operations as well. Lack of money means short staffed parks which also means less protection. I sure wouldn't want to be the one to make those decisions.

There's always a bit more to stories of "trophy hunting" but in my experiences here people are less likely to look at that perspective. I wish people were more willing to give it a real critical analysis the way they would other scientific research.
Click to expand...

Enron said:
The older males that are legal to hunt are going to have the larger ivory (elephants never stop growing). That's one of the ways they distinguish between which ones to take and which to leave.
Click to expand...

I was going to have a knee jerk reaction after reading the article, but after reading these couple posts I'm glad I didn't, and I learn something new today.Feel bad for both the hunter and the elephant now.
 
R

Razmos

Member
FairXchange said:
Does it seem like I care about the distinction between legal and illegal murder of elephants?

Hint: I don't.

I don't want to come off as angry or aggressive here, but I don't agree with hunting/poaching of these majestic creatures in any context.
Click to expand...
I have to agree, legal or not, what gives people the right to cull their numbers like they are in control of nature or some shit?

The idea just rubs me the wrong way, even if the intention is good.
 
Audioboxer

Audioboxer

Member
Razmos said:
I have to agree, legal or not, what gives people the right to cull their numbers like they are in control of nature or some shit?

The idea just rubs me the wrong way, even if the intention is good.
Click to expand...

Yup, just let nature do its thing.

It's been around far longer than us and the animal kingdom has been fine adapting.
 
S

Schweinehund

Member
Enron said:
Because there's few things that gaf hates more than hunters. They don't care.
Click to expand...

I don't hate hunters, I just don't care much for those that hunt for anything but food as the main reason. I also don't mind people that thin populations like badgers or cane toads if you want to consider that hunting.
 
S

Skyzard

Banned
Leunam said:
Kind of a interesting situation. No surprise that people here show no sympathy for the hunter since on its surface hunting elephants seems like such a shitty thing to do. I can't blame them. But I read another article that goes into a little more detail:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...professional-big-game-hunter-in-Zimbabwe.html



Supposedly they were tracking a lion first, but decided to get a look at this elephant instead. Not sure if they're telling the truth. Shooting from ten yards at a charging Bull elephant with elevated levels of testosterone sounds terrifying.

The article also linked to this story about elephant population:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...or-funds-lost-from-ban-on-trophy-hunters.html





Sounds like controlling elephant populations is a monumental task and Zimbabwe in particular is having a hard time with it since one of their main sources of income for those operations (hunting) has diminished. Seems like donations aren't enough.

The whole ordeal comes off as nothing but difficult lesser-of-two-evil choices at every turn. Flourishing elephant populations in the wrong place means a spike in poacher operations as well. Lack of money means short staffed parks which also means less protection. I sure wouldn't want to be the one to make those decisions.

There's always a bit more to stories of "trophy hunting" but in my experiences here people are less likely to look at that perspective. I wish people were more willing to give it a real critical analysis the way they would other scientific research.
Click to expand...

The article in the op mentions they were out for an elephant hunt, referring to it as game.

The population is too high for what, for their own good? So nature would take its course.

Otherwise you can sell them if you really care about their health.
 
S

SilentRacoon

Member
Log4Girlz said:
He stuffed the body in a trunk
Click to expand...

laughing-elephant-2.jpg
 
R

RangerX

Banned
Hunting elephants for their ivory is absolutely disgusting but I still think its a tragedy that the man died. Even if he is a complete scumbag its still a sad situation.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
He deserved it. If you are hunting animals then the animals have just a right to hunt you right back.

Doesn't matter the animals.
Hunting a deer and get killed by a buck? fuck you, you deserved it.

Don't hunt animals and get upset if they hunt you right back. You don't get to control nature.
 
L

Leunam

Member
Skyzard said:
The article in the op mentions they were out for an elephant hunt, referring to it as game.

The population is too high for what, for their own good? So nature would take its course.

Otherwise you can sell them if you really care about their health.
Click to expand...

The article in my post said they were initially tracking a lion. So who to believe?

Shooting at the elephant from ten yards tells me they weren't there to hunt it in the first place. Sounds like it was a last resort after it had started charging, otherwise they would have started shooting once it came into view and was in range. I doubt their 458 has a range of ten yards.

Overpopulation of elephants has several effects. The first being destruction of local property, which I might concede is something less important. An overpopulation of elephants also makes them targets for poachers, which only spurs that industry to grow. On top of that, it becomes harder to track their herds, which makes it harder to protect them against poachers especially now that their Park resources are stretched so thin.

And there are only so many elephants you can sell anyway. They only sell elephants from a certain age range to begin with, and there are only so many buyers available.
 
L

Laekon

Member
I use to feel the way most of the others do but after reading a few articles it's a really complex subject. Countries with legalized hunting seem to have stronger populations then ones without it. Guides buy tags and lease land to sell the hunts. The guides have a vested interest, as do the locals that work for them, in preventing poaching. The more large males there are the more the tags are worth. Each tag is worth more to the local community then selling a bunch of ivory.

The hunters in this particle article sound like morons but the author has a had time argue the overall point at the end.

http://www.gq.com/long-form/who-wants-to-shoot-an-elephant
 
S

Skyzard

Banned
Leunam said:
The article in my post said they were initially tracking a lion. So who to believe?

Shooting at the elephant from ten yards tells me they weren't there to hunt it in the first place. Sounds like it was a last resort after it had started charging, otherwise they would have started shooting once it came into view and was in range. I doubt their 458 has a range of ten yards.

Overpopulation of elephants has several effects. The first being destruction of local property, which I might concede is something less important. An overpopulation of elephants also makes them targets for poachers, which only spurs that industry to grow. On top of that, it becomes harder to track their herds, which makes it harder to protect them against poachers especially now that their Park resources are stretched so thin.

And there are only so many elephants you can sell anyway. They only sell elephants from a certain age range to begin with, and there are only so many buyers available.
Click to expand...

Article in OP was referencing a note that seems to be written by the company or group he belonged to.

He had to shoot at the elephant from short range because it charged him very quickly. He probably sensed the danger from the hunter.

And none of those are good reasons to allow for them to be killed, which only encourages hunters, spurring that industry to grow.
 
M

MJLord

Member
Skyzard said:
The article in the op mentions they were out for an elephant hunt, referring to it as game.

The population is too high for what, for their own good? So nature would take its course.

Otherwise you can sell them if you really care about their health.
Click to expand...

Well this is the argument isn't it. Do you just let them starve because there's too many of them or do you kill off a few? Getting shot is probably a quicker death than starving and I can agree that it's probably better to do that.

Moving them about is moving the problem somewhere else, eventually something would give.

EDIT: Starve or some of the problems listed by other posters. Destruction of property, increased poachers etc.
 
S

Skyzard

Banned
MJLord said:
Well this is the argument isn't it. Do you just let them starve because there's too many of them or do you kill off a few? Getting shot is probably a quicker death than starving and I can agree that it's probably better to do that.

Moving them about is moving the problem somewhere else, eventually something would give.

EDIT: Starve or some of the problems listed by other posters. Destruction of property, increased poachers etc.
Click to expand...

I look at it this way - when you don't have to kill, don't.

You don't know if the weather will change, or if they migrate themselves, or if the guy commenting on the overpopulation is even correct about what the area can hold. There's a chance for life there, it's not a mercy killing.
 
L

Leunam

Member
Skyzard said:
Article in OP was referencing a note that seems to be written by the company or group he belonged to.

He had to shoot at the elephant from short range because it charged him very quickly. He probably sensed the danger from the hunter.

And none of those are good reasons to allow for them to be killed, which only encourages hunters, spurring that industry to grow.
Click to expand...

What you're saying about the elephants charge isn't changing what I'm saying. Yeah, they shot at short range because it was charging. If they were there to kill it for its small amount of ivory, why didn't they shoot from much farther away? If they were tracking it then it's probable that they saw it first.

Like I said in my post, it's a tough situation. The hunters are there to help fund the parks and conservation efforts. Without them, there is no protection against poachers.
 
1

18-Volt

Member
If you really want to shoot your beloved guns, use it against ISIS or something instead of critically endangered animals.

Btw, I once heard on Nat Geo channel that almost all foreign hunters visit Botswana are American. Is it something to do with second amendment?
 
D

DarkKyo

Member
MJLord said:
Well this is the argument isn't it. Do you just let them starve because there's too many of them or do you kill off a few? Getting shot is probably a quicker death than starving and I can agree that it's probably better to do that.
Click to expand...
And why is it humanity's duty to do this? Nature was handling it just fine for hundreds of thousands of years before we made guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Hunter gets crushed to death after elephant he shot falls on him
4 5 6 7 8
371
40K
MIMIC replied
  • Locked
Robert Durst claims he was on meth during HBO's The Jinx
1
2K
mjc replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
4K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Pentagon buried internal study that exposed massive amounts of adminstrative waste
19
5K
rambis replied
  • Locked
Couple disappear; Man's facebook begins erratic posting; Later, woman found captive
9 10 11 12 13
640
207K
CREMSteve replied
Top Bottom