Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

American Dentist kills Endangered Lion in Zimbabwe.

Page 14 of 16 [ 241 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

04 Aug 2015, 11:29 am

It has been reported that the number of white rhinos in South Africa was only 1,800 in 1968 when they started hunting them for trophies. That sounds kind of backwards, doesn't it? In reality, with the advent of trophy hunting, the number of white rhinos in South Africa is about ten times higher today than in 1968.

Similarly, with the beginning of black rhino hunting in Namibia and South Africa in 2004, the total numbers of black rhinos in Namibia and South Africa is estimated to have increased by 51%.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

04 Aug 2015, 11:45 am

justkillingtime wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Since we're in an animal loving mode, how many of you animal lovers actually do anything for animals? I'm actively a Humane Society volunteer who makes time to work with shelter dogs every week rain or shine. Charity begins and home and I'm guessing none of us calls Zimbabwe home.


I donate to various animal organizations. I live in an apartment with a patio and keep out food and water for the squirrels, chipmunks and birds. I also plant bushes and plants that birds and hummingbirds like. The idea of volunteering to work with animals has given me an idea. I had read somewhere that if you work at the humane society, you have to participate in the euthanasia but maybe that is employee not volunteer.

I guess it would depend on the location but I can't see volunteers being required to participate in euthanasia since that would drive them away. The one I'm with is a no-kill shelter although there are, of course, exceptions to that policy. We actually take in animals from kill-for-space shelters when there is room.

You'll probably have to attend some kind of volunteer orientation which will include an animal handling class for dogs and/or cats. The scope of volunteer activity can include but is not limited to dog walking, washing dishes, doing laundry for their bedding, helping at adoption events, etc. I only work the dog side of the house since I'm a dog man and dogs require more work than cats.

It's some serious work just taking out dog after dog after dog after dog for for walks for hours (and miles) on end. They get wild with excitement and with big dogs it can be a chore in itself just to keep them under control. Still, it's the most rewarding thing I do and I look forward to it more than anything else.

You can also check out the SPCA and city / county shelters since they usually need volunteer help, too.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

04 Aug 2015, 12:25 pm

eric76 wrote:
It has been reported that the number of white rhinos in South Africa was only 1,800 in 1968 when they started hunting them for trophies. That sounds kind of backwards, doesn't it? In reality, with the advent of trophy hunting, the number of white rhinos in South Africa is about ten times higher today than in 1968.

Similarly, with the beginning of black rhino hunting in Namibia and South Africa in 2004, the total numbers of black rhinos in Namibia and South Africa is estimated to have increased by 51%.
you're right, it is backwards to claim that hunting directly resulted in the increase of Rhino numbers. while the Southern White Rhino population has rebounded, the Northen White Rhino is extinct in the wild with only 6 individuals remaining in captivity. The black Rhino used to be the most populous species with several hundred thousand in the early 19th century, but their numbers declined to 65,000 by 1970, and suffered an additional reduction to as low as 2,400 by 1992(that's a 96% drop).

source



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

04 Aug 2015, 12:46 pm

Fugu wrote:
eric76 wrote:
It has been reported that the number of white rhinos in South Africa was only 1,800 in 1968 when they started hunting them for trophies. That sounds kind of backwards, doesn't it? In reality, with the advent of trophy hunting, the number of white rhinos in South Africa is about ten times higher today than in 1968.

Similarly, with the beginning of black rhino hunting in Namibia and South Africa in 2004, the total numbers of black rhinos in Namibia and South Africa is estimated to have increased by 51%.
you're right, it is backwards to claim that hunting directly resulted in the increase of Rhino numbers. while the Southern White Rhino population has rebounded, the Northen White Rhino is extinct in the wild with only 6 individuals remaining in captivity. The black Rhino used to be the most populous species with several hundred thousand in the early 19th century, but their numbers declined to 65,000 by 1970, and suffered an additional reduction to as low as 2,400 by 1992(that's a 96% drop).

source


Where do you think that much of that conservation money comes from?

Furthermore, without the money brought in by hunting, why should the local villages even tolerate the presence of rhinos?



Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

04 Aug 2015, 12:49 pm

eric76 wrote:
Fugu wrote:
eric76 wrote:
It has been reported that the number of white rhinos in South Africa was only 1,800 in 1968 when they started hunting them for trophies. That sounds kind of backwards, doesn't it? In reality, with the advent of trophy hunting, the number of white rhinos in South Africa is about ten times higher today than in 1968.

Similarly, with the beginning of black rhino hunting in Namibia and South Africa in 2004, the total numbers of black rhinos in Namibia and South Africa is estimated to have increased by 51%.
you're right, it is backwards to claim that hunting directly resulted in the increase of Rhino numbers. while the Southern White Rhino population has rebounded, the Northen White Rhino is extinct in the wild with only 6 individuals remaining in captivity. The black Rhino used to be the most populous species with several hundred thousand in the early 19th century, but their numbers declined to 65,000 by 1970, and suffered an additional reduction to as low as 2,400 by 1992(that's a 96% drop).

source


Where do you think that much of that conservation money comes from?

Furthermore, without the money brought in by hunting, why should the local villages even tolerate the presence of rhinos?
from conservation societies.
because killing them is considered poaching, that's why.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

04 Aug 2015, 1:10 pm

Fugu wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Fugu wrote:
eric76 wrote:
It has been reported that the number of white rhinos in South Africa was only 1,800 in 1968 when they started hunting them for trophies. That sounds kind of backwards, doesn't it? In reality, with the advent of trophy hunting, the number of white rhinos in South Africa is about ten times higher today than in 1968.

Similarly, with the beginning of black rhino hunting in Namibia and South Africa in 2004, the total numbers of black rhinos in Namibia and South Africa is estimated to have increased by 51%.
you're right, it is backwards to claim that hunting directly resulted in the increase of Rhino numbers. while the Southern White Rhino population has rebounded, the Northen White Rhino is extinct in the wild with only 6 individuals remaining in captivity. The black Rhino used to be the most populous species with several hundred thousand in the early 19th century, but their numbers declined to 65,000 by 1970, and suffered an additional reduction to as low as 2,400 by 1992(that's a 96% drop).

source


Where do you think that much of that conservation money comes from?

Furthermore, without the money brought in by hunting, why should the local villages even tolerate the presence of rhinos?
from conservation societies.
because killing them is considered poaching, that's why.


Poaching is the illegal killing of animals.

Isn't the reason that there has been so much poaching of rhinos because of the high prices that the horn has in various Asian countries as a supposed cure for many ailments?

From https://www.savetherhino.org/latest_news/news/832_the_dallas_safari_club_controversy about the Dallas Safari Club auction for a black rhino hunt:
Quote:
Why, people ask, is a conservation organization like MET or Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife even allowing trophy hunts in the first place? Couldn’t they get $750,000 without having to suffer an animal being shot?

Well yes, it would be nice if donors gave enough money to cover the spiralling costs of protecting rhinos from poachers. Or if enough photographic tourists visited parks and reserves to cover all the costs of community outreach and education programmes. But that just doesn’t happen. It costs around $500,000 a year to run a relatively small rhino programme with only 20-30 animals. Heaven only knows how much it costs to run Kruger National Park in South Africa, or Etosha National Park in Namibia.

Fundraising for rhinos is hard. We’re not just competing for funds against other endangered species – elephants, tigers, polar bears, pandas – but against cancer charities, children’s charities, or the most recent natural disaster. In “An inconvenient truth”, Al Gore asserted that 97% of charitable giving goes to people-related causes and 1.5% to pet charities, leaving only 1.5% for the conservation of our entire planet. Are enough new rhino-focused donors really going to come out of the woodwork to make income from trophy hunting unnecessary?



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

04 Aug 2015, 1:13 pm

By the way, if the anti-hunting people wanted to stop the number of rhinos being hunted, all they have to do is pool their money and buy the hunting rights in the various auctions.

Why don't they do that? Perhaps they don't feel strongly enough about it to use their own money to help the rhinos.



neilson_wheels
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,404
Location: London, Capital of the Un-United Kingdom

04 Aug 2015, 1:30 pm

As above, even "Save the Rhino" supports hunting because they don't have a choice. It's quite well hidden on the site under "sustainable utilisation" with a link to a seperate pdf which you can view here:

HUNTING

It still does not give anyone any excuse if caught poaching, including rich americans. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.



Last edited by neilson_wheels on 04 Aug 2015, 1:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Aug 2015, 1:31 pm

eric76 wrote:
By the way, if the anti-hunting people wanted to stop the number of rhinos being hunted, all they have to do is pool their money and buy the hunting rights in the various auctions.

Why don't they do that? Perhaps they don't feel strongly enough about it to use their own money to help the rhinos.

Because Hunters would be sure it would cost millions to stop one hunt. Hunters would simply keep outbidding knowing they would stop once it gets to a certain ridiculously high amount just to bankrupt them.
The only way it would work is undercover.



Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

04 Aug 2015, 1:35 pm

eric76 wrote:
By the way, if the anti-hunting people wanted to stop the number of rhinos being hunted, all they have to do is pool their money and buy the hunting rights in the various auctions.

Why don't they do that? Perhaps they don't feel strongly enough about it to use their own money to help the rhinos.
good point, why don't those people who feel strongly about rights for animals participate in killing animals. gee, i wonder why they're not going for it :roll:



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Aug 2015, 1:40 pm

neilson_wheels wrote:
As above, even "Save the Rhino" supports hunting because they don't have a choice. It's quite well hidden on the site under "sustainable utilisation" with a link to a seperate pdf which you can view here:

HUNTING

It still does not give anyone any excuse if caught poaching, including rich americans. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.



They can manage the rhinos without all that. In order to be sure the "right" rhino was "hunted" I am guessing they would have to single it out. It would involve some kind of situation where it's the only rhino in the area, otherwise the chances of killing a different rhino would be high and that, my friend, is not real hunting. Not by a longshot. You can raise these animals captive in the US and let some guy go in and slaughter for a fee. It would be the same thing.

Veterinarians and rangers could easily separate these supposedly "troublesome" rhinos, and I am not even sure if this is a real issue since, before rhinos had their lands taken by territorial humans, and there wasn't an endless parade of poachers and hunters, they seemed to do alright on their own, even with tribes hunting now and then for food.

In other words, sounds like hog wash, or in this case, rhino wash to me. It's an excuse to make money on hunting rhinos because they like to have that lucrative source of cash available and instead of coming up with some bs or in this case, rs, they should just admit it.



neilson_wheels
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,404
Location: London, Capital of the Un-United Kingdom

04 Aug 2015, 1:49 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
They can manage the rhinos without all that. In order to be sure the "right" rhino was "hunted" I am guessing they would have to single it out. It would involve some kind of situation where it's the only rhino in the area, otherwise the chances of killing a different rhino would be high and that, my friend, is not real hunting. Not by a longshot. You can raise these animals captive in the US and let some guy go in and slaughter for a fee. It would be the same thing.

Veterinarians and rangers could easily separate these supposedly "troublesome" rhinos, and I am not even sure if this is a real issue since, before rhinos had their lands taken by territorial humans, and there wasn't an endless parade of poachers and hunters, they seemed to do alright on their own, even with tribes hunting now and then for food.

In other words, sounds like hog wash, or in this case, rhino wash to me. It's an excuse to make money on hunting rhinos because they like to have that lucrative source of cash available and instead of coming up with some bs or in this case, rs, they should just admit it.


Did you read the PDF or think that I made it myself?

Black rhino, where the big money is, are solitary animals. The ten that are allowed to be hunted each year are old males that are past their breeding age but still very territorial.

Some South African land owners are now considering to stop keeping Rhinos on their land as they cannot cover the costs of security for the animals from poaching. Even with the income they get from legal hunting.

I have got to say that considering how strongly you seem to feel about this subject, you seem to be very-poorly informed.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Aug 2015, 2:04 pm

neilson_wheels wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
They can manage the rhinos without all that. In order to be sure the "right" rhino was "hunted" I am guessing they would have to single it out. It would involve some kind of situation where it's the only rhino in the area, otherwise the chances of killing a different rhino would be high and that, my friend, is not real hunting. Not by a longshot. You can raise these animals captive in the US and let some guy go in and slaughter for a fee. It would be the same thing.

Veterinarians and rangers could easily separate these supposedly "troublesome" rhinos, and I am not even sure if this is a real issue since, before rhinos had their lands taken by territorial humans, and there wasn't an endless parade of poachers and hunters, they seemed to do alright on their own, even with tribes hunting now and then for food.

In other words, sounds like hog wash, or in this case, rhino wash to me. It's an excuse to make money on hunting rhinos because they like to have that lucrative source of cash available and instead of coming up with some bs or in this case, rs, they should just admit it.


Did you read the PDF or think that I made it myself?

Black rhino, where the big money is, are solitary animals. The ten that are allowed to be hunted each year are old males that are past their breeding age but still very territorial.

Some South African land owners are now considering to no longer keep Rhinos on their land as they cannot cover the costs of security for the animals from poaching.

I have got to say that considering how strongly you seem to feel about this subject, you seem to be very-poorly informed.


It's so arrogant to ignore all those years of evolution, in favor of a pdf some group that profits off of hunting black rhinos created to justify their income source, typed up just a few years ago, in response to those critiquing their practices.

Just because I don't fall for it, you call me poorly informed? Seems you are just prejudice in their favor.

We know, that for all the years rhinos have existed, it is not clear that it needed humans hunting the older male bulls in order to thrive. So there goes that!

It's just bs. Rhinos can exist just fine without humans. So can lions and these other animals. I doubt even domesticated dogs would die out without humans feeding them. They might struggle at first but in a couple generations, they would revert back to their wolf like instincts and continue on. It's pure egocentricity and ignorance for humans to believe animals need them to thrive. History says it simply isn't true.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

04 Aug 2015, 2:13 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
neilson_wheels wrote:
As above, even "Save the Rhino" supports hunting because they don't have a choice. It's quite well hidden on the site under "sustainable utilisation" with a link to a seperate pdf which you can view here:

HUNTING

It still does not give anyone any excuse if caught poaching, including rich americans. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.



They can manage the rhinos without all that. In order to be sure the "right" rhino was "hunted" I am guessing they would have to single it out. It would involve some kind of situation where it's the only rhino in the area, otherwise the chances of killing a different rhino would be high and that, my friend, is not real hunting. Not by a longshot. You can raise these animals captive in the US and let some guy go in and slaughter for a fee. It would be the same thing.

Veterinarians and rangers could easily separate these supposedly "troublesome" rhinos, and I am not even sure if this is a real issue since, before rhinos had their lands taken by territorial humans, and there wasn't an endless parade of poachers and hunters, they seemed to do alright on their own, even with tribes hunting now and then for food.


There doesn't appear to be any need to do that. My understanding is that the rhinos that are killed in the hunts are older animals that won't likely live all that much longer and that at least for the black rhinos, ever hunter is accompanied by game officials who are there to make sure that everything is correct including the selection of the rhino.

Quote:
In other words, sounds like hog wash, or in this case, rhino wash to me. It's an excuse to make money on hunting rhinos because they like to have that lucrative source of cash available and instead of coming up with some bs or in this case, rs, they should just admit it.


Huh? They readily admit that they need the cash from the hunters -- that they cannot bring in enough from other sources.



neilson_wheels
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,404
Location: London, Capital of the Un-United Kingdom

04 Aug 2015, 2:20 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
It's so arrogant to ignore all those years of evolution, in favor of a pdf some group that profits off of hunting black rhinos created to justify their income source, typed up just a few years ago, in response to those critiquing their practices.

Just because I don't fall for it, you call me poorly informed? Seems you are just prejudice in their favor.


If you had read it you would know that this organisation does not accept any funds from hunting. They feel that they do not have a choice in accepting it's existence as there is no other way for these countries to cover the costs of anti-poaching operations.

If you had read more of the information freely available to you, you would have a better understanding of the issues that affect conservation.

Personally i have a degree in ecology and volunteer my time to local conservation projects. Take from that what you want.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
We know, that for all the years rhinos have existed, it is not clear that it needed humans hunting the older male bulls in order to thrive. So there goes that!

It's just bs. Rhinos can exist just fine without humans. So can lions and these other animals. I doubt even domesticated dogs would die out without humans feeding them. They might struggle at first but in a couple generations, they would revert back to their wolf like instincts and continue on. It's pure egocentricity and ignorance for humans to believe animals need them to thrive. History says it simply isn't true.


The real issue is that NOW there are way more, possibly too many people on this planet, all competing for space with wild animals. We need to find a compromise that works for all, the system in place NOW is the one that works best NOW. Or maybe that's just BS too.



androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

04 Aug 2015, 2:38 pm

Quote:
What they've come up with is called "Pink Poison," a dye that's injected into the horn. The name is alarming, but the technique doesn’t actually hurt the rhinoceros. In fact, it is only dangerous to humans, as it is "eco-friendly, biodegradable, and vulture-safe." Veterinarians approach a rhino, and then tranquilize it. Once asleep, they drill a hole into the horn, and inject the "pink poison" dye, which discolors the inside of the horn.


How a Pink Poison Could Save the Rhinoceros from Extinction

Image