Hunting is in a spot of bother

[moosea]

I'm sure this has been asked before, but do those people who are against hunting and shooting, want to see both coarse and fly fishing banned?

Yes.

Do you seriously believe that animals have those thought processes and fears?

Yes I do. Not sure how we know what animals are and are not capable of thinking?
When a dog waits for its owner to return home do you not consider that the dog is thinking into the future? of their companions return?
You must know horses will remember something that made them fearful before? (ie. loading into a trailer)

Is hunting not a natural behaviour of humans ?

Yes, but consider that once humans squatted down to pee whenever they needed to but I hope you are not continuing that natural behavior!

Those who want to see fishing banned as well, do you live a vegan lifestyle?

Vegetarian. No meat, no eggs, no fish.
Butter, milk and cheese can be produced without killing or harming the animal. I know that this is often not the case for financial reasons but it can be done.

Obviously I can’t speak for YG, but on the basis that I agree with most of what she has posted on this thread , then no I don’t find it uncomfortable . I find the assigning of human emotions to animals a bit of a pointless exercise.

Yes they feel pain and yes they can feel a form of fear but broadly speaking this is in the abstract. A flight animal such as a hare reacts to the immediate and imminent threat, it will be alert to its environment and potential dangers posed, but there is no evidence to suggest that they have the capacity to envisage the thought processes required to contemplate their mortality or dwell upon previous near misses or future events .

With predators such as a lion then the level of response to danger is even less evident. They are rarely hunted and danger is normally encountered when the prey they hunt fights rather than flees. There is minimal signs of fear in their reactions.

If the hare does not 'have the capacity to envisage the thought processes required to contemplate their mortality or dwell upon previous near misses or future events' then why is it 'alert to its environment and potential dangers posed'? If it has not got capacity for future events, then the hare wouldn't look at it's environment for potential dangers as it couldn't think of future events? How does that work for you? ( Genuine question)

Why is getting enjoyment out of something so awful?
In Australia they stopped duck shooting (I believe as a result of anti pressure). Over the next few years the duck population grew to the point they were dying of disease. People were then paid to go and cull them.
So I assume it’s ok to kill something if there’s no enjoyment?
Man has always hunted and people who think we should have evolved beyond that sort of thing well we really aren’t a different level of being.

Previously man has enjoyed bear baiting and dog fighting. We 'should' be more evolved. Behaviour changes over time and once, people thought hunting was a good thing. Now the majority see is as outdated and barbaric. It's how change happens.

Trophy hunting generally does good for the species, I think.

How???

 

[Clodagh]

The hare is alert through instinct and learning. I doubt it sits in its form having an anxiety attack about the future.
Doesn’t trophy hunting pay local people to not raze everything to the ground to grow crops? I don’t know that much about it. Also older animals don’t mind procreation with their offspring and can get very inbred.

 

[meleeka]

Not sure if this has already been posted
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-11-14/bird-of-prey-persecution-remains-at-high-level-rspb-report-warns

 

[ycbm]

I would like to see illegal hunting stop now, snares made illegal from tomorrow, and eventually coarse/fly fishing and shooting shut down in a way that gives everyone enough time to adjust to the idea.

I eat meat, and supermarket meat at that.

I don't see any more conflict in that position than eating meat and being against the idea that my town, whose local fame is being "Bear Town", shouldn't ever again borrow from the bible fund to buy a dancing bear.
.

 

[stangs]

How???

https://www.conservationfrontlines.org/2020/01/trophy-hunting-and-conservation-science/ - in short, sustainable and regulated trophy hunting supports both people and animals, and helps protect species against poaching.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667010021001542 - this paper provides a review of trophy hunting in practice, and therefore makes for a more nuanced discussion on its benefits and consequences, in an area that's not normally associated with it. I'm providing some of the best bits of it, as it really got me thinking.

Spoiler

- Carbon and development footprints of trophy hunting programmes had also been lower than that of tourism (Di Minin et al., 2016a). It is a growing industry with a revenue of at least US$201 million per year in South Africa (Harris and Pletscher, 2002; Lindsey et al., 2007, 2006). Trophy hunting accounted for about 89% of the total revenue compared to 2% for ecotourism in Zimbabwe (Frost and Bond, 2008). Similarly, trophy hunting in Namibia led to the creation of community conservancies where local communities reap many social and economic benefits (Naidoo et al., 2016). Studies also suggest that restricting trophy hunting would adversely affect conservation (Maxi Pia Louis, 2019), and accelerate the loss of biodiversity (Di Minin et al., 2016b; Mbaiwa, 2018), restrict rewards, and demotivate local communities (Conrad, 2012).

- Although studies suggest that trophy hunting can benefit biodiversity (Baker 1997; B. Khan, et al., 2014; Naidoo et al., 2016; Nawaz et al., 2016) but hunting of fellow sentient beings for pleasure and trophies is often questioned, which limits its usefulness as an effective conservation tool (Costanza et al., 2016; Crosmary et al., 2015; Di Minin et al., 2016b; Muposhi et al., 2016; Rashid et al., 2020a). Apart from ethical obligations of trophy huntig to human communities and wildlife populations, the flaws in wildlife use regulations, revenue generation from TH programs, and its distribution are amongst the main debates about reforming the trophy hunting industry (Muposhi et al., 2016). Studies indicate that in hunted populations, animals showed clear signs of disturbance i.e., smaller group sizes, lower calf recruitment rates, and high nervousness than conspecifics in the absence of trophy hunting (Hariohay et al., 2018; Khan et al., 2019; Rashid et al., 2020). The private sector is said to reap more from trophy hunting fees than local communities (Nowak et al., 2019), which adversely affects wildlife conservation and management of protected areas (Di Minin et al., 2016a).

- In Pakistan, 80 per cent of the CTHP [community-based trophy hunting] revenue from CCAs [community conservation areas] goes directly to local communities, which is partly utilized for conservation activities i.e., wildlife watch & ward, livestock vaccination, and habitat improvement etc., (30%) and community welfare, livelihood improvement, and poverty alleviation programs (70%) in community conservation areas.

- In Tajikistan, trophy hunts of Bocharian markhor generated an estimated US$ 100,000 per hunt (McEnroe, 2017; Rosen and Stefan, 2012). Fifty percent of the trophy hunting revenue was used directly for species conservation, i.e., protection and habitat improvement. The rest is contributed to raising awareness about the conservation value of markhor and harnessing local support to protect other associated species and their habitats. In all the four community-led conservancies, recovery of Markhor populations has been successful mainly because of the trophy hunting revenue, employing local people as wildlife guards, and funding a range of community development initiatives.

- Unregulated and poorly managed hunting programs can lead to several social and ecological challenges including rapid declines in globally significant populations of rare and unique wildlife species (Nordbø et al., 2018) even in conserved and protected areas.

- A study conducted to estimate the snow leopard population in the Baltistan district of Gilgit-Baltistan between 1998 and 2001 suggested that non-targeted conservation policies, particularly those for trophy hunting of ungulates, could be one of the reasons contributing to the decline snow leopards in that period (Hussain, 2003; Jackson, 2004). In comparison, trophy hunting concessions for Ibex and Argali sheep have shown greater densities of the threatened Snow Leopards in Tajikistan than surrounding areas with no practice of trophy hunting, probably due to greater prey densities and controlled poaching (Kachel, 2014).

- Because of the lack of robust wildlife tracking systems, accurate data is seldom available, and quota allocation is often unclear. Research collaboration at the landscape level for scientific and joint monitoring of wildlife, habitat mapping, and cross-border movement of trophy animals is urgently needed to set agreed scientific standards for conservation hunting programs.

 

[Clodagh]

I admit I absolutely don’t see the point in shooting a giraffe, but if it overall does good for all giraffes then I can see it’s justification.

 

[Clodagh]

I eat meat, and supermarket meat at that.
.

I find that view incredibly hypocritical.

 

[ycbm]

I find that view incredibly hypocritical.

I can live with that.

We have a fundamental split, and I think I know where the majority lies on that split, between Country Sports supporters and people who do not believe, in this day and age, that it is right to kill (or catch and return in the case of most fish) animals as a passtime.
.

 

[Sandstone1]

People that enjoy killing and hurting animals sometimes go on to kill and hurt people. I know if children are found to enjoy hurting animals it can be a red flag for later problems.

 

[Fred66]

The hare is alert through instinct and learning. I doubt it sits in its form having an anxiety attack about the future.

As Clodagh says. It is inherent in all prey animals rather than conscious thought.

It can be a learned behaviour, you would see heightened response and awareness in elite sports (such as Formula 1) or elite soldiers.

This learning eventually can move to be subconscious awareness but doesn’t mean that the individual is consciously fretting about what might happen, just that their subconscious would prompt them ahead of conscious thought.

Ie most of us would see something, process the sight, recognise a hazard, and react to that sight. Whereas those who have trained to do something then the steps are less defined and the middle steps become almost defunct, leaving just the see-react steps

 

[Fred66]

People that enjoy killing and hurting animals sometimes go on to kill and hurt people. I know if children are found to enjoy hurting animals it can be a red flag for later problems.

If you are talking about deliberately torturing an animal then yes it would be a red flag, but where the killing is for a purpose such as pest control, eating etc. then I don’t believe there is any correlation.

 

[YorksG]

People that enjoy killing and hurting animals sometimes go on to kill and hurt people. I know if children are found to enjoy hurting animals it can be a red flag for later problems.

People who don't enjoy killing and hurting animals sometimes go on to kill and hurt people.

 

[sunleychops]

Why do Non vegans hold vegans to being 100% perfect, when the point of veganism REDUCING harm as much as they can?

Because of the amount of virtue signalling from the vegan brigade who make themselves out to be perfect

 

[sakura]

https://www.conservationfrontlines.org/2020/01/trophy-hunting-and-conservation-science/ - in short, sustainable and regulated trophy hunting supports both people and animals, and helps protect species against poaching.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667010021001542 - this paper provides a review of trophy hunting in practice, and therefore makes for a more nuanced discussion on its benefits and consequences, in an area that's not normally associated with it. I'm providing some of the best bits of it, as it really got me thinking.

I'm sorry, but trophy hunting is absolutely not beneficial to wild populations. Poaching, and by extension trophy hunting, is turning endangered animals into extinct animals. Those who live in the local communities are not wild and uncivilised people who would otherwise burn their land to the ground. They respect the local wildlife, and many risk their own lives to protect them. Much of the trophy hunting community are white westerners who couldn't care less about wild populations and are happy to spend ££££s to pose with a dead animal.

The bottom line is that we simply do not know how individual species think, feel and process the world. We barely understand how other humans do. In that respect, I know they can feel pain and fear and that is enough for me to campaign against causing them unnecessary harm.

 

[Gallop_Away]

I can live with that.

We have a fundamental split, and I think I know where the majority lies on that split, between Country Sports supporters and people who do not believe, in this day and age, that it is right to kill (or catch and return in the case of most fish) animals as a passtime.
.

This is where I struggle with this view and I agree with Clodagh completely in that I find it hypocritical.

Why is it morally wrong to kill an animal for the pleasure of sport, but not morally wrong to kill for the pleasure of eating them?

Also in response to an earlier comment, I don't think it's so much that vegans are expected to be whiter than white simply because they are vegan/vegetarian/disagree with hunting animals etc etc. It's more that if you are willing to pass judgement on others for their views/lifestyle choices, then it is hypocritical when you yourself behave in a way that causes a similar outcome that you are judging others for. People in glass houses and all that jazz

 

[palo1]

I think people should remember that in humans, much of memory, learning and emotion and the neurological and cognitive processes connected with those reside in the pre-frontal cortex. It is a development that does not have the same extent or function in other mammals so whilst we have many similarities with other mammals, ascribing our emotional experience to them is non-sensical and uninformed. All mammals use a combination of thought, memory/learning and instinct to survive but that simply does not mean that their experiences are like ours. We need to respect the real position of animals I think in order to provide the best for them.

As for trophy hunting, it is pretty well established, that however distasteful, the scientific evidence supports trophy hunting for species level conservation. I would not choose to trophy hunt (and I don't mean 'canned' hunting which is another thing altogether and probably without any benefit at all) but if we want time to work out better ways to manage biodiversity, at this point in time, trophy hunting is doing a service to wildlife. There was a huge hoo-haa from the scientific community a couple of years ago about this.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...fforts-scientists-warn-trophy-hunting-dispute

 

[palo1]

I'm sorry, but trophy hunting is absolutely not beneficial to wild populations. Poaching, and by extension trophy hunting, is turning endangered animals into extinct animals. Those who live in the local communities are not wild and uncivilised people who would otherwise burn their land to the ground. They respect the local wildlife, and many risk their own lives to protect them. Much of the trophy hunting community are white westerners who couldn't care less about wild populations and are happy to spend ££££s to pose with a dead animal.

The bottom line is that we simply do not know how individual species think, feel and process the world. We barely understand how other humans do. In that respect, I know they can feel pain and fear and that is enough for me to campaign against causing them unnecessary harm.

This is pretty much hogwash. Sorry, but you may be better off doing some basic research before being so adamant about things that have considerable research available on the subject.

 

[stangs]

I'm sorry, but trophy hunting is absolutely not beneficial to wild populations. Poaching, and by extension trophy hunting, is turning endangered animals into extinct animals. Those who live in the local communities are not wild and uncivilised people who would otherwise burn their land to the ground. They respect the local wildlife, and many risk their own lives to protect them. Much of the trophy hunting community are white westerners who couldn't care less about wild populations and are happy to spend ££££s to pose with a dead animal.

The bottom line is that we simply do not know how individual species think, feel and process the world. We barely understand how other humans do. In that respect, I know they can feel pain and fear and that is enough for me to campaign against causing them unnecessary harm.

...Did you read any of the research I attached?

You cannot say "poaching and by extension trophy hunting". Though there is occasionally some overlap, one of those industries is always unregulated and illegal, and doesn't produce much income for the local people who do it, and the other produces a huge amount of income, some of which goes to the local people, and a hell of a lot of which goes back towards conservation. Poaching is not sustainable. Trophy hunting can be.

No one has said that the local communities are wild and uncivilised. No one has said that they're going to 'burn their land to the ground'. If you cared so much about pain, you wouldn't attack a poor strawman like this . The fact of the matter is that many of the local populations are poor, and consequently human-animal conflict (e.g., elephants destroying crops), has a huge impact on their livelihoods. Trophy hunting (more so than ecotourism/photo-tourism, because of how much people will pay for it) gives the presence of these animals in the local area a value. It gives the people income, so they don't have to turn to poaching. People don't poach for fun. They don't do it because they're obsessed with killing - as one might attribute to trophy hunters - but rather because they need to survive. There is nothing uncivilised about deciding to feed your children over saving the local lion. There's examples of this in Botswana, Kenya and Tanzania, to start: the banning of trophy hunting leads to poaching sky-rocketing, and populations crashing down.

And, yes, we don't know how individual species process the world. But we will never find that out if the whole species goes extinct because the morality of killing the occasional conscious being was prioritised over saving the actual animals.

 

[palo1]

I can live with that.

We have a fundamental split, and I think I know where the majority lies on that split, between Country Sports supporters and people who do not believe, in this day and age, that it is right to kill (or catch and return in the case of most fish) animals as a passtime.
.

It is very difficult to respect that hypocrisy. If it is ok for you to have the right to kill, by proxy, animals that provide food pleasure for you but are not necessary nutritionally, then your choice to contribute to the living hell that intensively reared chickens and pigs, (including for sausages, bacon etc) are subjected to, makes a nonsense of judging anyone else for contributing to the death of another animal. In the case of wild animals, or those with a higher quality of life, even if that is provided for shooting for example, where the animal has a far greater chance to enact all of it's natural behaviours in an environment that is natural for it, then your position is even weaker. I can't get my head around that at all.

For those people who assert that no tolerance should be given to behaviour that they judge immoral, then there is both a disconnect and a rejection of the very values that enable us to largely live peacefully here; for example the practice of ritual slaughter is protected by law for communities in the UK, yet many would view that practice as cruel and immoral. However, we are a country that believes in tolerance and in not forcing our moral frameworks on everyone in society. The outspoken shaming of people for views that they are entitled to hold is...disturbing in that context.

 

[sakura]

This is pretty much hogwash. Sorry, but you may be better off doing some basic research before being so adamant about things that have considerable research available on the subject.

I literally work in wildlife conservation, that is my full time job so please don't assume I know nothing because you disagree with me.

I did read the articles, I disagree with them. I do not believe trophy hunting or poaching help wild populations - it is my personal and professional opinion that both are incredibly damaging and harmful.

 

[sakura]

No one has said that they're going to 'burn their land to the ground'.

Respectfully, yes they did:

"Doesn’t trophy hunting pay local people to not raze everything to the ground to grow crops?" post #4,142

 

[palo1]

I literally work in wildlife conservation, that is my full time job so please don't assume I know nothing because you disagree with me.

I did read the articles, I disagree with them. I do not believe trophy hunting or poaching help wild populations - it is my personal and professional opinion that both are incredibly damaging and harmful.

That is both odd and slightly concerning to me. I respect that you have a professional view and I am interested to know what research supports contesting what has become quite a well respected position on the value of trophy hunting?

 

[sakura]

That is both odd and slightly concerning to me. I respect that you have a professional view and I am interested to know what research supports contesting what has become quite a well respected position on the value of trophy hunting?

I‘m not sure what value a conversation will have considering you find my viewpoint odd. You’re stating opinions as facts. Some conservationists do regard trophy hunting as a positive, some do not. I am the later and I can assure you not alone in my view. But thank you for your concern.

 

[stangs]

I‘m not sure what value a conversation will have considering you find my viewpoint odd. You’re stating opinions as facts. Some conservations do regard trophy hunting as a positive, some do not. I am the later and I can assure you not alone in my view. But thank you for your concern.

Fair enough, but what research, species case studies, etc. has given you the opinion that it's harmful for conservation? It's a genuine question, as everything I've read has largely been positive. Are you in favour of a complete ban?

 

[sakura]

Fair enough, but what research, species case studies, etc. has given you the opinion that it's harmful for conservation? It's a genuine question, as everything I've read has largely been in favour of it.

I work with primates. Primates are targeted in the trophy hunting industry as well as big cats - specifically vervets and other old worlds. In the case of vervets, it's almost exclusively adults who are killed, with no regard to orphans. Monkey politics and social hierarchies are incredibly complex and intricate - it is my personal and professional opinion that this has a negative impact on familial group dynamics and therefore their conservation. Perhaps my opinion is based in emotions, but I challenge anyone working with primates day in and day out to see them as anything other than emotive.

 

[palo1]

I work with primates. Primates are targeted in the trophy hunting industry as well as big cats - specifically vervets and other old worlds. In the case of vervets, it's almost exclusively adults who are killed, with no regard to orphans. Monkey politics and social hierarchies are incredibly complex and intricate - it is my personal and professional opinion that this has a negative impact on familial group dynamics and therefore their conservation. Perhaps my opinion is based in emotions, but I challenge anyone working with primates day in and day out to see them as anything other than emotive.

I wonder, for those hunting primates as trophies, what the 'reward' is? Is it related to skill? What sort of people pay to hunt and kill monkeys? That seems very distasteful to me tbh but I can also see that if habitats etc are protected by trophy hunting that could be in the interest of those primate communities. I can completely understand why the idea of taking adults, leaving orphan monkeys, would be very upsetting although those things happen in nature without human interaction too. I could not and would not disagree that there would be a strong emotional element in considering the impact of hunting on individual animals/social groups but there are other elements in the conversation about trophy hunting too.

 

[Sandstone1]

If you are talking about deliberately torturing an animal then yes it would be a red flag, but where the killing is for a purpose such as pest control, eating etc. then I don’t believe there is any correlation.

But there is no purpose other than killing for pleasure in shooting huge numbers of birds that are left to rot

 

[Nasicus]

Not sure if this has already been posted
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-11-14/bird-of-prey-persecution-remains-at-high-level-rspb-report-warns

This is very important to highlight and inexcusable.

 

[ycbm]

Why is it morally wrong to kill an animal for the pleasure of sport, but not morally wrong to kill for the pleasure of eating them?

There is evidence now that animal protein is required for optimum human health. I don't eat meat because I particularly enjoy it ovef vegetarianfood (which i also often eat), I eat it because I was designed to be an omnivore.
.

 

[Gallop_Away]

There is evidence now that animal protein is required for optimum human health. I don't eat meat because I particularly enjoy it ovef vegetarianfood (which i also often eat), I eat it because I was designed to be an omnivore.
.

But ultimately humans can survive without meat in their diets. However, I suppose it's not so much the fact someone can be against hunting but still a meat eater that I take issue with, rather it's more where you source that meat I find hypocritical. As palo pointed out there are many practices within the commercial mass production of meat that are highly questionable, and I find it strange to take such an issue with the killing of an animal for sport, yet have no concerns about what suffering the animal you are eating has had to endure.