I chose to ignore
Both of your fatuous questions. Imagining a world without humans doesn't help a single elephant.
(
After you my dear Alfonse No. After you., Fri 17 Nov 2017, 21:27,
Share,
Reply)
Culling is a separate issue.
And complicated africageographic.com/blog/decoding-kruger-elephant-management-plan/
The value of trophy hunting is supposed to be in areas where no other incentive exists to conserve wildlife.
But then if you can afford the hunting permit fees and care about wildlife why not just go on a non lethal upmarket safari.
(
Mudface The web isn't callipygian, Fri 17 Nov 2017, 21:51,
Share,
Reply)
Because Africa is inhabited by Africans, not hipsters
You might rather it were otherwise. Safari tourists are a given, and the locals need to turn a buck. Where that buck doesn't involve industry, mining or poaching, and where it has a demonstrably positive effect on wildlife, I'm all for it.
(
After you my dear Alfonse No. After you., Fri 17 Nov 2017, 22:02,
Share,
Reply)
Botswana has banned hunting and is not run by hipsters.
And I'm not sure trophy hunting helps the fight against wildlife trade.
I agree that opposing it without providing a financial alternative isn't going to be effective.
(
Mudface The web isn't callipygian, Fri 17 Nov 2017, 23:06,
Share,
Reply)
For fun and lols, I would put shooting an elephant right up there
with the Spanish Inquisition. But Africa needs all the Yanks spunking tens of thousands of dollars it can get.
By making big game taboo, and hounding a dentist over the killing of Cecil the Friendly Lion, urbanites whose knowledge of Africa is based on Disney have deprived reserves of a lucrative resource.
By the way, it's also left a load of specialist trackers unemployed: if only there were an illegal trade in which they can monetise their skills...
(
After you my dear Alfonse No. After you., Sat 18 Nov 2017, 8:31,
Share,
Reply)