Reply With Quote
What are your thoughts on its impact on the environment and economy?
Ok cool. You think he'll be charged with poaching and I don't. Guess we'll just see what happens.
What are your thoughts on its impact on the environment and economy?
As I said four time before I think he will be prosecuted in the US for violations of international agreements.
Jesus, did you all just decide to be stupid together since it has something to do with guns?
I think it's not the only way to raise money for conservation.
Still waiting for a post of me supporting the dentist, or in your words my hero.
How would you make up for the lost $200 million? How would you convince all the private land owners to keep their lands open if there was no financial incentive?
Support, defend, rationalize -- whatever.
Where are you getting $200 million? Is that all for threatened and endangered trophies? You'll have to get pretty specific here.
Go ahead and try to find one of my posts doing any of that. I've said he's an asshole from the start.
You've done plenty to rationalize his actions, sport.
I've linked it during this discussion. You are more than welcome to find it.
How would you convince all the private land owners to keep their lands open if there was no financial incentive?
Link please.
If I get the actual numbers and the actual landowners (that is in some manner of flux there) I'll decide whether to cast a vote for penis compensation.
Look up.
There's nothing in this thread or any of the others with me showing support for the dentist.
I see you're done having a serious discussion.
ra·tion·al·ize
ˈraSHənlˌīz,ˈraSHnəˌlīz/Submit
verb
1. attempt to explain or justify (one's own or another's behavior or at ude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate.
I seriously told you exactly what I need to draw a conclusion here. If you can't or won't provide them, that's fine. Forgive me for not believing half the you post.
OK, first article I found:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-d...trophy-huntingIn practice though, studies have shown that only about three per cent of these fees actually reaches the local communities. Most of the money is siphoned off by the hunting industry and government officials.
If communities in the whole of Africa are only getting $6 million total then I'm fane with shutting down the whole practice completely.
Like I said I've already linked it. I'm sure you're familiar with the search member post function and I doubt you'll be logging of Spurstalk any time soon, so find what you need and stop being lazy.
Assuming you continue to be lazy I'll ask you a question you needn't look up data for. In your opinion is legal trophy hunting a net positive or negative on the environment, and why?
Looks like it's pretty worthless.
Shut it all down.
How do you propose you keep all the private lands open which are the biggest factor in endangered species making comebacks. Why would they keep their lands open with no more financial hunting incentive?
You shut down trophy hunting you shut out land. You would be responsible for more deaths than poaching.
You were saying it's a boon to African communities.
Now you are saying it's just a boon to landowners.
If that's the case, their land can be taken. We do it all the time when we deem it important enough.
Either enclose the parks or expand them. Compensation can be made in the latter case.
If all it takes is $6 million to help all the communities in Africa the way trophy hunting does now, I'm all for the US government's just giving it to those communities.
I've said the communities and the animals both benefit from the start. You keep grasping for straws and coming up empty. It's hard for you to accept that trophy hunting tags are actually beneficial to the animals hunted, and it's amusing watching you avoid admitting it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions