Friday 16 October 2015

Oh. Here We Go Again....

Barely three months after the shooting of Cecil the lion caused global outrage, a German hunter has risked the wrath of animal lovers once more by shooting dead one of the largest elephants ever seen in Zimbabwe.
Conservationists and photographic safari operators in the area expressed their outrage on Thursday night, saying the animal was one of a kind and should have been preserved for all to see.
 Well, of course they do. I mean, it must have been famous, right?
Louis Muller, chairman of the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters & Guides Association, said the hunter had only realised how large the “tusker” was once he had been shot.
"He told me when he and his client were stalking this elephant he saw the tusks were big but did not realize just how big until afterwards and he saw them close. He is going back to see if he can find the lower jaw and bring it back so we can accurately age this elephant,” he told The Telegraph.
"We checked everywhere and this elephant has never been seen before, not in Zimbabwe nor Kruger. We would have known it because its tusks are huge. There have been five or six giant tuskers shot in the last year or so, and we knew all of them, but none as big as this one.”
Ah, Well, so much for that idea!


adams said...

A prat with a rifle ends the life of this great creature for fun ????
Obscene and disgusting .

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why the life of a big elephant is of greater value than the tens of thousands(?) of animals killed every day for a variety of reasons. Also where's the social media outrage for all the elephants killed by poachers, they must out number the elephants killed by sport hunters.

Ted Treen said...

If an animal is humanely (that EXCLUDES Halal, Kosher etc.) killed for food, that is one thing. To kill purely for enjoyment or willy-waving speaks volumes about the perpetrator.

And none of it good,

Greencoat said...

'I don't understand why the life of a big elephant is of greater value than the tens of thousands(?) of animals killed every day for a variety of reasons.'

And I don't understand your comment. Nobody is suggesting any such thing. The pointless slaughter of wildlife is condemned from every civilised quarter but it is very difficult to stop.

It should be said, though, that the main offenders are not a small band of American or European hunters (pathetic scum that they are) but the Chinese, who are funding a veritable wildlife holocaust. Little is done about this because the Chinese are small and yellow-skinned (a 'sub-species' as Morrissey called them).

But, hush now - we mustn't be racist, must we?

JuliaM said...

"To kill purely for enjoyment or willy-waving speaks volumes about the perpetrator."

It's a sport like any other. Done well, it helps to conserve more 'nature' than the single animal (often past breeding age) removed from the population.

I confess, I can't see why so many otherwise sensible people seem to have such a blind spot about it.

"The pointless slaughter of wildlife is condemned from every civilised quarter..."

It is..?

"...but the Chinese, who are funding a veritable wildlife holocaust."

If you mean the trade in Chinese 'medicine', that's big business.

Able said...

The hypocrisy of all that emoting by the eco loons continues to astound me.

If it were not for hunting there simply would be 'no' big game left now. There's a reason the most dangerous animal left in Britain is a slightly disgruntled sheep you know (and it wasn't rich big-game hunters or even AGW that did it). The only reason we have almost any wildlife left is because … of all those nasty rich landowners, going back to the Normans and before, keeping large estates/hunting parks – fact!

The animals must be seen as a resource by those living there. Some significant reason why they should put up with their crops being destroyed and/or children eaten. Only the money from hunting does that. That and population control/culling is both necessary and drives the price up benefiting both the animals and the people.

Care to check what happens (eg. California) when hunting is banned/restricted? Populations grow, massive damage occurs and animal populations die a long slow painful death (and in preventing even Native American hunting they allowed the destruction of significant areas of habitat, and many other non-hunted species).

But eco-loonery is full of half-understood, good-intention, feel-good, unintended consequences. Remember the demand for recyclable packaging to 'save the environment'? Care to go to Madagascar where four-fifths of the forest has been cut down to grow sisal for … recyclable packaging? Or how about making biofuel to stop the 'big-oil' destruction? Care to check just how many 'millions' of hectares of irreplaceable rainforest has been cut down to grow sugar-cane for biofuel. Both instances (amongst the many) have destroyed more animal and plant life than any plastic bag, Styrofoam box, car/lorry or even … hunter.

Then of course, the self-same loons whilst demanding protection for animals that wont eat 'their' crops' or eat 'their' children, wouldn't hesitate a second to call animal-control/the exterminator if a rat/fox/bear dared to encroach on 'their' home/environs.

Hypocrites and idiots, like I said!

Anonymous said...

I see that the feminized cry babies are all over this - everywhere.
They seem incapable of understanding that hunting is good for all concerned even the population pool of the prey species. If you don't like something then don't do it but
it is no concern of yours if other do surely?

It takes balls to hunt big game and I suspect that many who object strongly have more than a little jealousy about those who are able to. Anyway, most animal lovers seem to be people haters. You won't stop me hunting or enjoying it either.