15 Elephants? Think Of The Trophy Fees They Would Have Brought In...

Not to mention the meat they wouls have provided local villages.But white Western liberal squamishness over hunting condemned them to a lingering death instead.

But Duncan Juma, communications director of Kenya's wildlife service, ruled out human-wildlife conflict in the death of the elephants, saying 'the community loves these animals.'

Really? Even the ones who risk being trampled by them when they go to harvest what crops the marauding herds have left to them? Of course, Juma lives and works in air-conditioned comfort in a city, so he would say that, wouldn’t he? 

The International Fund for Animal Welfare, or IFAW, said the recent suspected cyanide poisoning highlights the urgent need to tackle the underlying causes of human-wildlife conflict. 'As people and elephants increasingly share space, protecting wildlife and safeguarding communities' livelihoods must go hand in hand,' IFAW wrote in a statement.

They are incompatible. The elephant has no value to the rural African, if he cannot benefit from the trophy fees or the meat from a licensed hunt.

Last season alone, Muchai said elephants destroyed about half an acre of his tomato crop, costing him an estimated 500,000 Kenya shillings (£2,867). 'We have lived with these animals for years. They eat our crops, and many of us have never received compensation,' he said. 

Surprising? Not at all. 

Another farmer, Rymondy Mrosso, also questioned whether pesticides used by local farmers could explain the deaths and wondered why only elephants appeared to have been affected.

They have to eat a huge quantity of food per day. That would account for it. 

Wildlife Campaigners: 'No, Starve Them Instead, It's More Humane'

Culling deer in England will be made easier under a long-awaited government 10-year plan to deal with a population explosion that threatens woodlands, newly planted trees and farmland.The government has unveiled a deer management strategy that will identify priority culling areas and make it easier to carry out licensed night-time and closed-season shooting. Farmers could also be given new legal rights to shoot them to protect their crops.

At last, a sensible and wortehile government decision. Who could possibly object? 

But some animal welfare campaigners said culling was inhumane and not effective in the long term.

Oh. Of course!  

🙄

...a spokeswoman for the animal rights campaign group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) said that culling wild deer would not resolve the problem of overpopulation. "Removing deer from the landscape doesn't stop their numbers from rebounding, and, in many cases, a temporary reduction in population leaves more food available per animal, which can increase breeding rates in the survivors," she said.Instead, PETA called for "humane and sustainable" options to be used, including habitat modification, appropriate fencing and limiting access to artificial food sources.

So it's more humane to slowly starve them to death than it is to cleanly shoot them? Well, I suppose that's the sort of 'logic' you can expect from an organisation that's studiously ignored halal and kosher slaughter...

H&S is an issue too:

More than 74,000 deer are involved in collisions with vehicles each year, killing between 10 and 20 people and injuring more than 700, according to the RSPCA.

And don't forget, this is a crisis that has no downside, unless you're a vegetarian: 

The government said it also wanted to promote and support a domestic market for the venison from culled deer, including pushing for more to be bought and served up by schools, prisons and hospitals.

Why 'push' - legislate!  

It's Not Just The Muslims!

Campaigners are calling on theatre bosses to stop serving bacon, sausages and ham in their cafes...

Whut?  The usual suspects? No, Reader, and yes.

...at least while Peppa Pig and her family are performing in the same building.

Oh, for god's sake! What happened to people who once did this in response to stupid demands from lunatics? 

 This is how you should have dealt with PETA! 

Grimsby Auditorium in Lincolnshire said this week it would remove pork from the menu when Peppa Pig’s Big Family Show opens next month, after a request from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta UK). The campaign group is sending the venue vegan ham as an alternative. Jennifer White, an associate director at Peta, welcomed the decision, saying she hoped it would remind people “that all pigs are individuals with personalities and not body parts to be chopped up”.

They are both, actually. 

The auditorium told Peta it would remove pork products from the Stage Door cafe menu as a “considerate gesture” during the show’s run on 3-4 March.

Why? Why not tell these charlatans - who kill more animals than anyone - to sit and spin if they don't like it?  

In November, Peta said it had persuaded Chichester Festival theatre to drop pork products from its menus during a run of The Three Little Pigs.

Ah. Because yet more spineless arty types encouraged them... 

Just Tell Them To Go Stuff Themselves....

...animal rights campaigners are demanding that a stuffed 8ft Bengal tiger from one of George V's big-game hunts in Asia should be removed from Bristol Museum, returned home and given a respectful burial.

🙄 

The big cat was shot by King Charles's great-grandfather during his infamous ten-day hunting trip to Nepal in 1911 when he proudly claimed he killed 21 tigers, eight rhinos and a bear, describing the cull afterwards as 'a record'. He added: 'I think it will be hard to beat.'

Different times… 

It can be seen crouching hidden in long grass in front of a painted mural by the wildlife artist Stanley Lloyd. The mural shows a bearded George V in a khaki safari outfit and pith helmet riding an elephant, with his shotgun poised ready to fire.

Err, no, ‘Mail’, I’m pretty sure - even without having visited the museum in question - it will have been a double rifle.  I doubt anyone was hunting tigers from elephant back with a shotgun!

Elisa Allen, from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), says: 'Almost all animals stuffed and mounted were shot for sport or otherwise violently killed, and there are two ways to deal with this shameful past behaviour.

'Bury the dead respectfully, no matter how long it has been [since they died], just as we are returning human remains and artefacts to their countries of origin.'

Failing that, the museum should at the very least 'make sure the plaque describing [the animals] decries their horrific dispatch', she adds.

There’s actually three ways. We can just say ‘Well, that’s history’ and ignore PETA idiots. 

"My children enjoyed the rare taste of meat. "

Last week in London, celebrities including Dame Judi Dench, Ricky Gervais, Dame Joanna Lumley and Sir David Jason launched a petition demanding the Labour government help to starve small black children in Zimbabwe.

Whoops! No, sorry. Got that a bit wrong. Or...did I? 

Last week in London, celebrities including Dame Judi Dench, Ricky Gervais, Dame Joanna Lumley and Sir David Jason launched a petition demanding the Labour government help to stop the 'cruel sport' of trophy hunting in Africa.

They are, of course, outraged that small black children have meat to eat.  

Campfire leaders are emphatic in their support for the government cull. They told us that Zimbabwe cannot cope with so many elephants and is right to 'fight' pro-animal campaigners. 'The meat will save our people,' they added.

Resource Africa, an influential organisation representing the thousands in rural Zimbabwe and other southern African countries facing the 'elephant problem', said a recent UK poll backing the import bill was prompted by British ignorance and populist virtue signalling.

Hard to disagree, isn't it?  

Touche! But the sad truth is, these bunny-huggers, like Dame Judi Dench, Ricky Gervais, Dame Joanna Lumley and Sir David Jason would almost certainly demand stag shooting be stopped too, even as they tucked into venison fillets at the Dorchester...

These Tuskers Have Passed On Their Genes Already

...a series of super-tusker killings has sparked a bitter international battle over trophy hunting and its controversial, sometimes counterintuitive role in conservation. Some conservationists believe the killing of these extraordinary animals should not be allowed. Others say controlled, regulated hunting can actually contribute to elephants’ long-term survival by providing jobs for local people and incentives for habitats to be preserved.

Something that always gets the bunny-huggers backs up... 

“The targeted elephants were among the largest, oldest bulls,” a group of conservationists wrote in a letter decrying their loss, which was published in the journal Science in June. They represented “one of the last gene pools for enormous ivory and the source of the largest tusks ever collected”.

These old, solitary except for younger bulls, animals are usually well past breeding prime. They've contibuted their genes, and all they have to look forward to is a slow lingering death by starvation because thet've outlived their supply of teeth. Nature isn't Disney.   

This month, the Tanzanian government will decide whether to issue more super-tusker hunting permits for the coming year. The authors urged them not to do so, and focus instead on ecotourism. “Alive, these super tuskers have great biological, economic and social value,” they wrote. “Once they are shot, their contribution ends.”

The money raised by hunting far outweighs the money raised by photography tourism, which seems just as potentially dangerous a hobby, and it also provides much needed jobs: 

...other scientists say many who oppose hunting seem to push for bans even if they harm habitats, wildlife and communities. “However distasteful many may find hunting, it can and does work as a provider of revenue for conservation and communities,” says Prof Adam Hart from the University of Gloucestershire, co-author of the book Trophy Hunting. Evidence shows that abolishing trophy hunting – and the incentives it creates for conservation – without funded alternatives can lead to greater loss of wildlife.

Protecting a valuable resource for hunting has the fringe benefit of protecting other species that share their environment.  

Amy Dickman, professor of wildlife conservation at the University of Oxford, said the argument is a microcosm of a much wider debate about the unintended harms of hunting bans. Focusing on the “scientific value” of the bulls perpetuated the idea that elephants and researchers were more important than local people, she says. “The letter follows the damaging pattern of demanding that hunting ends now, while providing no immediate alternative revenue stream,” she says. “[It] failed to even mention local communities. “People don’t care as much about unintended consequences,” she adds. “[They] assume if you just ban something, then those animals will live in harmony in that place. It’s often not the case.”

The sort of people who object to hunting are the sort who would no doubt decry 'colonialism' except when they get the chance to demand what foreign countries should do. Because it's never about the animals, really.  

And None Of The Usual Suspects Will Complain...

...in fact, the usual anti-monarchy urbanites with 'hate racism' stickers on their electric vehicle who demand the council act when a fox shits in their garden and rips open their bins will be absolutely silent when a six-ton jumbo devastates an impoverished African's maize crop and tramples his grandma into the bargain. 

These are the same crowd that will enthusiastically back Starmer's plan to end trail hunting - because it's not love of animals that drives them, it's something very ugly. 

You Fed The Crocodile, So It Would Eat You Last...

...and now you can't use it's skin any more:

Copenhagen fashion week has just announced that it will ban exotic skins and feathers from its catwalks next year, becoming the biggest industry event yet to do so. “Skål to Copenhagen fashion week for raising the bar for other events,” says the vice-president of corporate projects at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta), Yvonne Taylor. “Now all eyes are on other fashion week organisers, who must follow suit.”

Is that a 'must' in the sense that fashion is known for following the crowd blindly, or 'must' in the sense that they were craven over real fur so you guess they'll be craven over this as well?  

But there is still a long way to go. While the prohibition follows similar moves from smaller fashion weeks, such as Stockholm and Melbourne, as well as brands such as Burberry and Chanel, it will be a while until exotic skins, including crocodile, snake, alligator and ostrich, as well as ostrich and peacock feathers, are considered cruel in the same way as fur.

Well, you don't have to kill the bird to get the feathers, since they moult, and expecting the celebs who cried over cute foxes and minks to do so over 10 foot man-eating reptiles is a fool's errand, so yes. 

While there has been no marked spike in the use of exotic animal skins, one of the most high-profile designs of the last year was the so-called Millionaire Speedy bag. Made out of crocodile skin, the Pharrell Williams design for Louis Vuitton lived up to its names with a price tag of $1m.Saltwater crocodiles have one of the most lusted-after skins in the industry, according to a report from the ethical fashion advocacy group Collective Fashion Justice, and “luxury brands such as Hermès and Louis Vuitton not only source these skins but now own factory farms themselves.”

And you won't see many animal rights nutters making midnight raids to let them out!  

And, Sadly, You're Wasting Your Time, Philda...

I am here to tell you on behalf of my country and many governments across Africa, that to save the animal kingdom we must put sentiment aside — and look at the facts.

But no-one wants to hear the facts, even when they come from the Minister for Environment and Tourism in Botswana. 

You know, someone who the liberal establishment should be listening to, if all their proclamations about self-government meant something...

Hunting revenue has connected villages to clean water and electricity, built roads and schools, founded businesses and helped struggling families. It has also created watering holes for animals that lie safely beyond village boundaries, and created animal-proof censors that can alert villagers if wildlife is close. Sadly, all too often, Westerners focus solely on animal welfare at the expense of human life in Africa.

And you know what the real tragedy is, Philda? 

Often, they couldn't give a damn for the animals either, no matter how they beat their breasts and rend their garments - it's all about stopping people enjoying themselves in ways of which they don't approve...

To talk about wildlife without taking into account lives and livelihoods is a terrible misstep — which is why, while prioritising sustainable development, the Botswanan government also puts people at the heart of policy. So how does it work in practice? Since the 1980s, and with the ongoing support of the UK, we have implemented a community-based natural resource management programme, allocating hunting quotas to communities, administered by a trust set up by villagers. Once issued with their quota, they can then find global partners who will pay for the right to hunt. These rights are tightly controlled and hunting without a permit carries a hefty prison term ranging from five to ten years. The revenue from these permits goes directly into the community coffers.

All things which you'd imagine would be lacking in a country such as Africa... 

Last year, our government raised £1,635,000 from a 'Special Elephant Quota' of 70 elephants, money that was channelled into improving the lives of rural communities.

But sadly, Philda, no-one that you're up against in this challenge wants to improve the lives of rural communities. They don't even really want to save the animals. And they certainly don't want to hear the facts, even from you. 

I Didn't Think Columbia Could Spare $3.5M ....

...must less spend it on assuaging animal rights nutters:

Authorities said they plan to capture and move nearly half of the hippopotamuses in the coming months, with 10 bound for the Ostok Sanctuary in northern Mexico, and 60 destined for an as-yet unnamed facility in India.

“The whole operation should cost around $3.5m,” Ernesto Zazueta, the owner of the Ostok Sanctuary said.

Well, you know what you could do instead, don't you? Upwards of £5k a pop, and the food's better than Africa! 

Since the hippos escaped after Escobar’s death, the government has repeatedly failed to tame the booming population who have made the Magdalena River basin their home.In 2009 it tried culling the animals but stopped after a graphic photo caused national outrage.

A sterilization programmed remains in place but the hippos breed faster than local experts can find, catch and castrate them.

There's a lesson here for everyone, isn't there? 

You're Wasting Your Time, Sadly...

Most of the claims about trophy hunting put out by animal rights activists are wrong, MPs have been warned ahead of a key vote today.

Conservationists say that in the last Commons debate nearly three-quarters of statements in favour of a blanket ban were questionable. They are battling to correct the ‘simplistic’ narrative championed by celebrities.

Sadly, simplistic narratives are all these virtue-signalling idiots can ever grasp. Actual facts elude them constantly, which is why we are being dragooned into nonsense like OLEZ expansions, '15 minute cities' and Net Zero. 

They, along with African leaders and grassroots groups, have called on Britain to allow certain trophies to be imported if it is proven the animals were hunted ethically. They argue that total bans are unsuccessful because they destroy the incentive for farmers to keep big game on their land and earn money from hunters.

Revenues from selective hunting keep locals in jobs and also help pay for patrols against poachers, the real enemy of conservation.

None of that matters to the idiots that are in sway to the slebs and activists. Some are genuinely animal lovers, some are rabid authoritarians and the rest are...well, simply dim. 

Professor Dickman warned: ‘Many thousands of wild animals will die in appalling and indiscriminate ways – far more than are killed in trophy hunting.

'True, we will no longer see the grinning faces of rich white hunters celebrating their kills.

‘Instead, we will see the grinning faces of rich white celebrities celebrating a “win” that drives more killing.’

Sadly, Prof, the idiots in power see that as an acceptable result. It's not about the animals at all. It often isn't for the slebs and activists, and it almost never is for the MPs... 

No Bull!

A helicopter with a shooter will fly over a portion of the vast Gila Wilderness in southwestern New Mexico next week, searching for feral cows to kill. US Forest Service managers approved the plan Thursday to protect sensitive spots in the nation's first designated wilderness area.

Naturally, the bunny huggers are aghast. And so are the cattle ranchers:

They said the action violates federal regulations and will be problematic when carcasses are left to rot.

Will it? Well... 

In 2022, a Forest Service contractor killed 65 cows in an aerial gunning operation similar to the one planned for next week.

A survey done 90 days later found that no carcasses remained. Scavenging birds and other animals consumed them, officials said.

There's your answer! 

No, Actually, Troy, It Isn't...

It is hard to fathom the boredom of pet fish.

...it's exactly like the boredom I felt scanning down this tired, hackneyed 'Guardian' column. 

Written by Troy Vettese, who is 'an environmental historian at the European University Institute and co-author of Half-Earth Socialism (Verso 2020)'. His premise is that the world would be better if we gave up pets (because what else is socialism taken to the extreme?).

In a post-pets era, we could still enjoy the company and beauty of animals, but from afar as naturalists in a wilder world. We can only speculate what this new era might look like, but its realization begins once we accept that true happiness cannot be predicated on the suffering of others.

Not sure that's true. Seeing this joyless little twerp suffering would give me true happiness... 

There's Good News And Bad News For Hookers In The Sunshine State...

First, the good news:

Prostitution will be easier in California through Senate Bill 357 that would repeal current laws that prohibit loitering in the state with the intent of prostitution. Woke Democratic Senator Scott Wiener authored the bill to halt the crack down of the criminalization of prostitution. Wiener insisted argued that the current law targets the LGBT and black communities 'for simply existing and looking like a “sex worker” to law enforcement.'

Now, the bad:

Fur has been a part of California history before the gold rush in the 1800s with several Europeans and Americans flocking to the west coast for otter and seal fur. Now, fur products may no longer be sold or made in the state under Assembly Bill 44 authored by Assemblymember Laura Friedman (D). Violators can face up to a $1,000 fine, according to The National Review.

 "I hope that's fake, sweetie.."

Perfectly Understandably, Andreas...

Museum director Andreas Beitin said: 'We thought that flies didn’t come under the Animal Welfare Act.'

You'd have to be insane to treat them as anything other than revolting disease-bearing pests, after all. Rather like, say, art directors.

The RSPCA slammed the 'so-called "art exhibition"' and said: 'There would be national outcry if such an exhibition involved any other animal – such as a dog.'

Well, yes. But it didn't.

Hold The OUTRAGE!

...nursery rhymes such as Baa, Baa, Black Sheep have gone woke – with the words changed to reflect a kinder attitude towards animals.

Baa, Baa, Black Sheep, which parents and teachers sing to children, traditionally starts ‘Baa, baa, black sheep, have you any wool?’

But in a new version the sheep explains it’s ‘not cool’ to steal wool and refuses to provide any for the ‘pastor’, dame or little boy who lives down the lane.

*gasps!* 

Meanwhile, the line in Little Miss Muffet which tells of a girl being ‘frightened away’ by a spider has been changed to say it ‘brightened Miss Muffet’s day!’

That'll go down well in DownUnderLand! 

Miss Muffet has also become vegan – instead of eating ‘curds and whey’, she is ‘watching the bluebirds play’.

Ready the flaming pitchforks, Reader, we march on the nurseries implimenting these ... 

Oh, wait. 

The changes to the rhymes have been made by animal rights campaigners Peta who say the traditional versions promote unfair and outdated attitudes. The rewritten rhymes, which are featured on the Peta website, are part of a trend of woke children’s literature, which includes gender-swap fairytales.

It's a publicity grab by Peta. I bet no-one's stupid enough to read these to toddlers.  

Drop The Lot!

The British government is reportedly considering ditching its pledge to ban fur and foie gras imports after opposition from within the cabinet.

The new rules, which were due to be part of the animals abroad bill, were expected to be introduced soon. But, according to the BBC, the government is likely to drop the plans due to objections from several cabinet ministers.

Is this a sign of Carrie's malign influence finally beginning to wane..? 

Rees-Mogg believes the government should not impose restrictions on customers and argued that the proposed ban would not benefit animal welfare in the UK.

Well, precisely! But to assume that it would is to assume animal welfare is what drives those pushing for this, and we know that's not the case... 

The new draft legislation intended to improve animal welfare includes a crackdown on hunting animals for trophies and holidays that lead to animal neglect.

Surely the same argument applies to these too?  

But, following debate over how some aspects would be enforced, the bill has been delayed.

How are you going to stop people riding elephants abroad? Are Customs expected to trawl through their holiday snaps? 

This is what happens when you let idiot bunnyhuggers decide policy... 

...animal rights campaigners warned that removing the ban from the bill would lead to anguish.

“A very large number of people will be disappointed if they don’t,” Claire Bass, the executive director of the Humane Society International UK, told the BBC, adding: “People won’t stand for that.”

People mostly don't care about such non-issues, and as we've seen, will stand for pretty much anything so long as 'Strictly' is on and there's no toilet paper shortage in Tesco. So your followers will have a strop and...well, that's it! 

And Yet, She Doesn't Understand That Birds Can Fly...

Helena Horton is an environment reporter for the Guardian.

And knows her subject about as well as all other 'Guardian' experts, clearly... 

Two of these giants have now been found dead on estates in Dorset and Sussex.

While the cause of death has not been established, the multi-agency police investigation suggests that foul play could have been involved.

That's what an investigation is for - it doesn't actually mean anything in and of itself.  

Currently, officers are conducting toxicology reports, suggesting they believe the eagles could have been poisoned.

As a famous screen lawyer once pointed out 'It doesn't matter what I believe, it matters what I can prove...' 

Unless those who own estates are properly held to account for poisoned birds found on their land – perhaps having their shooting licences suspended until they can get a handle on crimes occurring under their noses – this will likely keep happening.

There's no automatic connection whatsoever between a landowner and a dead poisoned bird just because it happens to be found on that land. 

Birds fly, Helen. You did know that, didn't you? 

Never Forget The True Agenda Of These 'Animal Lovers'...

Exotic-looking pet cats like the one kicked by footballer Kurt Zouma in a horrifying Snapchat video could be banned in the UK.

Widespread fury over the shamed West Ham defender’s antics has prompted calls for hybrid Bengal animals to be outlawed.

Wait, what? Some barely human savage acts as his true nature dictates, and these people want to outlaw everyone else's pets? 

With the backing of TV animal expert Chris Packham, the Wildheart Trust has launched a campaign for a legal ban on the breeding of exotic cats with domestic cats.

Ah, say no more - publicity-hungry tv celebrity joins forces with 'young, dynamic and determined charity' that wants to get in on the 'Born Free' action...

In an open letter to environment secretary George Eustice, the charity called on the government to ‘end this cruel form of hybridisation’.

They wrote: ‘Motivated by the “designer pet” trade, fuelled by social media, the breeding of exotic felids and domestic cats (known as F1 hybrids) should have no place in the 21st century.

‘It is no less cruel than breeding a wolf with a poodle. This practice is also an escalating problem – evidenced by the dramatic rise in rescues of F1 hybrid cats in 2021.

‘We have a moral responsibility to treat animals with dignity and not as commodities to be corrupted for pleasure or commercial gain.

‘Urgent legislative action to make this form of hybridisation illegal will prevent the suffering of individual animals caught up in this trade and mitigate against future threats to wild populations of exotic felids.’

What does the public think? Are they on board with this radical agenda? 

That'll be a big 'No!' then. Probably not because they have Bengals or Savannahs, but because they have cats. Ordinary moggies. 

And they know that if this campaign succeeds the charity and this snivelling sentimental celebutard will find some way to come for them next...

In Which I Agree With An Animal Rights Loon...

Well, I quite agree...

That's much better! 

What's the issue, anyway?

Animal Aid campaigner Rachel King said: "Christmas should be a joyful time for all, but for reindeer used as 'props' in festive events it can mean increased stress and misery. Kate and William are prominent members of society and are in an excellent position to set a positive example by avoiding events that treat animals as commodities for human entertainment."

Some animals indesputably are just that, though.