We are still screwed: the coming climate disaster

[Oghier]

What’s strange is this: The wealthy hunter could quite easily go to many places in Africa, stalk a lion, and then take a picture of that lion, which picture is taken by a telescopic sight indicating that he could have killed the lion. It’s the same achievement without the death of the lion, yet somehow, it isn’t enough for the wealthy hunter. The wealthy hunter needs to kill. It’s not a good thing.

You can’t control what people want to do. This is just a pragmatic approach to monetizing that desire and putting the cash to good use.

That’s true, but then you shift focus to habitat protection (or in the case of an organization like the Nature Conservancy, just buy the land.)

Who is the buyer for the land these goats live on?

[MrGrumpy]

Who is the buyer for the land these goats live on?

That was in response to species like toads and beetles that can’t generate charity directly. Nature Conservancy is international, but I don’t know if they operate in Asia/Pakistan (and there’s other international organizations that do the same thing.) There’s risk of course that in less stable places, the government would just do what it wants with the land regardless of who bought it, which is why it’s useful to work with the local populations like the Snow Leopard trust people do.

At the end of the day, insisting that hunting is the only or best way to possibly save endangered animals is really quite specious. Tourism (and eco-tourism) can be effective too (see for instance Costa Rica), and rare creatures aren’t getting killed Sure there’s downsides to eco tourism, but if we want to celebrate pragmatism, I’ll celebrate that instead.

[Oghier]

At the end of the day, insisting that hunting is the only or best way to possibly save endangered animals is really quite specious.

Literally nobody is suggesting that here, and I doubt there is anyone saying that anywhere. Obviously, there are many approaches. Eco-tourism is an awesome one. But they won’t all work everywhere. Costa Rica is a lot more accessible for westerners than some remote spot in Pakistan. Philanthropic organizations are awesome, too, but they can’t buy everyplace endangered species live. Managed hunting is one solution among many, but it will may be the only one that works in some spots.

If your priority is treating animals humanely and avoiding cruelty, hunting is a terrible ‘solution.’ I get that. But if you’re focused on preserving the species, it’s going to be the best practical approach to some situations.

[MrGrumpy]

But if you’re focused on preserving the species, it’s going to be the best practical approach to some situations

That’s where the disagreement lies* is. I don’t think that ever need be the case. We can agree to disagree though.

(*I can’t even google what the correct grammar is for that.)

[Dave_Perkins]

Why do hunters feel the need to pose with the slain animal like that? It automatically makes me think they are douchebags, not animal lovers.

[ArmandoPenblade]

Because they’re not good people. Next question?

• Armando the Answerer

[MrGrumpy]

I love you man.

[Dave_Perkins]

Because they’re not good people. Next question?

• Armando the Answerer

What happens when you die?

[Dave_Perkins]

Not you. I mean, us.

[KevinC]

The job creators animate your corpse and shuffle you back to your cubicle.

[ArmandoPenblade]

I’ll give you a twofer:

Me: my mortal form will be interred at state for six months. Within a decade, a death cult in my name will arise. The cemetery where McConnell is buried will be swept to the ocean by a neverending river of my acolytes’ shit.

Y’all: Anubis will ask you if you ever voted for a Republican. He already knows the answer, but he lives to watch you squirm.

[Dave_Perkins]

Armando the Answerer, I worship you and will gladly add to the river. I have begun consuming pistachios by the fistful in preparation for that glorious day.

[CraigM]

I’m having hummus and a bowl of cabbage stew for lunch.

[scottagibson]

You can’t control what people want to do.

Strangely, there are all sorts of laws that seek to control what people want to do. Perhaps they still want to do them, but generally they don’t do them, so no one need care about their perverse desires.

[Oghier]

That has nothing to do with my point. I’m aware that laws and regulations are a thing. I’m not aware that laws or regulations can take someone who wants to kill animals and turn them into someone who will pay for the right to take a picture.

For the record, I’m not a hunter. I’m fine with people who hunt for food, but I’m not impressed with those who hunt so they can stick a head on the wall. That doesn’t mean it bothers me if their money is used for something useful.

[Tin_Wisdom]

Strangely, there are all sorts of laws that seek to control what people want to do. Perhaps they still want to do them, but generally they don’t do them, so no one need care about their perverse desires.

Exactly. That’s why the War on Drugs is such a massive success. And why there were no gay people before the law against buggery were struck down.

[scottagibson]

That’s why the War on Drugs is such a massive success.

Also why most people don’t murder their neighbors, or rob the local liquor store, or embezzle from their bosses. So there’s that.

[scottagibson]

I’m not aware that laws or regulations can take someone who wants to kill animals and turn them into someone who will pay for the right to take a picture.

There are certainly laws that would prevent them from acting on that desire. They just need to be enforced.

[MikeJ]

I love how a post like “We are on-course for wiping out insect life” gets a yawn but one guy kills a goat and the thread is hopping.

[Oghier]

There are certainly laws that would prevent them from acting on that desire. They just need to be enforced.

You’re missing the point again. I don’t know why, and I don’t really care.