Firstly trophy hunting in Africa SAVED the plethora of animals now present.
That may well be the case, and what a shame it was ever needed. What a damning indictment of our society's behaviour if we need to rely on hunting revenue to preserve what we've previously all but killed off by other means.
But just because that is what may have happened in the past it does not mean it is how we should proceed.
I don't accept the premise that trophy hunting is the only workable way to preserve nature we have.
I don't accept the premise that trophy hunting is the only profitable way to enjoy and protect wildlife.
I don't accept the premise that the local population are hapless, just waiting for another westerner to come along with a 375 H&H and finally rid them of that [insert species] so they can finally eat/be safe.
I don't believe trophy hunters are overly concerned about preserving these species.
I think it is an argument used to justify the fact that they want to kill stuff that has big teeth and will look good on the wall.
If preservation were their goal, they could donate to conservation org's, go on safaris instead.
I don't agree with killing animals for "a laugh". It is not an activity I can bring myself to respect.
lions aren't endangered either
If that is true then why are even the Masai Mara trying to curb their coming of age tradition of killing a lion by spear to prove one's manhood: because they know that numbers are in rapid decline.
Take a look. 450K in 1940 to 20K by 2000. Quite sobering.
When those sorts of changes arise from direct or indirect human activity over just the period of 1940 to the turn of the 21st century, I think that your definition of endangered and mine are very different.
How few do you want there to be before they become worth actively protecting?
Wildlife safaris are a billion dollar industry that creates jobs for the people in africa, yankees and euros pay big bucks to hunt ...
Permit the amendment that illustrates that a rifle is not needed to garner the same results.
... and atleast some of it trickle down.
"Some" is the operative word there. I bet the main beneficiaries are not the majority of locals and that the "some" is a paltry %.
Professional Hunters are not conservationists. They are Professional Hunters.
If they are preserving these animals it is primarily to make money. What does that mean when that animal no longer becomes profitable/worth maintaining: Bottom line is that trophy hunting is not the only nor even the best means of conservation at our current disposal.
So let's not claim that trophy hunters are motivated by a desire to preserve the Savannah. If they were they could choose from any number of more effective, more sustainable ways of doing so.
Let's rather say it like it is: they do it because they want to kill a big African game animal.