P
Path_Finder
Guest
It’s a Catholic forum.
How would that sounds if one said “doesn’t surprise me on an _______ forum”? Let’s say one is talking about someone’s race. It is actually, a Catholic forum.
- Status
How would that sounds if one said “doesn’t surprise me on an _______ forum”? Let’s say one is talking about someone’s race. It is actually, a Catholic forum.
S
styrgwillidar
Guest
indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/lion-murderer-walt-palmer-has-done-more-for-conservatio-1720901473
Interesting article " Lion Murderer Walt Palmer Has Done More For Conservation Than You Have" pointing out the economic factor that, like it or not, trophy hunting provides an economic incentive for conservation. Article isn’t supportive of Palmer, it’s more-- before you criticize him you’d better be coughing up as much money towards preservation of wildlife.
“According to a 2005 paper by Nigel Leader-Williams and colleagues in the Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy the answer is yes. Leader-Williams describes how the legalization of white rhinoceros hunting in South Africa motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than one hundred individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies”.”
“Today, trophy hunting takes place in 23 sub-Saharan African nations, generating over $200 million and attracting over 18,000 clients each year. That’s money spent in the economies of multiple African nations directly pegged to the continuing presence of big game animals. It’s a large economic incentive for conservation of these species. And it’s growing.”
Kind of the same thing in the US, folks decry hunting – but much of the money going to conservation comes from hunting licenses and taxes on ammunition etc.
Interesting article " Lion Murderer Walt Palmer Has Done More For Conservation Than You Have" pointing out the economic factor that, like it or not, trophy hunting provides an economic incentive for conservation. Article isn’t supportive of Palmer, it’s more-- before you criticize him you’d better be coughing up as much money towards preservation of wildlife.
“According to a 2005 paper by Nigel Leader-Williams and colleagues in the Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy the answer is yes. Leader-Williams describes how the legalization of white rhinoceros hunting in South Africa motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than one hundred individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies”.”
“Today, trophy hunting takes place in 23 sub-Saharan African nations, generating over $200 million and attracting over 18,000 clients each year. That’s money spent in the economies of multiple African nations directly pegged to the continuing presence of big game animals. It’s a large economic incentive for conservation of these species. And it’s growing.”
Kind of the same thing in the US, folks decry hunting – but much of the money going to conservation comes from hunting licenses and taxes on ammunition etc.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Simply because love is “really hard” does not disqualify us from having a responsibility for loving others. Jesus said, “Love those who hate you and persecute you.” Those kinds of people would appear even more difficult to find value/dignity in than Palmer, since Palmer has done nothing to you personally, has he?Thank you for this. The thinking Catholic’s response.
I must say I still struggle with a basic paradox here - to love what is good and noble - to love man. Palmer and his defenders make it really hard to buy the value/dignity of man argument. Bad PR.
Sure, atheism looks pretty good as a way of avoiding thinking about, dealing with or confronting the issue at all. That, however, is ALL that it is - a denial or avoidance. It certainly isn’t satisfying in any deep sense.
Sincere atheists such as Camille Paglia recognize that, at least.
salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_that’s_simply_not_true/
T
Thorolfr
Guest
It now appears that Zimbabwe is going to seek Palmer’s extradition and US officials say that he “could have violated the U.S. Lacey Act, a conservation law meant to shield animals from harm”:
washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/07/30/u-s-officials-cant-find-the-dentist-who-killed-cecil-the-lion/?hpid=z3
W
Windmill
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
B
Brendan
Guest
The government of Zimbabwe indicated that it was not needless that a lion die when it issued the permit.
This is commonly done in wildlife management. I don’t have direct experience with Zimbabwe, but I do regular mission trips to Tanzania, to a rural diocese that is on the Serengti plateau. The diocese is not in the park itself, but I interact with the park officials on occasion.
The proper management of lions involves that dominant lions be removed. This is necessary to ensure the genetic diversity of the pride.
Due to loss of habitat, the range of lions is restricted. Those near game preserves benefit from the greater numbers of prey animals. They are generally more fit and stronger than others.
In a pride, adoleceant male lions are kicked out by the dominant lion and forced to fend for themselves. Most will die, but in the past, some males have been able to best a dominant lion and take over the pride. This provides a new genetic line for the pride, and that is a good thing.
But for male lions who dominate a pride near, or on, a game preserve, they stay on much longer than they normally would have in a completely wild environment. The females have better hunting, so they catch more game. The problem, though, is that genetic diversity is lost. A domainant lion would end up mating with the own daughters, and, in some cases, his own daughter\granddaughter. Not good.
So parks eliminate male lions, just a few, but some every year.
This opens up opportunities for the loner males from other prides to become dominant, and thus add new genetics to the pride.
So the question now becomes, do the parks use their limited revenue to hire someone to take out the requisite number of lions, or do they offer permits, where upon they GET revenue.
That one is a no brainer. If you had a tree in your yard that needed to be removed because it was causing deformities in several other trees, and then someone offered to PAY you $50,000 remove it FOR you, you would jump on it too, wouldn’t you…
So the fact that a permit was issued fulfills the part of the CCC in that the animals death was NOT needless.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
None of what you say above applies in this particular case as Zimbabwe National Parks have said that that lion hunting using firearms requires a permit and a quota which is assigned to a given area. This killing was illegal because it took place in an area that does not have a quota for lion kills, and Palmer’s use of a bow and arrow against Cecil was in contravention of Zimbabwean hunting regulations, So this IS in breach of the catechism, not that that will matter one bit to Walter Palmer, but he will never work again.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
I think all are agreed that someone made a mistake, perhaps a criminal one, in this killing, be it the guide or the dentist. The law and not the catechism or the mob will determine who will be held responsible.
However, what does make sense to discuss is the general topic of hunting which is a more appropriate topic. Similarly, we might discuss what the catechism says about ruining a man’s reputation and livlihood based on inuendo and upset feelings.
If anyone here thinks that the catechism forbids hunting, make the case.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
No one said that hunting per se is illegal. What the catechism says is “It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.” No debate needed.
S
styrgwillidar
Guest
From what I’ve read- the area the lion was killed in was ok, the problem was the lion was illegally lured into the area where Palmer shot it with an arrow. Then, of course, since it didn’t achieve an instantaneous kill it had to be tracked and finally shot again (I think with a firearm). Of course, the argument Palmer has put forward is that he was relying on the guide to assure that the hunt was legal.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Uh, you are dodging the question. I didn’t ask if hunting was illegal, we all know that it isn’t.
Nor does it serve any useful purpose to repeat the generic statement of the catechism. We are discussing its application to hunting.
Are you asserting that the catechism forbids hunting or not?
L
liturgyluver
Guest
Goodness me, this is painful!
Given that the catechism says that “It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.” I would say that if hunting is done needlessly or causes animals to suffer then it against the catechism, if it doesn’t, then it isn’t.
And hunting is illegal in certain circumstances.
W
Windmill
Guest
Word.
If you say something or do something politically incorrect, whether it is public or private, you are toast. You are trashed in the media, Twittered to death, banished from the history books, prevented from holding a job, and cast into the outer darkness where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth. The mainstream media love sensational stories. Don’t feed the Beast by encouraging premature judgement. Don’t make the punishment greater than the crime. The guy killed a lion - maybe illegally, maybe not. Does that mean his career should be ended?
The greater question here is: Is this the type of society we want to live in? Do we really want Big Brother looking into our lives and making sure we hold to the party line? Isn’t there a right to liberty? Be very wary of those who say, “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
What is “needless” hunting?
Are you asserting that no suffering is allowed by animals in hunting?
You are aware, I hope, that there are not only laws but also sporting customs in hunting?
Obviously. That is not at issue here.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
I agree, this episode is sympamatic of some serious social pathologies. It may well turn out that the dentist committed a crime but there is much more going on here that bodes ill for society. I’d call it moral vanity.
By contrast, there is little more than a yawn over the Planned Parenthood videos.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
As I am not a hunter I really don’t have to worry about these questions!
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
So that’s why you’re here, to tell us all how univolved you are in this subject. Good to know.
Fortunately, others have given this subject serious thought already:
catholic.com/quickquestions/is-there-anything-morally-wrong-with-hunting-deer-for-sport-as-opposed-to-hunting-out
L
liturgyluver
Guest
You already posted this earlier.
U
utah_rose
Guest
The worst part of this is supposedly the lion was lured from a protected wildlife area, then shot with a bow and arrow. The wounded lion then was hunted and killed. I do believe trophy hunting should be banned. However, this is an animal, a lion. Regardless of this cruelty, how is this more cruel then selling baby parts via the Planned Parenthood videos or for that matter the abortion of all babies is much crueler! The mediums dwelling on the lion or dentist rather than Planned Parenthood is problematic!
S
sarah_j
Guest
There’s something pathological about all the vengeance directed toward this dentist…
people hoping that the man loses his livelihood, and PETA calling for his hanging!
I don’t condone what he did; it’s terrible that the lion died such a slow death.
But the outrage is WAY out of all sane proportions.
This society has definitely lost its moral compass.
people hoping that the man loses his livelihood, and PETA calling for his hanging!
I don’t condone what he did; it’s terrible that the lion died such a slow death.
But the outrage is WAY out of all sane proportions.
This society has definitely lost its moral compass.
- Status