I'd say if you're going to shoot the elephants anyway to keep their population stable, you might as well earn money doing so and employ some people in the local economy.The "hunting for conservation" bit was brought up - and the whole things is far from conclusive in terms of requirement and efficacy.But let's for the sake of argument that elephants do need to be culled (again - not a settled matter). An African elephant is frickin' huge thing, and isn't terribly easy to be killed cleanly and quickly, which any non-sadist would obviously want. If it absolutely HAS to be done, throwing it open to any yahoo with the cash and the pathetic desire to do it so they can feel powerful is probably going to result in the animals suffering more than they need to at the inexpert hands of weekend warriors.As Richard Dawkins has pointed out - nature IS actually "red in tooth and claw", and tremendous suffering is a constant in the wild. But one of the hallmarks of homo sapiens sapiens is the decoupling of action from instinct. No one needs to frickin' well kill an elephant for the fun of it. If I could take my point to the ultimate extreme, it'd be kind of satisfying to grab their elephant gun off them and make them sit down and start eating the carcas until their useless fat guts exploded. I wonder at what bite the realisation would kick in that they had just done something pretty damn useless.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Rat