• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Elephants & Trump

Rosie1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,914
Reaction score
1,005
Location
Pacific Northwest
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
I was listening to NPR, and the president of Botswana is very displeased with Trump. As we know, Trump relaxed the importation of Elephant parts by big game hunters. One wonders if Trump did this so his crappy son could bring home his endangered trophies (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../03/.../trump...trophy-imports.../402198002/). At this time 30 EU countries are agreeing not to allow (imports/exports) of even antique ivory. Botswana is allowing no hunting of any game in it's borders.
 
I was listening to NPR, and the president of Botswana is very displeased with Trump. As we know, Trump relaxed the importation of Elephant parts by big game hunters. One wonders if Trump did this so his crappy son could bring home his endangered trophies (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../03/.../trump...trophy-imports.../402198002/). At this time 30 EU countries are agreeing not to allow (imports/exports) of even antique ivory. Botswana is allowing no hunting of any game in it's borders.

Trump is an idiot.

However, even a dumb blind pig can find an acorn.

The facts are.. that regulated hunting is a very important tool in helping to manage African big game herds.. . that's based on biological science. ''

Here is the irony... irony of the ivory.

That ivory that's exported and imported into other nations.. would raise needed money for conservation.. and would lower the price and thus the incentive for poached ivory on the black market.

but lets not let science and facts get in the way of emotion.
 
The elephants are at such a critical population state that the management by shooting in most areas no longer applies. Botswana has big groups of tourists there to visit a friendly, fairly safe, African country; to see the the animals and specifically it's elephants. They call them "environmentalist/tourists."
 
The elephants are at such a critical population state that the management by shooting in most areas no longer applies. Botswana has big groups of tourists there to visit a friendly, fairly safe, African country; to see the the animals and specifically it's elephants. They call them "environmentalist/tourists."

That might be the case in many places in Africa but I think Botswana has the highest concentration of elephants in all of Africa. That said I am sure the president of Botswana has a better handle on the situation than Trump or any of us. If he thinks relaxing the rules will be harmful to their elephant population then he is probably right.
 
Trump is an idiot.

However, even a dumb blind pig can find an acorn.

The facts are.. that regulated hunting is a very important tool in helping to manage African big game herds.. . that's based on biological science. ''

Here is the irony... irony of the ivory.

That ivory that's exported and imported into other nations.. would raise needed money for conservation.. and would lower the price and thus the incentive for poached ivory on the black market.

but lets not let science and facts get in the way of emotion.

The problem is corruption. I lived in Africa for many years. It became a rule for me that the central figure in big game poaching in any country was always the Minister charged with combatting poaching. This was true 100% of the time in my experience. The money made from ivory exports never​ goes to conservation. It goes to the Minister who is supposed to oversee conservation and combat poaching. The only way to conserve and protect is to ban trophy hunting altogether.
 
I was listening to NPR, and the president of Botswana is very displeased with Trump. As we know, Trump relaxed the importation of Elephant parts by big game hunters. One wonders if Trump did this so his crappy son could bring home his endangered trophies (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../03/.../trump...trophy-imports.../402198002/). At this time 30 EU countries are agreeing not to allow (imports/exports) of even antique ivory. Botswana is allowing no hunting of any game in it's borders.

Your link didn't work for me.
Didn't Trump go back and forth on the elephant trophy decision?
As far as I'm concerned he ended up making the wrong decision.
 
Trump's spawn like to kill elephants for fun. oddly enough, their dad is currently doing the same thing in a different way.
 
Trump's spawn like to kill elephants for fun. oddly enough, their dad is currently doing the same thing in a different way.

ho ho ... I got that.
 
I was listening to NPR, and the president of Botswana is very displeased with Trump. As we know, Trump relaxed the importation of Elephant parts by big game hunters. One wonders if Trump did this so his crappy son could bring home his endangered trophies (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../03/.../trump...trophy-imports.../402198002/). At this time 30 EU countries are agreeing not to allow (imports/exports) of even antique ivory. Botswana is allowing no hunting of any game in it's borders.

This is an understood issue. several years ago when I debated such an issue, there were two African countries that Ivory from Elephants was legal. Guess what. They have the healthiest of elephant populations, over other countries.

The reason is very simple.

Making it legal, means minimal poaching. The elephants are taken very good care of and treated like life stalk, rather than something to slaughter and run.

It should be the source boycotted, not the resource.

Should we ban all diamond imports because of the blood diamond trade?
 
The problem is corruption. I lived in Africa for many years. It became a rule for me that the central figure in big game poaching in any country was always the Minister charged with combatting poaching. This was true 100% of the time in my experience. The money made from ivory exports never​ goes to conservation. It goes to the Minister who is supposed to oversee conservation and combat poaching. The only way to conserve and protect is to ban trophy hunting altogether.

Actually the research shows that banning trophy hunting is detriment to the population.

1. Scientific control over the population is largely lost. Animals over run their carrying capacity and then have severe die offs from disease, starvation and dehydration
2. Local populations have no incentive to see species as anything but a nuisance. There is no desire for conservation when the animals bring in little to no economic resources, and there numbers are not controlled and thus there are more negative human and animal interactions.
3. Science shows that the best way to protect a species is through science.. which includes the use of managed hunting.

By the way.. lets just think about your post for a minute.

IF you were a corrupt minister of a country.. and you did not want to see your very lucrative blackmarket poaching market to be hurt. What would you support? Legal harvesting of animals and their export.. which would cause competition for your illegal trophies, ivory and cost you profit. Not to mention, perhaps have hunters and others expose your involvement in poaching.

OR would you rather have importing countries ban legal trophies and hunting.. thus making your illegal activities that much more lucrative?
 
Last edited:
Link does not work.

So, what exactly is the President of Botswana so upset about?
 
Link does not work.

So, what exactly is the President of Botswana so upset about?

I think I've found it (ha ha ha) ...

"The outgoing president of Botswana has attacked his US counterpart Donald Trump for "encouraging poaching" by overturning a ban on the import of hunting trophies.

Speaking at an anti-poaching summit in Botswana, two weeks before he steps down, President Ian Khama told the BBC it was not just Mr Trump's attitude towards wildlife he was concerned about, but his "attitude towards the whole planet". ...


Botswana's Ian Khama: Trump encouraging elephant poaching - BBC News

A little while ago that president had a meltdown over Trump's s***hole countries comment, :lol: and now that he's leaving, he's not holding back how he feels about Trump.
Poor snowflake.

With regard to the elephant ivory and hunting, elephant hunting in Botswana is not allowed.
The ivory trophies Trump allowed to be imported from African countries is ivory that has been in customs facilities for the last 15 or 20 years - it is called "antique" ivory.
Ivory that has been "harvested" at a time when countries like Botswana were welcoming trophy hunters and their money.

The snowflake president was not successful in curbing the recent increase in elephant poaching in his country and tries to blame Trump for it.

(sigh) The usual story ... Trump is responsible for everything bad ...
 
Actually the research shows that banning trophy hunting is detriment to the population.

1. Scientific control over the population is largely lost. Animals over run their carrying capacity and then have severe die offs from disease, starvation and dehydration
2. Local populations have no incentive to see species as anything but a nuisance. There is no desire for conservation when the animals bring in little to no economic resources, and there numbers are not controlled and thus there are more negative human and animal interactions.
3. Science shows that the best way to protect a species is through science.. which includes the use of managed hunting.

By the way.. lets just think about your post for a minute.

IF you were a corrupt minister of a country.. and you did not want to see your very lucrative blackmarket poaching market to be hurt. What would you support? Legal harvesting of animals and their export.. which would cause competition for your illegal trophies, ivory and cost you profit. Not to mention, perhaps have hunters and others expose your involvement in poaching.

OR would you rather have importing countries ban legal trophies and hunting.. thus making your illegal activities that much more lucrative?

I'll take the last first. The "legal" hunting provides cover for the poaching and exports and is therefore useful. And the "legal" hunters always make sure they don't compete with the minister. Often they're in a kind of profit sharing agreement.

As for the rest, it's simply BS. African trophy animals are not dying off from overrun carrying capacity, and never were. the local populations don't see enough benefit from trophy hunting for it to matter. The only "managed hunting" in Africa is poaching and the big game hunting that covers and facilitates poaching.
 
I think I've found it (ha ha ha) ...

"The outgoing president of Botswana has attacked his US counterpart Donald Trump for "encouraging poaching" by overturning a ban on the import of hunting trophies.

Speaking at an anti-poaching summit in Botswana, two weeks before he steps down, President Ian Khama told the BBC it was not just Mr Trump's attitude towards wildlife he was concerned about, but his "attitude towards the whole planet". ...


Botswana's Ian Khama: Trump encouraging elephant poaching - BBC News

A little while ago that president had a meltdown over Trump's s***hole countries comment, :lol: and now that he's leaving, he's not holding back how he feels about Trump.
Poor snowflake.

With regard to the elephant ivory and hunting, elephant hunting in Botswana is not allowed.
The ivory trophies Trump allowed to be imported from African countries is ivory that has been in customs facilities for the last 15 or 20 years - it is called "antique" ivory.
Ivory that has been "harvested" at a time when countries like Botswana were welcoming trophy hunters and their money.

The snowflake president was not successful in curbing the recent increase in elephant poaching in his country and tries to blame Trump for it.

(sigh) The usual story ... Trump is responsible for everything bad ...

The problem is that much allegedly "antique" ivory is in fact recently taken. The "antique" loophole is a way to move poached ivory.
 
I'll take the last first. The "legal" hunting provides cover for the poaching and exports and is therefore useful. And the "legal" hunters always make sure they don't compete with the minister. Often they're in a kind of profit sharing agreement.

As for the rest, it's simply BS. African trophy animals are not dying off from overrun carrying capacity, and never were. the local populations don't see enough benefit from trophy hunting for it to matter. The only "managed hunting" in Africa is poaching and the big game hunting that covers and facilitates poaching.

Legal hunting doesn';t provide "cover" for poaching and exports.. in any way.

And African animals ARE dying off because of overrun carrying capacity. that's what happens when you have habitat loss. the local populations see a huge benefit from trophy hunting for it to matter. And the managed hunting in Africa is not poaching.

sorry sir but the facts simply disprove you.

Trophy hunting can play an essential role in the conservation of African wildlife, according to a growing number of biologists.

Now some experts are calling for a program to regulate Africa's sport-hunting industry to ensure its conservation benefits.
According to a recent study, in the 23 African countries that allow sport hunting, 18,500 tourists pay over $200 million (U.S.) a year to hunt lions, leopards, elephants, warthogs, water buffalo, impala, and rhinos.

Private hunting operations in these countries control more than 540,000 square miles (1.4 million square kilometers) of land, the study also found. That's 22 percent more land than is protected by national parks.

As demand for land increases with swelling human populations, some conservationists are arguing that they can garner more effective results by working with hunters and taking a hand in regulating the industry.

Sport hunting can be sustainable if carefully managed, said Peter Lindsey, a conservation biologist with the University of Zimbabwe in Harare, who led the recent study.

"Trophy hunting is of key importance to conservation in Africa by creating [financial] incentives to promote and retain wildlife as a land use over vast areas," he said.

In an upcoming edition of the journal Conservation Biology Lindsey and an international team of colleagues call for a plan to increase the conservation benefits of sport hunting, including a certification program to more tightly regulate the industry.

"To justify the continued existence of [protected] areas in the context of increasing demand for land, wildlife has to pay for itself and contribute to the economy, and hunting provides an important means of achieving this," Lindsey said

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/03/070315-hunting-africa.html
 
Legal hunting doesn';t provide "cover" for poaching and exports.. in any way.

And African animals ARE dying off because of overrun carrying capacity. that's what happens when you have habitat loss. the local populations see a huge benefit from trophy hunting for it to matter. And the managed hunting in Africa is not poaching.

sorry sir but the facts simply disprove you.



https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/03/070315-hunting-africa.html

A link 11 years old, and just propaganda BS anyway. There's nothing there to challenge anything I wrote.
There's enough money to purchase a lot of sound bites, but apparently none in the last 11 years.
I've seen the reality in person.
 
A link 11 years old, and just propaganda BS anyway. There's nothing there to challenge anything I wrote.
There's enough money to purchase a lot of sound bites, but apparently none in the last 11 years.
I've seen the reality in person.

Whatever.. the science on facts are on my side.

But.. you saw something... so then it must be true for all of Africa..

got it.
 
Whatever.. the science on facts are on my side.

But.. you saw something... so then it must be true for all of Africa..

got it.

I lived in five countries over 12 years in Africa, and visited 20 or so more. My responsibilities included understanding how things worked.
 
I lived in five countries over 12 years in Africa, and visited 20 or so more. My responsibilities included understanding how things worked.

Well given their are 45 countries in Sub saharan Africa..

And that the research and scientific evidence proves you wrong.. I will go with that..
 
Back
Top Bottom