[Nightwing]

I saw a video of hunting Elephants. I mean... do people eat elephant? Is ther a need to kill elephant? I can see deer, elk, gazelle..... but elephant.
If someone can explain it to me I'd be put at rest, but I couldn't see jsut going out to get a head shot on an elephant, seeing this amazing creature it the ground and say "Take a picture! ok... let's get outta' here!"
I hear the guy saying it's becasue they're over populated but isn't there somewhere else i the world we could create a habitat for these amazing animals?
I dunno how to feel about it. I hate to see them suffer from overpopulation.... but still. Seeing that big beautiful animal go down like that.... so strange to see!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0m23rM2WYl8

[auschip]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=189864

It's a sticky at the top of this forum.

[Nightwing]

Thanks for more fact. The more I think about it.... it's a necessary evil.

[Polishrifleman]

Just like those that want your Evil Black Rifle, or think that Bambi, Thumper, or Maggie Moo are too cute to kill you need more information (especially before you make a post like this). Ethic's above all, and as noted several sticky's above cover the topic very well. Here is another article from a Conservation website. Also don't fool yourself that the indigenous people of Africa dodn't have a million and one uses for an Elephant. Just like the Indians and Buffalo.

IWMC.org

Conservation & Elephant Hunting
by Dr. Bill Morrill

The African elephant is a natural resource that lends itself to assignable ownership and that ownership, couples with benefits produced from hunting, provides an incentive for conservation. There are other uses of the African elephant, both legal and illegal, but the purpose of this article is conservation and elephant hunting.

Regulation has often been utilized as the final solution to conservation problems. In fact, conservation rarely directly results from unqualified regulation, because regulation restricts or removes ownership. Appropriate regulation limits use, but sets the boundaries for the implementation of management practices at the appropriate levels. That is why the victory for the elephant at the 1997 CITES Meeting in Harare was so significant; it did not preclude applied management; it made it a requirement.

Hunting of the African elephant by foreign tourists has a long-standing tradition and is one of the uses of choice by many African nations today. Africans were hunting elephants before Eastern peoples or Europeans arrived in Africa. Elephant hunting by foreigners generates both finances for management and with the emphasis on local people in management, it has increasingly begun to provide incentives to the people living with the wildlife.

We conserve only what we have incentives to conserve. Wildlife has three economic values. Legal value is the value assigned with regulated use. Illegal value would be the use outside of laws or regulation (for instance, poaching). No value means that the resource will effectively be ignored. Sadly, most evaluations of use focus on the negative impact of the use (the faulty precautionary principle), ignoring the impact of not using the resource. Any real evaluation must include those costs to the resource of not using it. Conservation practices require funding, and that funding must come from somewhere, to turn from a use providing benefits must be factored into any evaluation as a very real cost.

Elephant management requires determining the appropriate level of sustainable off take, and that management requires funding. With increased value of any resource, comes a responsibility, and more likely an imperative need for increased level of management. But conservation cannot (more appropriately put, will not) be perpetually performed in a financial vacuum. In a word beset by many demands for land, if a species is to survive, a use which can be sustained both economically and ecologically, provides independence that will favor survival in the most tumultuous of times.

Hunting of elephants by tourists is cost effective, profitable and easily monitored. The foreign hunter pays for all participation in the hunt, including government fees, and for taking the natural resource. A government representative is usually present. Animals are taken under a quota. The stakeholders in such an arrangement include the hunter, the professional hunter (guide), the regulatory agency (National Parks or Wildlife) and the people who live with the elephants (the community).

Imaginative approaches are being implemented in the different hunting countries such as Zimbabwe's CAMPFIRE communities collecting data and setting their own harvest quotas. In South Africa, many ranches have their own herds of elephants. Other countries such as Cameroon, Botswana and Tanzania are implementing programs where hunting benefits communities. Tying in the management to those who benefit provides an appropriate monitoring loop in management.

In conservation, as in governmental structure, centralization reduces effectiveness. Since all ecological and economic systems are dynamic, good conservation is the ability of the management to adapt to that change. Local monitoring with the control to adapt to that change decreases response time. This results in a more appropriate level of adaptive management.

The elephant is a natural resource with assignable ownership. Foreign hunters are willing to convert that from an asset to capital in exchange for a cultural experience compatible with the history and use of the elephant. It is the responsibility of the hunter to demand an ethical experience and the professional hunter to provide such an experience. It is the responsibility of those charged with management to maintain the resource. It is the responsibility of the regulatory agencies, while maintaining appropriate boundaries, to minimize their restriction of management options for any dynamic resource.

International hunting of elephants will continue to be a realistic option for sustainable utilization. Under well managed conditions, it provides economic incentive for continued proper management, and this insures the survival of the elephant. And that by definition is conservation - the wise use of natural resources.

________________________________
http://www.iwmc.org/elephant/981127.htm

[countertop]

it's a necessary evil

It is what it is, but its certainly not evil. Don't fall for Wayne Pacelle's lies

[Funderb]

go look at the never poke a big cat with a stick video.
gold.

[ants]

To answer one of Nightwing's questions, yes local people utilize the meat, hide, bones, and other parts.

As other posts note, the majority of astute African nations recognize that ownership and stewardship are in the hands of indigenous populations. After a legal kill, the native owners make claim to their resources. While we were in North Africa, we bought shoes made from elephant hide. We also saw waste baskets made from the feet, axe handles of elephant bone, and other products in the market. Interior Ministry officials tracked the products from field to market in an effort to identify poached vs. legal takes. As you well know, poaching and corruption are the twin problems, not legal harvest.

[Sergeant Sabre]

Elephant hunting isn't simply going out and plugging one in the head. Elephant hunters walk mile after mile day after day tracking them down, sometimes only to put one down in a charge. It's work, and it's dangerous.

No meat is intentionally wasted in Africa.

[Gaiudo]

Nightwing,

Pretty much (ok, all) of your assumptions in your OP are false. A), yes, people do eat elephant. In a protein-starved environment, this (tasty) bushmeat is of great value! B) you don't "just go out" and get a headshot on an elephant. Read some of H&HHunter's posts about hunting elephant. It pretty much sounds like the most terrifying, dangerous type of hunting out there, stalking into a herd, with sentinel bulls and cows ready and willing to hunt you down and wipe you into the dust. Add miles of walking, through jesse and tall grass... its not what you imagine.

Plus, you clearly don't realize the absolute NECESSITY of hunting elephants in Africa in this day and age. Read the sticky at the top of the forum. Those countries that have outlawed elephant hunting have seem poaching rise, the intrinsic value of the animal to the population plummet (no game fees, tags, etc. poured into the economy), and populations drop. In those countries that have legalized hunting, it appears we aren't doing ENOUGH hunting! The elephant population is overpopulated, beyond carrying capacity, and the governments will be reduced to culling the herds (with no monetary recompense, actually COSTING Africans money), rather than gaining from this tremendous resource.

Read the stickies at the top of the forum page, or do a search on elephant hunting in the hunting. There's a tremendous amount to be learned. Do you really care about these animals, or is it merely about your offended sensibilities? If its more than your bleeding heart, and if you really do care about these animals, become engaged in something that is proven to actual help both the elephants, and the people of Africa. Support Safari Club International, or other hunting organizations (which contribute millions and millions more to Africa and conservation efforts than Greenpeace or other such organization will even begin to contribute).

Something to think about. Actual PRACTICES that help Africa and these magnificent animals, rather than mere sentiment. There's a lot we can do to help, and you'll be surprised how much of it rests in the hand of the hunter, rather than the "so-called humanitarian".

[.cheese.]

I couldn't kill anything unless I intend to eat it (or it was going to kill me).

I understand the arguments for it: conservation, etc..... but I still couldn't do it.

It's sad to see anything die.... big or small. Life is precious.

With that said, I'm not about to start protesting it or telling you guys not to do it. It's just a matter of knowing my personal limits.

[Cosmoline]

You most certainly CAN eat elephant. Just not the WHOLE elephant. Not by your lonesome anyway.

[Byron Quick]

It takes a village.

[Sergeant Sabre]

"It takes a village to eat an elephant"

I like it. Should be the Clinton's new campaign slogan.

[pat86323]

id eat it probably red meat......... and a WHOLE bunch of it!

[plexreticle]

Culling the herd or shooting animals to raise money to fight poachers or whatever.

I really can't see the appeal in shooting an Elephant.

[Gaiudo]

Probably one of those things where, unless you've been there and had the opportunity (and either taken it or let it walk), you've not much basis for comparison. Kinda like climbing a mountain or surfing... never saw much appeal until I did it.

However, each to his own. Free country.

[plexreticle]

However, each to his own. Free country.

Agreed

[mossberg]

I wouldn't shoot an elephant. They are rare and just too cool.

Free country? Is it really? We are talking about Africa right, because you can't hunt them in the zoo.

[Art Eatman]

mossberg, have you read the sticky at the top of the page?

Are you aware that in some areas there are way too many elephant for the habitat to support? That when they can't get enough food from the natural habitat, they start in on the local villagers' farms? And destroy more than they consume, just from the size of their bodies and feet?

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Unchecked, they destroy the forest habitat by ripping and shredding all edible plant life within their reach. As mentioned, it is hunting and only hunting which has saved and is saving the African elephant from extinction, as well as having the incidental positive of managing their numbers, to provide a balanced habitat for ALL indigenous species.

In places where hunting is "banned", poachers (who are often in with corrupt gov't officials who look the other way or worse, take a kickback from the ivory trade), do their dirty deeds, and the numbers are very low and the animal is endangered. But in countries where hunting is allowed, rich hunters pay BIG money to hunt, and this money goes into the communities (not to mention the meat for the villagers), so these countries and communities have a strong financial incentive to "take care of" the poachers, to protect the herds for their paying customers. Free market, supply and demand. Without hunting, the animals would likely become extinct. With hunting, they have been saved. It's not everyone's cup of tea (most people object on the basis of the intelligence of the elephant, which is indeed quite high, but then again, so is that of the crow and the coyote).

The only thing I can think of more exciting than hunting elephant, would be hunting the elephant poachers - they shoot back!

[mossberg]

I hadn't noticed the sticky actually, but I do know elephants are endangered. If there is too many, shooting them would definitely be reasonable, more so if the meat is to be eaten. I still personally wouldn't shoot one though. Elephant extinction threats are mostly due to their habitats being destroyed. Not that I'm an activist or anything like that, I just think they're kind of neat.

[Gaiudo]

I do know elephants are endangered

You know that for certain? If you read the sticky, it points out that in Botswana alone, there are 150,000 elephants. In one country alone! Hardly endangered.

[mossberg]

Yeah, but that's one of the few countries they are in. In the whole world, there are between 470,000-690,000 African elephants and only about 60,000 Indian elephants.

[Gaiudo]

How would hunting in Africa have any effect on Indian elephants? The fact remains that African elephants still need managed in those countries (South Africa, Tanzania, Botswana, etc.) that have high populations.

[mossberg]

All right, all right, we agree on something. Management: Yes

[Gaiudo]

:-)

The best management practices are those that benefit both the animal population, while bringing significant revenue to the native population.

I've kinda got a grudge against govts. that outlaw hunting irrationally. Coming from Brazil, tremendous revenue stands to be gained there if they would legalize amazonian hunting. As it stands now, the ranchers wage a blood-war against panthers, hogs, and grand cayman, as these animals represent only a financial loss to the farmers. If it were up to them, they would be poached to extinction! (Plus, its only rich senators that get to hunt... since they won't get prosecuted). However, let them share the significant revenue available from international hunting....

Its not about conservation, nor is it about helping the environment. Its only about bleeding heart politics.

[marksman13]

I would gladly take an elephant hunt if it were given to me. Sounds like a win-win situation if there ever was one. Population is controlled. Villagers get a ton of meat, and I get the coolest mount in the world, not to mention the thrill of a lifetime I'm sure. Yep, if you hear of anyone giving away elephant hunts let me know. I'm in.

[Soodonim]

There's no question that hunting is a huge conservation tool, but I don't see anything wrong with finding hunting a particular animal distasteful. For example, I wouldn't hunt a bald eagle, but if I was convinced bald eagle hunting would aid in preservation I wouldn't have any problem with anyone else doing it.

[Titan6]

You guys slay me with your characterization of killing elephants as evil. What about chickens, deer, rabbits and cows? I guess that all must be evil as well. I don't like trophy hunting for it's own sake but back when elephants were harvested as opposed to poached at least the meat went to feed people. I would say wasting 5 tons of meat is evil any day of the week....

"It takes a village"

Now that is funny...

[tinygnat219]

Yummmm! I wonder what Elephant would taste like?

I have two wallets made from Elephant hide. One's 40 years old and past its prime, but the other is 20 and doing just fine.

For those that don't want to hunt Elephant, exchange Elephant for any other game name and those arguments suddenly start applying to all the creatures we hunt. There are good reasons for managing the Elephants, and they shouldn't be taken lightly.

Now, to HUNT one of these creatures, it will cost you in excess of 50K. I think that safely excludes most of us.

[bensdad]

Is it unfair of me to characterize an anti-hunting post in a "hunting" forum as troll activity?

Prefacing your troll behavior with a qualifying statement, "i'm about as [open]minded as it gets..." does not negate the troll behavior.

This is the hunting forum. If you want to discuss the evilness of elephant hunting, I'm sure you can find an audience over at the PITA website.

[Gaiudo]

Now now, bensdad. I think there as some honest ignorance mixed in with a honest question in the OP. Hopefully this provides opportunities to clarify the necssary reality of conservational hunting practices.

Its certainly better than going to PETA and getting the monotonously repeated errors from the ignorant bleeding hearts found over there! At least here we can clarify things.

If a certain hunting practice which WAS unethical was addressed (say, using certain types of traps for furbearers that resulted in long starvation, or something like that), I'd rather treat it in-house.

I saw the OP as an honest question, rather than as an anti-hunting troll. How we address the question may well color a person's perception for or against hunting for years to come.

[Nightwing]

Thanks to those of you with a good simple reasonable answer. And to the rest of you....Oh my god..... the high and mighty ones on this board never cease to amaze me.

"You troll! How dare you ask anti hunting questions!!!!!"
"How uninformed!!!"
"You Damn Liberal"

Good God... I'd hate to be related to some of you. I bet you're a real downer at family reunions.

Seriously.... I can't believe I've said this so often lately.... GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSES OLD MEN! Some people are trying to learn around her. Imagine if I was someone just trying to get familiar with the gun world in general? Brand new to guns. Some of you guys would make me think it's not worth the time because anyone else I talk to about guns is going be a pompous know it all.
This is the first time I've said this because I think it actually fits, and isn't just cliche (like so many of you use it around here)... TAKE THE HIGH ROAD!!! Give good answers without being so arrogant. People come in here looking for knowledge.... not a scolding or demeaning lecture. If someone's looking for a fight, then give em hell! But I'm here to ask questions, and share stories about things I do know, and talk about guns I do own or want to own.
I'm not here to wad through the inflated ego's.

Chill out guys... really... take the high road.
I may disagree with some of the practices around here, but in general the board is a good place, and unlike any other. It's a great place and I don't want that ruined by a few of you that decided that you're gonna cyber bully every person that misspells a word, mis-states a caliber size, refers to an AR-15 as an assault rifle, or want to know about going to the range!

I'm not an anti hunter! I simply have never had the time, or the resources until this year to consider hunting. With that has come interest in a broad range of animals. Came along Elephants and saw a video of an Elephant head shot.... made me feel weird. Like.... the last time I felt that weird was when I saw an alqueda video of an American soldier being beheaded. Just very unsettling. But after I realized the reason the hunting was going on, and all the other animals it helped to feed, and the elephants it gave more food to..... it made sense and I was over the weird feeling. This thread was nothing but me trying to inform myself.

You CAN NOT rip on people trying to educate themselves, and figure out what they believe in or support. Especially when they publically voice their dilema. You can offer advice or your opinion, but insults are way out of line.

I'm done. What a waste of time. Grow up guys.

And once again, thanks to those of you that actually contribute something useful day to day in here. I appreciate the help, and the info every single time!

[Art Eatman]

No sweat, Nightwing. We're trying.

Occasionally, some of us are very trying...

I think this go-'round has been covered fairly well. Enuf.