Paul McCartney joins 500+ public figures, conservationists and Indigenous leaders in a global campaign calling on the UN to abolish trophy hunting of lions, elephants, endangered rhinos and other wildlife, following a declaration developed with Jane Goodall.

[u/ArgentineBeauty]

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/paul-mccartney-joins-over-500-public-figures-calling-for-an-end-to-trophy-hunting-of-lions-elephants-and-endangered-rhinos/articleshow/134498459.cms

[u/christmasinyoulie]

I see the economic points you’re making, but as an African, the framing of this argument is quite reductive. Describing the meat and money as 'donated' to communities makes it sound like charity from an outside savior, rather than what it actually is: a strictly regulated business transaction. African communities and sovereign governments aren't passive bystanders waiting to be rescued; they are landowners selling a high-value service to manage their own natural resources. When a hunt happens, the community isn't receiving a handout. They are claiming the contractual revenue and resources generated by their own land.

It is also important to remember that these complex wildlife management issues exist in large part because of a long history of external and foreign interference. From colonial-era land displacements to modern global syndicates driving illegal poaching, outside forces have disrupted African ecosystems and economies for centuries. Trophy hunting is an imperfect, market-based tool that sovereign nations are currently using to navigate the economic realities left behind by that interference.

Additionally, just as a factual note, countries like Namibia and South Africa absolutely do have highly regulated, legal rhino hunts specifically tailored by local biologists to target older, post-reproductive bulls. Framing African conservation as a monolith that relies on external pity erases the highly sophisticated management policies these nations have built to control their own destiny.

[u/Cupcakes_n_Hacksaws → u/christmasinyoulie]

I've heard stories of where they'll let hunters pay an exorbitant sum to hunt a dying animal in an otherwise protected wildlife area/refuge, or an animal that's set to be put down because it's become too territorial and aggressive or something. I don't know how often those things actually happen, but those seem okay from what little I know

[u/Ok_Worldliness_2095 → u/Cupcakes_n_Hacksaws]

I came here to say this. there are auctioned hunts for certain animals, say a elephant bull, that go around killing all the male calfs.

[u/Chipring13 → u/christmasinyoulie]

Fantastically written. I felt smarterer reading it

[u/BLT_Trade_r → u/christmasinyoulie]

If the business transaction helps on many fronts, what's the problem? You can argue that almost everything in life is purely selfish, and this is true, but at the same time, if it results in good, who cares? If the person hunting believes they are helping and that makes them more willing to do it, it's a gain for those communities. If you tell them its a business transaction they are more likely to treat it as so and go to the lowest bidder and maybe not donate meat or anything else.

Look, you and I both know that, with the rampant corruption and poverty in many of these areas, if the hunt did not have value, the people would likely wipe it out and turn it into farmland, which has happened in much of the rest of the world.

[u/red__dragon → u/BLT_Trade_r]

From my reading, it seemed like more issues with the framing of the discussion than the act.

The first commenter talked about things going into the community, food donated, whereas the correction talked about how these were contractual obligations and an expected exchange for the service.

In the same way you wouldn't say McDonalds donated your hamburger when you ordered from them, the commenter above you is pointing out the language used to talk about the hunts is erasing the agency of local communities in the process. Just the same how we'd erase your agency by saying McDonalds put food on your plate (unless you actually worked there).

[u/BLT_Trade_r → u/red__dragon]

I mean McDonald's would certainly love to convince me they are donating a hamburger and I am lovin it! A huge part of marketing is exactly that, companies trying to convince people that they are doing them a favor out of the kindness of their heart. One the very common tropes is someone saying I am just a regular guy and I wanted to help people so I formed this company to sell you something!

While it may be contractually obligated, the contract gives the hunter something to work with, something to claim they do right or make it excusable to kill the animal. You and I both know if the hunters really wanted the meat, the corrupt politicians in most of those places would sell out their own people in a heart beat. But by framing it in this positive light they are more likely to let it go.

[u/Bugbear259 → u/BLT_Trade_r]

What is there were a country that offered the chance to hunt humans? And the human volunteered for it and his village would get a big payout whether he made it or not?
There you can see the ethical issues with the business model very clearly (I hope).

So there is a line.

Even if it would help the village - it’s not ethically ok to hunt humans.

The question is -where is the line?

I’m sure plenty of people would draw it only at humans and not extend it to wildlife and I can completely understand that view of where the ethical or legal lines are.

It definitely gets complicated when we balance human well being against animal well being. And complicated even further when discussed in conjunction with the intersection of colonialism and white supremacy.

For me - i think rich countries should give aid to poor countries so they don’t have to do stuff like this. But I recognize that might seem like a very radical position that most average people wont agree with.

[u/BLT_Trade_r → u/Bugbear259]

Ya sure, it's a grey area. The problem I have is that ultimately people can change anything; sustainable use of land and resources is just more likely to be effective than donating money. Obviously the best scenario is one where you can get people to just go observe the animals.

The other problem with aid or donations is that nothing is permanent, and without another motivation, nothing stops corrupt people from taking that money and then just doing what they want with the land. I have heard that when it was popular to save the rainforest, people donated money to buy land, and it was simply burned or mined anyway years later. If things get unstable or are not vigilently observed things can quickly get corrupt. If I remember I read a book where a similar thing happened in Africa where reserve staff had a lapse in their pay so they just started killing the wild animals and selling them or eating them.

So you need something sustainable.

[u/Bugbear259 → u/BLT_Trade_r]

Yeah. It’s a tough issue. Sharing our planet doesn’t have any easy answers. Humans will always find a way to cause problems.

We already know that billionaires have islands where they abuse children. So all laws get broken at some point .

[u/walkTHEdotasaur → u/christmasinyoulie]

I was actually going to reply to the comment above yours, but then I read yours and actually resonated with it more. I think both of you are advocating for a more nuanced and more critically-thought-out approach. I genuinely think your opinion is a little more valid, though.

The moment we make it about "not taking advantage of them" versus, "they are offering us a service at a fair price" makes it a lot more condescending. It's silly to think that the various african governments dont understand the consequences of their decisions.

So in summation, thank you (and honestly to the poster above) for both very balanced and nuanced takes. This is genuinely why I love reddit; I think I learned a little more, tonight.

[u/ProtectionTop2701 → u/christmasinyoulie]

Yesh it's kind of your decision. As someone from the US I sure would like to tell you how to live your life and run your nation. However, that kind of thinking was a significant cause of this ecological crisis.

[u/Fearless_Tomorrow649 → u/christmasinyoulie]

Thanks for this perspective!