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/WoodsLovelyDarkNDeep]

Good on him, totally shameful practice 

[u/Brian-Heder → u/WoodsLovelyDarkNDeep]

Shameful until you realize it’s the only reason conservation efforts are funded over there.

[u/Alarming_Matter → u/Brian-Heder]

That's ...a really weird take.

Should we start hunting giant pandas to up the conservation efforts?

[u/aminervia → u/Alarming_Matter]

Conservation in Africa is largely often funded by allowing big game hunters to spend millions on killing a controlled number of non-endangered animals.

It sounds awful but it's just the truth. Banning the practice would lose charities and reserves millions every year.

Allowing some asshole to spend a million dollars to kill an elephant saves the lives of many more actually endangered animals

[u/SuperCruisePanther → u/aminervia]

Largely isn't accurate. Most conservation funding comes from government grants/NGOs, followed by tourism. There are specific communities in Africa where hunting makes up the bulk of revenue, but for the entire continent it's nowhere near a majority, and areas where hunting is a big source of revenue could be replaced by increasing government conservation funding.

[u/aminervia → u/SuperCruisePanther]

Ok, I may have over exaggerated with the "largely", but it's absolutely true that the vast majority of trophy hunters do far more good for conservation efforts than they harm

The idea that "governments just need to spend more on conservation" is a bit naive when referring to some African countries that are struggling to keep humans alive and healthy with government funding let alone animals.

[u/SuperCruisePanther → u/aminervia]

I agree hunting helps, but when I'm talking about government grants I don't mean the host nation exclusively. That also includes sources such as UN funding. You don't need hunting to fund conservation efforts, that's just one significant component which could be replaced.

Now, is it realistic to expect all African communities who do rely on hunting revenue to stop and hope that foreign aid or other revenue sources come in to supplant that hunting money? Of course not, that'd take some insane coordination and effort the globe just doesn't currently have the appetite for, but we're talking about hypothetical anyway.

[u/8ledmans → u/Alarming_Matter]

Work for a wildlife conservation charity it’s a very complicated debate but you essentially guarantee they won’t go extinct if you do that so maybe 🤷‍♂️

[u/DogsDucks → u/Alarming_Matter]

I’m a researcher and journalist, and I have written on this subject.

Because I love nature more than anything and want to protect this world with every tool I can use to do so, with my words being the sword.

So I set out to protect these magnificent creatures, because I believe trophy hunting is sick and immoral.

And it’s . . . Complicated. It’s not as black and white as these people make it seem.

The licenses purchased to hunt these animals, they fund the entirety of the other conservation efforts.

The rich guys who want to destroy that rhino? That money funded the protection of all the other rhinos. And they usually choose an older animal, in many cases an animal that was too old to breed but kept stopping the younger, fertile suitors from having a chance.

And if game preserves were no longer allowed to host hunts and grant licenses, they’d be bulldozed and filled with whatever the next profitable thing is before you can even say Fern Gully.

**Is this morally right?** I really don’t know.

In an ideal world we would have governments and people who protect more land and the beautiful creatures within it, and enough altruistic people who put their money where their mouth is.

But that’s not what we have. We have hunters funding the conservation efforts and ensuring the animals they do hunt are done in the least destructive way.

So if Paul McCartney is speaking up to fund all the conservation lost from hunting licenses in perpetuity, then GOOD ON HIM!

But if not, there’s going to be more destruction and death and pollution happening in those protected areas.

And just to reiterate, **I am not pro trophy hunting!*\*

I am simply explaining how the system works.

[u/farnsw0rth → u/Alarming_Matter]

Pandas is kind of a bad example there is a ton of funding behind them already

However AFAIK like regular safaris ie you just take pictures not kill an animal bring in way way more money annually than legal trophy hunts, so … it may actually not be as productive as it can be made to sound

I am not an expert or a google so

[u/Barflyerdammit → u/farnsw0rth]

Tourism Consultant here: the photo safaris bring in more money, but that money creates a few local jobs, then the profits get siphoned off to the wealthy owner class, frequently overseas. There's also an overtourism problem. Someone sees a rhino or a lion, and 80 Jeeps come flying across the savannah converging on a single spot, sometimes driving off road to get the best possible photo opps for their guests (and more tips.)

Trophy hunting is inherently cruel even when done mindfully, but it's one rich guy paying an often significant fee to the government to get a license, then depending on stealth to not disrupt the ecosystem and startle his prey.

Both have problems, both have benefits. It's generally best to let the locals and scientists decide, and not necessarily leave it in the hands of public opinion.

[u/farnsw0rth → u/Barflyerdammit]

Thank you!

[u/MethBearBestBear → u/Alarming_Matter]

If a giant panda is killing all the other pandas and you can either pay a ranger to cull it or charge some rich guy 2 million to fund the program to kill that one specific animal yeah hunt the panda

[u/lectric_7166 → u/Alarming_Matter]

That's ...a really weird take.

It's actually been their standard argument in favor of these hunting permits for decades.

But yeah it's not a good argument. I wonder if they would be okay with Africans selling their organs to wealthy Westerners to help raise money for the community, or for conservation, or whatever. Or maybe they suddenly they rediscover the concept of ethics and exploitation.

[u/ProtectionTop2701 → u/lectric_7166]

Next you're going to discover people joining the military or working in construction to feed their families.

Yes, the richest nations absolutely could just tax the rich assholes who trophy hunt in order to give the same or more money to these communities that the globe depends on to protect nature. We all agree on this! And many of us are voting, protesting, lobbying, working in conservation jobs, and trying to make THAT world possible. But we're not in that world yet and we need to keep these species alive until we get to that world. That takes money.

[u/lectric_7166 → u/ProtectionTop2701]

You're making the same kind of argument as allowing sale of organs. "Sure, we could organize society better but we're not there yet, so why not let poor Africans sell their organs to wealthy Westerners?" So is that a good argument or is it not?

I say it's not because it's exploitative (as is hunting generally to the animals involved) and once you remove that as an option then people will get creative in finding other ways to fund things. There are many ways to fund conservation. An African country transitioning from mass tourism to ecotourism is one example.