I actually do agree with you, busdriver, this probably isn’t significantly different than other big game kills. But the attention is different, for various reasons, and that’s what makes this a moment to get some changes made.
"But the attention is different, for various reasons, and that’s what makes this a moment to get some changes made.’
Okay, now that one I can understand. Otherwise, I don’t really get that the last 10,000 kills were just fine, and this one—torture and execute the dentist.
It seems that most of the outrage should be directed towards the people that actually make this happen, time and time again, and the countries that allow this. For $$, of course. Not just some sucker with too much cash in his wallet, and perhaps because he is an American. Would this be such an outrage if he was a rich Saudi? I doubt it.
What I read is that they spotted the lion on the grounds of the Hwange National Park and lured it using a truck baited with a dead animal and by scenting an area of the adjacent private land, where it was shot. Hunting in the national park is not permitted. Also, the owner of the private land did not have permission to allow the hunting of lions.
“Investigations show the killing of Cecil was illegal because the land owner was not allocated a lion on his hunting quota for 2015.”
So if the land owner had allocated a lion, this would be fine, and there would be no outrage?
It just seems like fairly unimportant distinctions. Maybe important for those enforcing the law, but those advocating that the guy lose his business or be brutally killed? Not so much.
I don’t know why you would come to that conclusion.
If the land owner had been permitted to allow hunting of lions, he may not have been charged with a crime. But there is still the matter of luring a major tourist attraction out of a national park where he is protected and slaughtering him in a callous and cruel manner. Of course there still would have been outrage.
It seems odd that the guide and landowner neighbor of Cecil would not have known they were hunting Cecil, since Cecil is so famous in the area.
CatLivesMatter
On a positive note Oxford’s Wildlife Conservation Unit has received donations of over $150,000 since Jimmy Kimmel spoke of Cecil the Lion on his show. (wildcru.org) http://www.wildcru.org/news/macdonald-cecil-appeal/
I’d guess that the people reacting so violently to Palmer don’t consider big game hunting in general to be “just fine” but the vast majority don’t protest because it’s an ongoing thing that happens in foreign countries where they have no say in making the laws. The death of Cecil is a classic “tipping point” moment, imo. All the negative feelings and reactions people have in general to regards to trophy hunting, particularly of endangered and near-endangered animals, gets funneled into this one example and all the afore-mentioned elements of sleaziness, dishonesty and cruelty contribute to a perfect storm of outrage.
Want to reduce prostitution? Go after the “clients.” Ditto here - without wealthy American and other clients willing to pay $$$ for these hunts and the the coveted animal body parts, big game hunting business might not thrive as much as it does. While we can’t control the Chinese etc. poachers, we should be doing steps to control our own, and preventing these “hunters” from importing their trophies into the US will at least be a good first step.
The reaction to news via social media is an interesting phenomenon. Calls for harm to come to this man, as vile as he is, are over the top and similar to the crackpot comments you regularly see online in comments on news sites. I remember the story last summer of the teenaged cheerleader from Texas posting photos of several big game animals she had killed but I don’t recall the same type of vitriol that is being spouted now. In fact, she now apparently has a youtube page detailing her hunting exploits, complete with video!, many of which occur in the U.S. It’s disgraceful, in my opinion.
I also heard on the radio program that the biggest threat to big game in Africa is the pressure from burgeoning human populations. It was alleged that if big game hunting was not legal nor a lucrative business, then the land owners would have no incentive to breed and protect the animals on their property, and the animals would be wiped out in favor of other uses of the land. I think this is where the dilemma comes in.
People are always outraged when these sorts of things are exposed, but because many of these slaughters happen on another continent we only see the most egregious cases. And let’s keep in mind that the hunts are actually legal in Africa so long as the basic permits are in place. And as always, one of the main ingredients that keeps this industry rolling is the large amount of money that hunters are willing to pay. $55,000 goes a very, very long way in Africa.
I don’t see this case as being unusual – there is always a groundswell of anger when these things come to light. Remember a few years back when NBC had to cancel the show “Under the Wild Skies?” They actually broadcast a hunter getting within 20 feet of an elephant and then shooting it in the face. The episode ended with the hunter and guide toasting the kill with champagne as they stood over the elephant. There was public outrage and the hunter who is affiliated with the NRA then compared his critics to Hitler. NBC cancelled the show.
I would be more concerned about the state of our own humanity if there was no outrage.
I agree with the tipping point argument. What’s happened is that this kind of practice has now come to the public’s attention–and a huge portion of the public really, really doesn’t like it. Part of it may be a gradual change in public attitudes about animals (my kids grew up watching Animal Planet), and this was just a trigger.
Article in today’s WashPost about hunting & poaching in Africa: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/07/29/as-the-world-mourned-cecil-the-lion-five-of-kenyas-endangered-elephants-were-slain/
The answer to the question about why this guy is obvious, it is as others say a tipping point. Look, kids get killed in inner city neighborhoods all the time, they are victims of gang violence, you name it, people will read about it, shake their heads, but go on their way. But if let’s say the child of a celebrity dies in a horrible way, or you have the case where a cute little girl is kidnapped and killed, people are outraged…is that kid killed in Compton or whatnot any less valuable? Or do people get outraged more about things more like them, or they care about?
The reason this one was publicized was someone found out about it, and put in on social media, then it got publicized, and like the killing of a celebrity’s child versus some poor kid from the inner city, it blows up. For one thing, I wonder if many people even realize or know that big game hunting is going on like this, that species were are told are endangered and through nature documentaries and such we have gotten to know and admire, I think this has opened eyes. It doesn’t hurt that you have the classic archetype here, the rich, arrogant guy who can buy anything with money, and when it is an activity that many people viscerally react to, well. Someone asked if we would be outraged that a Saudi Prince did this, and that is an interesting question. Given common perceptions of Saudis, especially the well off oil barons and their behavior, people might be outraged, but they kind of expect that kind of ugly behavior. But this guy was an American, and we have this mythos about ourselves that we are the good guys, that unlike the Saudis lets say, with accusations of white slavery, the barbarism of their version of Shariah law, you name it, we are out there for good in the world, we would never brutally kill a beautiful animal like that…so when a well off American does something we would expect from some foreign potentate, we react.
Add to that that this guy comes across as some arrogant DB, and it is quite a mix and the way he killed the poor animal is what has a lot of people outraged, especially serious hunters. This is like the dilletantes who go to ‘hunting ranches’ and blast away at wildlife with shotguns, this wasn’t hunting, it was an extermination, and then letting the animal suffer for 40 hours made it much worse.
The problem with these hunting preserves in Africa is that it isn’t like you would think here, from what I know those preserves are not fenced, this isn’t like private breeding stock, the hunting lands and the preserve lands are open to each other, so this isn’t like the guys owning the preserve are breeding the animals to be killed, they are taken from whatever happens to be on their land at the time…it is why the owner of this particularly property is in trouble, because he didn’t have a permit to take a lion…if the guy was breeding his own lions, if the animals were ‘owned’ by the guy, no permit would be needed. I don’t doubt some places the hunting ranches work like that, but here the hunting ranches appear to be co-located with parks, and they are shooting the same animals that roam the preserve.
Personally, the idea that the hunting licenses and such help preserve the animals is a load of BS, I would bet if you audited how the funds from those licenses ends up being distributed, most of it ends up in someone’s pocket. Yes, the biggest threat to wildlife is human encroachment, loss of lands, but the next biggest is in things like poaching and hunting, and saying “well, hunting isn’t the biggest threat these animals face” is an excuse, since hunting , legal and especially illegal, is killing more of them. As far as hunting licenses making the animals valuable and thus giving valuable to them being saved, they probably would make a lot more money with tourism to these preserves than the big walleted idiots who think killing Lions and Giraffes and Elephants is sport.
They absolutely knew the lion they were hunting. Black-maned lions are rare, but anyway, the guides know EVERY lion in the area. It’s their job.
To call for someone to be brutally killed in so many different ways is disgusting. It doesn’t make it right because he’s the example, or the tipping point. People are such suckers, getting pulled in by the emotion of social media to demand violence against someone. Who cares if he is wealthy (as a dentist, no doubt he worked hard for his money) or if he appears arrogant.
Words matter. Wonder if his wife and kids should die, too, if he has them. When you are targeting someone for assassination, often their families are collateral damage. Maybe worth it, to make an example? Because after all, he’s the tipping point.
It is likely, if he knowingly did something illegal, that he will face the consequences. Calling for his murder is unconscionable. Certainly don’t hear such passion about the continuing slavery and mass killings still going on in Africa. Those victims have names and a story, too.
I have to think the guides knew that Cecil wasn’t one of “theirs,” in any event. I imagine there is a ton of pressure on these guides to perform. The dentist was paying $50K to take a lion within a limited period of time, and they didn’t want him going home empty-handed. It would be terrible for business if that happened.
I agree with you that most of the $$ ends up in the landowner’s pockets, but those game preserve owners have to stock their lands with game in order to maintain a business which is regulated by the government. I believe they do need to obtain permits to hunt their own animals. This is why they end up breeding and protecting their own game. It takes a staff of locals to maintain the premises, feed and house the guests, and clean and prep the kills, so it does create jobs. If these landowners were not making decent money, they would not breed lions or maintain a hunting preserve, because it is expensive. I suppose they could just hand over their lands to the government, but that is not realistic. Maybe that is the answer though, that the government should take all the land where animals are living now.
Seems odd to bring prostitution into it. The prostitute and the client can both be decision-making adults, neither needing protection or moral oversight from the state. Cecil is unlikely to desire to killed by a dentist, but needs human intervention to protect him.