After the guy killed Cecil the lion, he apparently asked his guide if they could kill an elephant next. It was difficult to believe he could have been an even bigger a-hole, but apparently he was. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ant-next-but-couldnt-find-one-big-enough.html
So it was the arrow the second time that killed Cecil according to this guy's story? I thought someone used a rifle.
Honestly, I think the fauxrage argument pisses me off almost as much as the guy who shot Cecil. For me, the more I read, the more I'm inclined to better support conservation groups, eat free range chicken eggs, and reduce my red meat intake. Something positive came from this, but yes, I'm still outraged about it. At least we are talking about life and death here, and not Taylor Swift vs Whats her face.
Sure you can help change that. 1. Donate to conservation projects. 2. Don't kill threatened species. 3. Volunteer to help conservation projects. All of those things can help change the status of endangered or threatened species.
I don't care which charities you help, but the statement you made that it was untrue you couldn't do anything about a species being in the threatened statute was untrue. I agree with the other point you were making that mostly people hunt deer, etc. for the fun of it. The meat is an added bonus. But besides the meat being an added bonus, those animals aren't threatened and their numbers need culling, so the hunting is actually beneficial. The same isn't true about lions, elephants, etc.
Then stop making false equivalencies. Hunting overpopulated deer is not the same as hunting a threatened species.
It actually is true. They dont need cullint, but it costs money to maintain their population, and a lot of money can be made from trophy hunting. This is why it is legal in Zimbabwe with restrictions.
That logic is similar to stating that funds from child prostituion is used to save child prostitutes thus we should go buy the services of a child prostutute.
