*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...06320706003831

Without wanting to pay to read the whole thing, it sounds like there's both positives and negatives to the idea of conserving animals for the purposes of killing them. Who'da thunk it.

[Poopadoop]

Restaurant-gate spreads to Canada. So fucking stupid. "I'm not serving you because I don't like what your hat says."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ouse-1.4728720

[Poopadoop]

Meanwhile in the immigrant child prisons:

[wufwugy]

Without wanting to pay to read the whole thing, it sounds like there's both positives and negatives to the idea of conserving animals for the purposes of killing them. Who'da thunk it.

I would imagine so. Few things are wholly positive or wholly negative.

[oskar]

Without wanting to pay to read the whole thing, it sounds like there's both positives and negatives to the idea of conserving animals for the purposes of killing them. Who'da thunk it.

I'm just going to assume it is probably going to reference the 1977 trophy hunting ban in Kenya. If you put your horse blinkers on, you could look at that and go: Omg, if I don't shoot that elephant, I'm killing it! So you would expect that after the 2014 trophy hunting ban in Botswana, it would have the same outcome, but then you remember Botswana's wildlife tourism industry is roughly 1000x it's trophy hunting industry.

But whatever arguments you could find for very limited cases, this:

An increase in desire for trophies increases the desire for the animals, thereby incentivizing increasing and protecting the populations. A ban has an antithetical effect: reducing the desire for trophies, reducing the desire for the animals, and reducing the desire to increase and protect the populations.

is still just as wrong, as evidenced by the hundreds of species that were hunted to or near extinction with no hunting bans to somehow accelerate their demise.

[wufwugy]

is still just as wrong, as evidenced by the hundreds of species that were hunted to or near extinction with no hunting bans to somehow accelerate their demise.

I could have been more clear that when there is no infrastructure for a market, then what I described doesn't work. Tons of extinctions have happened because of that.

[wufwugy]

This happened recently, and was a big deal when it happened:

An African rhino of an endangered species was killed by a hunter. There was great outrage that this happened by those whoe live half a globe away and feel rather than think.

The rhino was old and was attacking/killing younger breeding rhinos of the species. Killing him was best for the conservation of the species. His body was donated to a nearby village for food. The hunter was one of many who paid a lot of money to the conservation institution to enter a raffle for that opportunity.

A whole lot of good came out of that.