Trophy Hunting – how hunters use jargon to conceal cruelty.
This canned rhino hunt is a true story. The way that conservation officials/hunters describe it, they were doing the poor rhino a favour.
A rhino cow was being non-consumptively utilised as a tourist attraction in Kuruman Game Park. Sentimental, urbanised people might erroneously or perhaps maliciously, describe the Game Park as a small piece of fenced land across the road from the industrial estate, but real conservationists would know that it was an 'extended wildlife system' as defined in the new regulations.
The 'active management' of the rhino cow began at 9a.m. in the morning when she was approached by licensed hunters on foot in accordance with good hunting practices. She was first shot humanely at about 9a.m.with a .458 Winchester in a manner which inflicted no more than minimal suffering and did not distress any other animals in the vicinity. Thereafter she enjoyed further humane treatment from time to time during the course of the day. At 4.30 in the afternoon she was seen to be bleeding from four quarters, flanks and hind quarters but could not have been suffering more than minimal discomfort because the ethical hunter was using an approved weapon of the correct calibre. She must also have been pleased to know that the ethical hunter had a permit issued by Kimberley Nature Conservation authorities to introduce her to the doctrine of sustainable use. For all this, and mindless of her duty to be sustainably utilised for the benefit of conservation, she had unlawfully retreated into a thicket. The ethical hunter was by now shooting from his safari vehicle in accordance with good hunting practices because she was wounded, albeit only minimally. Not because he was afraid that his vehicle would get a puncture in the thicket or because he was tired from all that pulling on a heavy trigger, the ethical hunter decided at 4.30pm to pull out his cell phone and call up a helicopter from the industrial estate, which lay in plain sight across the highway from the extended wildlife system. The helicopter arrived within minutes and descended upon the thicket in order to flush the rhino cow out. When she emerged she received more humane treatment from the ethical hunter's .458 Winchester, which caused her to retreat back into the thicket. This meant that the process had to be repeated again and again. But this was the rhino's own fault because she exhibited a marked aversion to the humane treatment she was getting.
The helicopter pilot, who was not a true conservationist, alleged that she received humane treatment in this manner not less than ten times over a period of forty minutes before she agreed to be sustainably used and fell onto her knees. At this stage the hunting party were observed to break open beer cans and to take photographs in order to celebrate the success of their successful ethical hunt according to the prevailing norms of conservation society. All that humane effort must have been thirsty work. Out of a tender concern to avoid hurting the trophy parts of her body, no attempt was made to terminate her minimal suffering, and her active management was allowed to be prolonged until she eventually expired some time later in the evening. Too much should not be made of this because every true conservationist knows that animals cannot reason and therefore cannot suffer pain as we do and there is really no ethical difference in killing a rhino than in killing bacteria.
Unfortunately there are spoil sports in all walks of life and the circumstance of this hunt were leaked to some radical extremist bunny huggers who should get a life, who deceitfully reported the matter to the police in order to harm conservation in South Africa. The response of the hunting party and of the conservation authorities was, quite properly, to point out that the hunt had been conducted ethically and in accordance with good hunting practices and the prevailing societal norms: viz. the hunter was licensed by Kimberley conservation authority; he was a qualified marksman; he was a member of a recognised hunting association which was supervising the hunt; he initially approached the animal on foot, and he used a rifle of the approved calibre to avoid causing more than minimal suffering and distress to other animals in the vicinity. The rhino cow was deemed to be wild because the enclosure in which she roamed fell within the broad definition of an extended wildlife system, wherein active management was required. So this hunt could not lawfully be called either cruel or canned.
The Kimberley prosecutor, himself an avid hunter, and therefore a true conservationist, accepted these defences and declined to prosecute, saying it was impossible to prove that she had suffered more than minimally.

See Technorati article

Chris:

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

I am normally a peaceful and placid person, but I am now totally furious with the way the South African government allows this type of cruelty/
barbarism to their wildlife.

One side of me says that any person caught torturing any animal should be likewise tortured (the old Eye for an Eye). In the case of rhinos and elephants a machete should be taken to the person - his nose chopped off, a big hole put in each cheek and all his teeth pulled out. If he doesn't die of loss of blood, infection or starvation from not being able to eat, hopefully his fellow man will be so afraid of his horrible appearance that they would exile him. In the case of someone killing lions, they should be given the choice of having a spear put through them or drinking a Furadan cocktail.

Another side of me says we need to set up groups of mercenaries who are former military personnel who would have no compunction against killing these barbaric humans. This has GOT TO STOP, whether hunter, poacher, or government official who allows it to continue.

I hate feeling this way, but most Africans don't stop to think that the wildlife was there long before the humans were and deserve a right to live also.
They also don't stop to think that wildlife controls its own numbers a lot better than the humans do (an elephant will have one baby in four years - a woman could have 1 - 8)!!!

I went directly to Technorati and "liked" the article so it would go directly to my Facebook page. We need to get more people to learn the truth of what is happening.

Thanks Jan
Maybe it is the sarcasm, but this article seems to have upset many hunters and hunting sympathisers. Funny how they get so angry about the sarcasm, while the appalling suffering of the poor rhino is overlooked completely. What strange priorities!

Perhaps part of the reason they are disturbed by it is that they don't have the know-how and the guts to do it right (despite all the modern guns on the market today). The old game wardens of years ago knew what they were doing, and if an animal had to be dispatched would get a clean brain shot on the first try. Yes, they ended up killing the animal (sometimes due to human-wildlife conflict and sometimes due to serious injury the animal had sustained and they knew it couldn't survive - thus putting it out of its misery). They also mourned the loss of the animal and were sorry they had to kill it.

In addition many of these people truly do believe they are helping to conserve. They haven't got a clue of what is happening to African wildlife nor do they care. They seriously think their sports hunting is helping the indigenous people in the area and aren't smart enough to realize that money gained from their hunt is going into only a couple of very deep pockets. Perhaps with that money the farm owner can purchase another rhino - but it will only be to make more money by having it shot also, not to help conserve the species.

I never thought I could kill an animal, but now know I am tougher than I thought. About two years ago in Kenya when the drought was so very bad, I sat through four days watching a 3 - 4 year old orphaned bull elephant starving to death. We couldn't get the wildlife authorities or a vet to come and rescue him. He often walked right in front of my tent hoping to find a little bit of grass. On the third day he was down and couldn't get up, yet he continued to move his legs and trunk trying to get up. Then during the night of the 4th night I heard an ear-deafening trumpet - and it was his last.

Thus I realize there are times an animal needs to be killed, but I find it impossible to understand how anyone can get their jollies from it and celebrate the killing. Shame on them!

Oh certainly we have to kill animals all the time. It was my unhappy lot to have to put down animals and birds that came in to our wildlife rehab centre when there was no hope for them.
And culling for conservation purposes is also a necessary evil. But it is the idea of killing animals for fun, sport, that I find so deeply offensive.

Though I agree with most of your conservation thinking, I disagree with you on culling. You have probably read of the horrible Tsavo die-off in the 1970's. When space, food and water are very limited due to high numbers of animals, drought, etc., females will not come in estrous - thus controlling their own numbers for a period of time. Mother Nature deals with those that are too weak or ill - cutting the numbers of the herd without culling. When culling takes place, there are fewer animals for a short period, meaning more food & water for those surviving, and the females continue to come into estrous - thus increasing the population very quickly again. Though seeing a die-off must be heartbreaking and horrible, IMHO it would be preferable to culling.

That South Africa can even consider culling 10,000 elephants in Kruger is abhorrent. Yes, elephants can indeed destroy the habitat they live in. But again thinking of Tsavo, before the elephants destroyed all the trees, elephants were the only species living there. At that time Kenya was considering culling to prevent more trees/habitat from ruination. Thankfully David Sheldrick put his foot down and refused to let it happen. It wasn't long after that that the drought hit and thousands of elephants died from starvation. Due to all the trees being felled thus forming a savanna, many more species moved into the area. The reason for Kruger being "over-populated" with elephants is man-made. They are fenced in. Take the darn fences down and let the animals roam free. I realize it is much easier said than done, but that would be the ideal.