MN Dentist legally kills Cecil the lion in Zimbabwe

[Keith B]

. . . I really have to question the mental state of someone who kills an animal for a trophy.

Well, you just insulted a rather large number of hunters with this crap. If you don't want to hunt, then don't, but you aren't going to sling accusations like this against millions of hunters.

Chas.

I've hunted myself. I didn't consider my remark to be an accusation against ethical hunters. My remark was directed to those killing merely for the fun of it. He wasn't consuming or giving away the meat and he wasn't killing to protect livestock or property or to control an animal population, all of which I consider ethical killing or hunting. I guess it would be more to the point to say killing merely for the enjoyment of killing raises questions about someone's mental state. The basic hunting ethic I was taught is that you don't kill what you don't eat, and that it is unethical to kill an animal, take it's head, and leave the rotting carcass in the field.

There are lots of reasons for hunting. Food is just a bi-product of hunting. Game conservationists sets seasons and limits on hunting to help with population control, disease issues, other health of the herd, etc. If a person follows the guidelines and hunts within the law and established rules, then whether it is for a trophy or to put meat in your freezer, then it doesn't matter, it's still ethical.

[VMI77]

. . . I really have to question the mental state of someone who kills an animal for a trophy.

Well, you just insulted a rather large number of hunters with this crap. If you don't want to hunt, then don't, but you aren't going to sling accusations like this against millions of hunters.

Chas.

I've hunted myself. I didn't consider my remark to be an accusation against ethical hunters. My remark was directed to those killing merely for the fun of it. He wasn't consuming or giving away the meat and he wasn't killing to protect livestock or property or to control an animal population, all of which I consider ethical killing or hunting. I guess it would be more to the point to say killing merely for the enjoyment of killing raises questions about someone's mental state. The basic hunting ethic I was taught is that you don't kill what you don't eat, and that it is unethical to kill an animal, take it's head, and leave the rotting carcass in the field.

There are lots of reasons for hunting. Food is just a bi-product of hunting. Game conservationists sets seasons and limits on hunting to help with population control, disease issues, other health of the herd, etc. If a person follows the guidelines and hunts within the law and established rules, then whether it is for a trophy or to put meat in your freezer, then it doesn't matter, it's still ethical.

Uh, in the quote you referenced I included "to control an animal population" as ethical hunting. I assumed in this remark that would occur under some legal framework such as rules established by entities like Texas Parks and Wildlife. I also meant my remark to include non-game related killing of animals like feral hogs (alluded to by the remark about protecting livestock and property). TPW has a hog poisoning program and shooting them seems more humane to me. While it doesn't explicitly say so, the "ethical hunting" guide on the TPW website refers to "harvesting" game and assumes that a deer hunter, for example, isn't going to leave a carcass in the field. In my follow up comment to Andy I more explicitly acknowledged what you're essentially saying here, though he was referring to circumstances in Africa, so I'm not quite sure what point you're making?

None of that has anything to do with what this guy was doing when he killed Cecil or with some of the things he's done in the past. I attempted to be more specific in my follow up remarks to Andy. I don't think I have the verbal skills to be any clearer: I question the mental state of this guy, Palmer, and people who act as he did. The fact that he has been convicted previously of hunting unethically, and that he had to settle a sexual harassment claim, support such questioning.

[VMI77]

I've hunted myself. I didn't consider my remark to be an accusation against ethical hunters. My remark was directed to those killing merely for the fun of it. He wasn't consuming or giving away the meat and he wasn't killing to protect livestock or property or to control an animal population, all of which I consider ethical killing or hunting. I guess it would be more to the point to say killing merely for the enjoyment of killing raises questions about someone's mental state. The basic hunting ethic I was taught is that you don't kill what you don't eat, and that it is unethical to kill an animal, take it's head, and leave the rotting carcass in the field.

Actually, on any legit game farm in Africa that I know of, the number of lion/elephants/etc that *can* be shot by trophy hunters is carefully managed, given the finite resources of a specific land-area - so while the hunter may be killing for "fun", his or her motives are irrelevant - the benefits brought to the area in doing so are very real.

The hunt brings in a lot of revenue, keeps the locals employed (and indeed keeps them from being involved in poaching themselves), keeps the ranch open for further generations of animals and trims the population of lion/elephant/whatever to a sustainable level by culling the aggressive and the old who have already passed along their genetic material. Rather a swift, clean death than to be torn apart and eaten alive slowly by hyenas, wouldn't you say?

Now, I don't enjoy big-game trophy-hunting myself - but I'm certainly not going to sneer at someone who does (as long as it's legal and ethical) because I'm aware of the benefits.

I don't disagree and I do agree that there are benefits to the practice as you describe it. However, that's not what happened here, and that's not really what I was addressing as it falls into the area of ethical hunting, and as you say, under the circumstances you describe, the hunter's motives are irrelevant. I guess I wasn't specific enough. I was speaking to the state of mind that enjoys killing apart from everything else, purely for the sake of killing, and immortalizes it with a trophy. Under the circumstances you describe no such state of mind is required.

Well, you said this:

My remark was directed to those killing merely for the fun of it. He wasn't consuming or giving away the meat and he wasn't killing to protect livestock or property or to control an animal population, all of which I consider ethical killing or hunting. I guess it would be more to the point to say killing merely for the enjoyment of killing raises questions about someone's mental state. The basic hunting ethic I was taught is that you don't kill what you don't eat, and that it is unethical to kill an animal, take it's head, and leave the rotting carcass in the field.

Basically you've just said that anything other then killing for food is unethical and calls for an examination into someone's mental health, or am I not understanding you correctly?

I did? I listed at least two other reasons for killing that are ethical, one that has nothing to do with killing for food --killing to protect livestock or property; and one that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with killing for food --controlling an animal population (which includes other categories noted above in Keith's comments). Killing feral hogs is an example of population control that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with killing for food though some people might consume the meat. Killing Nutria is another example. Are you saying that shooting a deer, taking its head, and leaving the carcass to rot in the field is ethical hunting? Is it ethical to shoot a dove and leave it on the ground just because someone likes killing birds? More to the point are you saying that killing animals purely for the fun of killing, because someone gets a thrill from it, is mentally healthy?

According the TPW only 4.4% of Texans hunt. That's a pretty small minority. Many people are against any kind of hunting no matter what the reason. Even more people are against trophy hunting. I haven't seen any numbers but I suspect a majority of the population is troubled by those who kill animals just for the fun of it. Guys like Palmer turn people against hunting and many, perhaps most, aren't going to differentiate between the type of hunting we're discussing here and will therefore support banning all hunting. Banning hunting would not only be bad for the minority of those who hunt, but for all gun owners, since that's one of the only justifications for gun ownership grudgingly allowed by the banners.

Edited to add the following citations on ethical hunting:

http://www.nssf.org/safety/lit/EthicalHunter.pdf

...the ethical hunter never takes more game than can be used. If they can, ethical hunters use well-trained dogs to help find downed game. Properly field dressing and cleaning game assures that game is never wasted.

http://www.gma.vic.gov.au/hunting/deer/ethical-hunting

Once a deer is dispatched it should be properly handled to minimise waste. Bring out as much meat as you can and ensure that the carcass is not left near a road, track or a waterway. Never shoot an animal if you know you cannot carry it out. Avoid wasting a valuable game resource. Prepare game quickly and never leave game to waste.

http://www.eregulations.com/indiana/hun ... gulations/

Wanton Waste

It is illegal to kill or cripple any wild animal without making a reasonable effort to retrieve the animal to include in your daily bag limit.

http://mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/regu ... egulations

It is illegal to leave or abandon commonly edible portions of game.

Use of bait — which includes grain or other feed placed or scattered so as to attract deer or turkeys — while hunting is illegal.

http://diyhuntingmaps.com/p/co-hunting- ... pec-conth4

Felony offense: To kill and abandon big game. It is illegal to remove only the hide, antlers or other trophy parts and leave the carcass in the field.

Fail to make a reasonable attempt to track and kill animals you wound or may have wounded.

[VMI77]

Those are all strawman arguments - I haven't said or even implied any of those, but let's examine them all in one go anyway. Ever heard of the expression "Buzzards gotta eat too"? At the end of the day, I don't see that anything truly goes to waste in nature whether the hunter takes all, some or none of his game, so "wastage" is an emotive non-argument as far as I'm concerned.

You may consider it an emotive non-argument, but as the citations I gave indicate, it's illegal in many states to take "none" of his game, including Texas: http://tpwd.texas.gov/regulations/outdo ... estitution

Waste of Game

It is an offense (Class C misdemeanor) if a person while hunting kills or wounds a game bird or game animal and intentionally or knowingly fails to make a reasonable effort to retrieve the animal or bird and include it in the person's daily or seasonal bag limit. It is an offense if a person intentionally takes or possesses a game bird, game animal, or fish and intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly, or with criminal negligence, fails to keep the edible portions of the bird, animal, or fish in an edible condition. It is a Class A misdemeanor to fail to retrieve or to keep in an edible condition a whitetail or mule deer, pronghorn antelope, or desert bighorn sheep hunted without landowner consent; from a vehicle, boat, or aircraft; on a public road; at night; or with the aid of a light.

From your previous comments I got the impression that you considered following the law part of ethical hunting? So are you saying an argument to follow the law is an "emotive argument?" I don't understand then, are you endorsing criminal behavior?

I hardly think this guy is anti-hunting and he gets close to what I've been attempting to get across: http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/big-bu ... hy-hunting

Yes, I dream of, plan for, and target older and bigger bucks. And I’d certainly love a crack at one of those giants you see on magazine covers. But I’d like to think that what I’m doing is much more than simply trying to acquire a trophy.

Hunting is a rush. It’s a thrill. But it’s not a game. We’re not running up and down a court for 60 minutes throwing a ball in a basket, hoping to get something shiny and gold to put on the shelf.

We’re taking a life.

That’s something worth sitting back and reminding ourselves of every once in a while. We are taking a life, and as author Thomas McGuane once said, “This is serious and you had better always remember that.”

I hunt for meat. I hunt for an experience. I hunt for a challenge. And yes, I sometimes hunt for the kind of animal that others would call a trophy.

But when I walk by my dining room table and through the French doors, I don’t see trophies hanging on my wall. I see lifelong memories and lessons learned. I see struggles and I see success. I see joy and pain and laughter and failure.

And ultimately, I see a stark reminder of the animal lives that I’ve taken, and the innumerable thanks that I must give for having hunted them.

[philip964]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbhU76kUGMM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This maybe is the lion video I remember from its from the '50's not the '20's

Not as dramatic as I remember.

A female.

British Pathe adds recent commentary saying it's unfortunate the lion died.

The lion had it's teeth around the shooters shoulder, when a second shooter added another shot.

They describe the camera work as shaky because the cameraman was afraid. Duh.

[txglock21]

In my 37 years of hunting I have only shot two animals that the meat was not eaten. One was a bobcat that I had mounted and the other was a coyote that was eating our chickens. I personally don't hunt for "trophies", (except that bobcat) but I am not going to condemn others as long as it is done legally and ethically. In the case of this dentist, I don't think what he did was either legal or ethical. He is blaming it on his guides, but I think he knew exactly what he was doing and that it was wrong. Just my 2 cents, YMMV.

[Charles L. Cotton]

. . . I really have to question the mental state of someone who kills an animal for a trophy.

Well, you just insulted a rather large number of hunters with this crap. If you don't want to hunt, then don't, but you aren't going to sling accusations like this against millions of hunters.

Chas.

I've hunted myself. I didn't consider my remark to be an accusation against ethical hunters. My remark was directed to those killing merely for the fun of it. He wasn't consuming or giving away the meat and he wasn't killing to protect livestock or property or to control an animal population, all of which I consider ethical killing or hunting. I guess it would be more to the point to say killing merely for the enjoyment of killing raises questions about someone's mental state. The basic hunting ethic I was taught is that you don't kill what you don't eat, and that it is unethical to kill an animal, take it's head, and leave the rotting carcass in the field.

I see what you mean, but that's not what I took from your post. When one passes up a buck with a small rack and takes one with a bigger rack, they made that decision at least in part for the mount. Again, I better understand what you mean and I apologize for my post.

Chas.

[VMI77]

. . . I really have to question the mental state of someone who kills an animal for a trophy.

Well, you just insulted a rather large number of hunters with this crap. If you don't want to hunt, then don't, but you aren't going to sling accusations like this against millions of hunters.

Chas.

I've hunted myself. I didn't consider my remark to be an accusation against ethical hunters. My remark was directed to those killing merely for the fun of it. He wasn't consuming or giving away the meat and he wasn't killing to protect livestock or property or to control an animal population, all of which I consider ethical killing or hunting. I guess it would be more to the point to say killing merely for the enjoyment of killing raises questions about someone's mental state. The basic hunting ethic I was taught is that you don't kill what you don't eat, and that it is unethical to kill an animal, take it's head, and leave the rotting carcass in the field.

I see what you mean, but that's not what I took from your post. When one passes up a buck with a small rack and takes one with a bigger rack, they made that decision at least in part for the mount. Again, I better understand what you mean and I apologize for my post.

Chas.

No need to apologize. Your response made me realize that I was too general in my comment and didn't accurately represent what I was thinking. It reminded me of the wisdom of Francis Bacon:

“Reading maketh a full man; and writing an exact man. And, therefore, if a man write little, he need have a present wit; and if he read little, he need have much cunning to seem to know which he doth not.”

I wasn't an exact man. I'm still not but maybe got a little closer.

[gljjt]

I enjoy hunting. I love to hunt dove. With that said, hunting with the intent to consume the meat is ethical. Hunting for wildlife management purposes is ethical. Hunting to eliminate predatory (against farm animals, land/crops) animals is ethical. Hunting in approved/managed big game hunts is ethical, shooting an animal in self defense is ethical. Paying $55,000 to lure a lion off a game preserve with bait to shoot it for 'sport' is criminal. Maybe not by law, but certainly ethically so. IMHO.

[philip964]

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/18/op ... ?referrer=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New York Times editorial from 2013 Saving lions by killing them

[Abraham]

Varmint hunters kill crows.

Huh?

They don't eat them do they?

Answer: No, they don't.

Are crows devastating crops?

If they are, sure, blast em, but shoot them just because you can is despicable.

And yes, I've hunted most all my life from dove to deer and lots of other critters in between. I'm no anti-hunter lib, just don't care for shooting critters just to shoot them.