|
Chinese authorities have issued two hunting permits to a group of seven American tourists headed to Qinghai province to stalk protected Bharal blue sheep and TIbetan Gazelles. According to the NewsCore wire service, the permits are the first issued by the Expert Committee of Wild Animal Hunting since a hunting ban was placed on foreigners five years ago.
Bharals are on the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List of endangered species and Tibetan Gazelles are protected -- in theory at least -- by the Chinese government.
Chinese law prohibits hunting protected animals unless the hunters are part of an expedition or doing scientific research.
State News Agency Xinhua reports that the Qinghai Dulan Hunting Ground has already brought in about $3 million in tax revenue by catering to local hunters. That number is bound to go up as foreigners arrive.
According to the Tibetan Review, the hunts could offend local Buddhists who do not believe in recreational hunting.
Before the hunting ban on foreigners was instituted in 2006, specialized tour companies gave Americans an expensive Asian safari experience. According to the China Daily, it cost $7,900 to hunt a Bharal and $1,500 to hunt a Tibetan Gazelle.
After a short piece about the permits being issued was posted on Field and Stream's website, commenters expressed a lack of faith in the Chinese government to protect animal populations and little enthusiasm for a new hunting ground.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/12/foreigners-hunt-endangere_n_925290.html?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl17|sec3_lnk2|86047
Why would chinese government do this to their own animals? Especially animals that are endangered or almost extinct in their own LAND? Is it money? You want yuan, is that it? Typical example of human greed. And those American scumbag hunters, I hope they get hunted down.
|
First the bear thing, then this..
Well, I guess they can spin it to say it's all the foreigners' fault.
|
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure.
|
I say let the foreigners do as they please, $3million in tax revenues + is well worth the lives of measly animals. Protected animals my ass, nothings going to protect them from the double barrel shotgun between the eyes.
|
Facepalm to the extreme~~~ I never even heard of those animals before and now these guys are allowed to hunt them?
|
On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure.
They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters?
|
On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters?
The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it.
|
On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it.
Funny. I don't see any other people with different nationality paying money to hunt those endangered animals... yet.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
a hunting ban was placed on foreigners five years ago.
So wait you can't hunt our shit only we can hunt our shit oh k, oh wait you pay shiz nvm go hunt em.
|
|
|
|
|
On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it.
Generally when someone does something worthy of making the news, the media adds in the nationality of the person. For instance a headline will be like "British man abducted by pirates off Somali coast."
|
i hope they leave red panda alone bc they are adorable ^_^
|
I mean hunting is a source of revenue and if people are willing to pay 3 million to hunt an animal that's not even close to endangered I'd do it.
|
Probably why this little gem of a sentence is there
Bharals are on the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List of endangered species and Tibetan Gazelles are protected -- in theory at least -- by the Chinese government.
|
I was expecting another foreign proteam buying out some chinese players..
Oh Teamliquid you..
|
On August 13 2011 11:38 kaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it. Funny. I don't see any other people with different nationality paying money to hunt those endangered animals... yet.
So by saying "... yet." your admitting your judgement on the nationality of the hunters has nothing to do with the story and you blew a whistle at their being Americans too early.
As soon as ANY other hunters of another nationality participate in this hunting your comment is completely bigoted. That's what people are getting at.
You didn't have to stress the fact that they were American, you chose to. You could have said "scum bag hunters" and made the same point.
|
It's disturbing how much the media covers about Chinese news bits and always in a negative way which is a classic case of Sinophobia.
|
Hong Kong9169 Posts
On August 13 2011 11:26 kaisen wrote:
Why would chinese government do this to their own animals?
Because they, as a sovereign state, have determined this to be in their national interest. Pure and simple. In their calculus, revenue inflow now outweighs vacuous international law regimes regarding conservation. No international third party exists that can effectively regulate China's domestic behavior, and no other country will go to war over this.
|
What the fuck is going on with China and their animals?!?!
|
ROFL now here come all these people gonna protect America when they were bashing China earlier as a culture because of what they did. How are the americans better here when they are hunting rare animals? Yeah the Chinese permitted it, but because of the profit stance. Isn't it "immoral" for the Americans to do this? keke
|
I'm just curious why the International Union for Conservation is protecting least concern and non threatened animals.
|
On August 13 2011 11:47 TerlocSG wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:38 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it. Funny. I don't see any other people with different nationality paying money to hunt those endangered animals... yet. So by saying "... yet." your admitting your judgement on the nationality of the hunters has nothing to do with the story and you blew a whistle at their being Americans too early. As soon as ANY other hunters of another nationality participate in this hunting your comment is completely bigoted. That's what people are getting at. You didn't have to stress the fact that they were American, you chose to. You could have said "scum bag hunters" and made the same point.
Said it better than I could.
All I can say is, if you don't like 'murrica, you can giiiiit out!
|
I saw this thread and immediately went to go check who made the "bear" thread.
Yep, no surprise. The same OP.
I hope you aren't going to start regularly spamming General with animal cruelty stories.
How am I supposed to respond to this except "awww, that's too bad." Unlike many people, apparently, I don't enjoy reveling in righteous indignation.
|
|
|
First the bear thread and now this?
|
Non-story, this appears to be akin to hunting white-tailed deer in America due to the animals conservation statuses.
|
awww that's too bad poor gazelles, I really get sick of people bashing my country on the internet. You have nothing better to do than this?
|
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species?
|
On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species?
well idk maybe their DNA has the cure to cancer, you never know. Since DNA strains don't really repeat itself after extinction it's rather important.
|
On August 13 2011 12:10 Blasterion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species? well idk maybe their DNA has the cure to cancer, you never know. Right, well, thats retarded. I can think of all numbers of things that we "should" do because of all numbers of unknown variables. Thats clearly not rational.
|
On August 13 2011 12:10 lizzard_warish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:10 Blasterion wrote:On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species? well idk maybe their DNA has the cure to cancer, you never know. Right, well, thats retarded. I can think of all numbers of things that we "should" do because of all numbers of unknown variables. Thats clearly not rational.
Well logically it's because DNA variables do not repeat itself after a species extincts and X specie may cure Y disease in the future, useful to keep 1 or 2 around just for medicinal reasons
|
On August 13 2011 11:58 Rembot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:47 TerlocSG wrote:On August 13 2011 11:38 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it. Funny. I don't see any other people with different nationality paying money to hunt those endangered animals... yet. So by saying "... yet." your admitting your judgement on the nationality of the hunters has nothing to do with the story and you blew a whistle at their being Americans too early. As soon as ANY other hunters of another nationality participate in this hunting your comment is completely bigoted. That's what people are getting at. You didn't have to stress the fact that they were American, you chose to. You could have said "scum bag hunters" and made the same point. Said it better than I could. All I can say is, if you don't like 'murrica, you can giiiiit out!
Eh? You Americans should feel ashamed that some of your fellows are out there hunting endangered species protected by International treaties. I'm of Chinese origin as well and you don't see me jump up in hoops to defend the things my government do that are just plain wrong.
|
On August 13 2011 12:12 Blasterion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:10 lizzard_warish wrote:On August 13 2011 12:10 Blasterion wrote:On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species? well idk maybe their DNA has the cure to cancer, you never know. Right, well, thats retarded. I can think of all numbers of things that we "should" do because of all numbers of unknown variables. Thats clearly not rational. Well logically it's because DNA variables do not repeat itself after a species extincts and X specie may cure Y disease in the future, useful to keep 1 or 2 around just for medicinal reasons Can we not simply preserve the DNA as we preserve seeds [in norway I think]? Not to mention 1 or 2 isnt genetically viable, to keep a species sustainable... well it obviously differs on the species, but its usually north of 1000.On August 13 2011 12:15 Rembot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species? We don't really have a moral duty to preserve species, unless your own morals make you feel duty-bound to do so. What we do have is a biological duty to preserve species, since it's been proven that biological diversity is the key to survival. If we only had a few species then it wouldn't take very much to wipe us out.
Yeah, so in other words, our only impetuous is to make sure we dont wipe out about ten thousand species for no reason, especially ones crucial to important eco systems. It leaves literally no room for bleeding hearts, or relevance, for the odd extinction from pollution, hunting, human expansion etc. It's only an issue on the macro scale. Not to mention the posts here [which werent critical of the op] did not follow the nature of fear for low genetic diversity, they followed the nature of moral disgust, which is ridiculous until some quasi valid ontological basis for a moral system which makes one duty bound to preserving animals for their own sake arises.
|
On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species?
We don't really have a moral duty to preserve species, unless your own morals make you feel duty-bound to do so.
What we do have is a biological duty to preserve species, since it's been proven that biological diversity is the key to survival. If we only had a few species then it wouldn't take very much to wipe us out.
|
On August 13 2011 12:15 lizzard_warish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:12 Blasterion wrote:On August 13 2011 12:10 lizzard_warish wrote:On August 13 2011 12:10 Blasterion wrote:On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species? well idk maybe their DNA has the cure to cancer, you never know. Right, well, thats retarded. I can think of all numbers of things that we "should" do because of all numbers of unknown variables. Thats clearly not rational. Well logically it's because DNA variables do not repeat itself after a species extincts and X specie may cure Y disease in the future, useful to keep 1 or 2 around just for medicinal reasons Can we not simply preserve the DNA as we preserve seeds [in norway I think]? Not to mention 1 or 2 isnt genetically viable, to keep a species sustainable... well it obviously differs on the species, but its usually north of 1000.
Well I didn't express it well , but you get the idea, Rembot explain it better
On August 13 2011 12:15 Rembot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:09 lizzard_warish wrote:
Why do we have a moral duty to preserve species? We don't really have a moral duty to preserve species, unless your own morals make you feel duty-bound to do so. What we do have is a biological duty to preserve species, since it's been proven that biological diversity is the key to survival. If we only had a few species then it wouldn't take very much to wipe us out.
|
On August 13 2011 12:13 ppdealer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:58 Rembot wrote:On August 13 2011 11:47 TerlocSG wrote:On August 13 2011 11:38 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it. Funny. I don't see any other people with different nationality paying money to hunt those endangered animals... yet. So by saying "... yet." your admitting your judgement on the nationality of the hunters has nothing to do with the story and you blew a whistle at their being Americans too early. As soon as ANY other hunters of another nationality participate in this hunting your comment is completely bigoted. That's what people are getting at. You didn't have to stress the fact that they were American, you chose to. You could have said "scum bag hunters" and made the same point. Said it better than I could. All I can say is, if you don't like 'murrica, you can giiiiit out! Eh? You Americans should feel ashamed that some of your fellows are out there hunting endangered species protected by International treaties. I'm of Chinese origin as well and you don't see me jump up in hoops to defend the things my government do that are just plain wrong.
I am ashamed of them, but you don't see me going out of my way to identify them as "American". They're just stupid, rich hunters with no respect. The fact that they're from America is not very relevant to the discussion. If it was shown that there were hundreds of American hunters taking advantage of these offers from the Chinese government, then the argument would have some merit. As it stands, it's a few isolated nutjobs with an obsession for killing endangered animals.
|
This is ridiculously sensationalist. The endangered species list even says that they are not even near extinction at the moment, and are not likely to become extinct, our even threatened without major changes to their current population. I'm sure we in america have similar offenses to this.
The bear thread was legitimate, this is not.
|
Bharal isn't an endangered species.. OP no research before thread post? This is why you wiki everything..
|
Did you know you can pay 50 thousand for a native tracker and license to go bag yourself one of them polar bear trophies in Canada? Supplies not included of course.
At least, monetarily speaking, China values those animals more then Canada does.
|
Typical example of human greed. And those American scumbag hunters, I hope they get hunted down.
GTFO of my nation.
Seriously, There's nothing wrong with hunting. Bears and Cougars hunt humans. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
Hunting is not the reason that the dinosaurs went extinct, and humans are the only things that can possibly prevent certain animals from becoming extinct. Now hunting endangered animals is wrong in international law, and it's understandable.
But hunting common animals for sport has been around longer than you. Just because most of them aren't forum lurkers like you doesn't mean you have to diss their lifestyle.
In other words, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT, CHUMP.
User was warned for this post
|
Seems like the OP is just trying to pick a fight.
|
On August 13 2011 12:20 sCfO20 wrote:Show nested quote +Typical example of human greed. And those American scumbag hunters, I hope they get hunted down. GTFO of my nation. Seriously, There's nothing wrong with hunting. Bears and Cougars hunt humans. It's a dog eat dog world out there. Hunting is not the reason that the dinosaurs went extinct, and humans are the only things that can possibly prevent certain animals from becoming extinct. Now hunting endangered animals is wrong in international law, and it's understandable. But hunting common animals for sport has been around longer than you. Just because most of them aren't forum lurkers like you doesn't mean you have to diss their lifestyle. In other words, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT, CHUMP.
You don't seriously believe that do you?
|
Can this OP please get banned? This animal isn't even endangered.. (or even close). He's just spreading anti-foreigner crap.
Stop trying to tell everyone how bad hunting/foreigners are. Reporting the news is one thing but you're trying to ram your views down our throats.
|
OP is just a anti Chinese jesuit that want to start a flame war. (e.g. Bear Thread) no need to listen to his bullshit.
|
You don't seriously believe that do you?
Believe what? that we can help endangered animals? I believe it, of course I do. Forced breeding, and a nice place to stay can do a lot for animals on the ropes.
If you mean hunting, yes. I think hunting is perfectly fine. Why wouldn't it be? That's all Lions do in their free time. Of course, it's for a different purpose, but why don't you go cry when you see some shit on the NGC?
|
On August 13 2011 12:28 sCfO20 wrote:Believe what? that we can help endangered animals? I believe it, of course I do. Forced breeding, and a nice place to stay can do a lot for animals on the ropes. If you mean hunting, yes. I think hunting is perfectly fine. Why wouldn't it be? That's all Lions do in their free time. Of course, it's for a different purpose, but why don't you go cry when you see some shit on the NGC?
He probably meant go out in packs and look for humans to kill. It's the other way around. And while I myself am a hunter, I am definitely opposed to hunting endangered species, as I am 100% behind conservation of all wildlife. However, judging from some of the replies of this thread it doesn't look like they are endangered...
|
On August 13 2011 12:28 sCfO20 wrote:Believe what? that we can help endangered animals? I believe it, of course I do. Forced breeding, and a nice place to stay can do a lot for animals on the ropes. If you mean hunting, yes. I think hunting is perfectly fine. Why wouldn't it be? That's all Lions do in their free time. Of course, it's for a different purpose, but why don't you go cry when you see some shit on the NGC?
I mean bears and cougars hunting humans.
I'm fairly indifferent on the sport of hunting.
|
This isn't news. People get hunting licences all over the world, these animals are no less endangered. Useless OP with no grounds for discussion.
|
Seems like a sensationalist article and even worse OP.
These animals are not in dire need of help; they are not on the brink of extinction; we will not be deprived of their miraculous cancer curing DNA strands. Anyone bothered enough to do 5 minutes of research will find out that they are in fact they are "Least Concern" and "Near Threatened" respectively. Did you know that human beings and house mice are also on the "Least Concern" list? I think that puts things into perspective on how the situation really is with the blue sheep.
They are not endangered, they are not threatened, they are not going to get wiped out by the occasional "scumbag hunter". They face much more danger from natural predators. Yet we're seeing words like "endangered species", " protected", and "almost extinct". This is all completely false. Another poster mentioned the situation is more akin to whitetail deer in America and that wouldn't be an unfair assumption.
There are very few hunters who will drop eight grand to get the chance to hunt one animal, and in the case that they do it will have no effect on the animal's population. If you are against hunting that is fine, and you are free to have that opinion. However, don't go around making sensationalist topics like this to hatemonger for your cause.
|
I mean bears and cougars hunting humans.
Oh, yeah I do believe it. Well, not in the sense we humans do, but there's plenty of instances where animals have killed humans. Timothy Treadwell is a good case. Nothing but passion for the bears, and ends up gettin eaten by them.
I'm not saying that that justifies it... but it makes you see it differently.
|
Bharals are "Least Concern".
Tibetian Gazelles are "Near Threatened".
http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/18536/0
http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/18231/0
They aren't endangered like the article suggests, they're just on the red list...as not that concerning at all.
As long as they are regulating the hunting in some way there shouldn't be too much problem with their populations. They just have to keep good tabs...and charging money for each one hunted is a pretty damn good way of keeping tabs (and making money!).
So good on them for this one, IMO.
|
On August 13 2011 12:35 sCfO20 wrote:Oh, yeah I do believe it. Well, not in the sense we humans do, but there's plenty of instances where animals have killed humans. Timothy Treadwell is a good case. Nothing but passion for the bears, and ends up gettin eaten by them. I'm not saying that that justifies it... but it makes you see it differently.
A human hanging out in bear infested Alaskan forests =/= bears hunting. If a deer broke into your house because it saw some food, and you shot it would you consider that hunting? Would you call yourself a hunter? Of course not. So don't call the bears hunters just because they have killed humans.
|
Chinese and their stupid policies. Why am I not surprised...
Putting a ban on foreigners but allow locals to hunt instead ? What's the fuckin difference... These endangered animals will die just the same.
|
On August 13 2011 12:26 Blasterion wrote:
OP is just a anti Chinese jesuit that want to start a flame war. (e.g. Bear Thread) no need to listen to his bullshit.
Sounds like you are butthurt. How am I an anti china? Maybe if you can't handle the truth, maybe this thread isn't fit for your kind.
|
A human hanging out in bear infested Alaskan forests =/= bears hunting. If a deer broke into your house because it saw some food, and you shot it would you consider that hunting? Would you call yourself a hunter? Of course not. So don't call the bears hunters just because they have killed humans.
? Your second example makes some sense, but it doesn't apply. Of course if I shot it it wouldn't be considered hunting. Just like if I saw a robber in my house and killed the fucker doesn't make me a murderer.
The guy died to a bear, there's nothing more that could be said about it. He wasn't wrong, and the bears weren't wrong. It's a freak accident.
But how do you explain people jogging and gettin killed by a cougar? That's not a case of an animal hunting a human? No, not to you PETA freaks I suppose.
|
On August 13 2011 12:50 kaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:26 Blasterion wrote:
OP is just a anti Chinese jesuit that want to start a flame war. (e.g. Bear Thread) no need to listen to his bullshit. Sounds like you are butthurt. How am I an anti china? Maybe if you can't handle the truth, maybe this thread isn't fit for your kind.
Maybe if you could make this thread title/OP a little less sensationalist and not address these species as endangered when they are simply not close to that. The truth isn't what your thread title or OP suggest it is at all.
|
On August 13 2011 12:40 Kezzer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:35 sCfO20 wrote:I mean bears and cougars hunting humans. Oh, yeah I do believe it. Well, not in the sense we humans do, but there's plenty of instances where animals have killed humans. Timothy Treadwell is a good case. Nothing but passion for the bears, and ends up gettin eaten by them. I'm not saying that that justifies it... but it makes you see it differently. A human hanging out in bear infested Alaskan forests =/= bears hunting. If a deer broke into your house because it saw some food, and you shot it would you consider that hunting? Would you call yourself a hunter? Of course not. So don't call the bears hunters just because they have killed humans. By that logic animals can never hunt because the other animal is always in its enviroment, aka, its house. Bears hunt and kill, rarely but they do, and sometimes their target is humans. Thats a fact. Cougars are far more common, they pick off children every now and again.
|
On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters?
You could say "Scumbag hunters" and "scumbag government", instead of slapping a broad label on it like "Americans".
|
On August 13 2011 13:02 lizzard_warish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:40 Kezzer wrote:On August 13 2011 12:35 sCfO20 wrote:I mean bears and cougars hunting humans. Oh, yeah I do believe it. Well, not in the sense we humans do, but there's plenty of instances where animals have killed humans. Timothy Treadwell is a good case. Nothing but passion for the bears, and ends up gettin eaten by them. I'm not saying that that justifies it... but it makes you see it differently. A human hanging out in bear infested Alaskan forests =/= bears hunting. If a deer broke into your house because it saw some food, and you shot it would you consider that hunting? Would you call yourself a hunter? Of course not. So don't call the bears hunters just because they have killed humans. By that logic animals can never hunt because the other animal is always in its enviroment, aka, its house. Bears hunt and kill, rarely but they do, and sometimes their target is humans. Thats a fact. Cougars are far more common, they pick off children every now and again.
Of course animals can hunt. It's just that bears and cougars don't hunt. Seeing a guy wandering through your territory and then attacking him isn't hunting. Hunting means actively searching out prey for the purpose of killing or catching it. Wolves are a good example of a hunting animal.
Semantics, yes, but using bears/cougars/whatever as justification for hunting is questionable reasoning at best.
|
On August 13 2011 12:50 kaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 12:26 Blasterion wrote:
OP is just a anti Chinese jesuit that want to start a flame war. (e.g. Bear Thread) no need to listen to his bullshit. Sounds like you are butthurt. How am I an anti china? Maybe if you can't handle the truth, maybe this thread isn't fit for your kind.
"Your kind"...seriously? You really dont like the Chinese huh?
But really though, he has a point. As many have mentioned already (and I will do so again because people seem to love ignoring evidence and reason), the article is very misleading because the animals mentioned are not even near the level of Endangered Species. Here take a look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharal#Conservation_Status
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibetan_Gazelle
They are "Least Concern" and "Near Threatened", which are the 2 degrees farthest away from Endangered.
|
On August 13 2011 13:36 Swede wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 13:02 lizzard_warish wrote:On August 13 2011 12:40 Kezzer wrote:On August 13 2011 12:35 sCfO20 wrote:I mean bears and cougars hunting humans. Oh, yeah I do believe it. Well, not in the sense we humans do, but there's plenty of instances where animals have killed humans. Timothy Treadwell is a good case. Nothing but passion for the bears, and ends up gettin eaten by them. I'm not saying that that justifies it... but it makes you see it differently. A human hanging out in bear infested Alaskan forests =/= bears hunting. If a deer broke into your house because it saw some food, and you shot it would you consider that hunting? Would you call yourself a hunter? Of course not. So don't call the bears hunters just because they have killed humans. By that logic animals can never hunt because the other animal is always in its enviroment, aka, its house. Bears hunt and kill, rarely but they do, and sometimes their target is humans. Thats a fact. Cougars are far more common, they pick off children every now and again. Of course animals can hunt. It's just that bears and cougars don't hunt. Seeing a guy wandering through your territory and then attacking him isn't hunting. Hunting means actively searching out prey for the purpose of killing or catching it. Wolves are a good example of a hunting animal. Semantics, yes, but using bears/cougars/whatever as justification for hunting is questionable reasoning at best. Yeaahhhh...both bears and cougars are known to actively look for things to eat when they're hungry enough. Hence why we said they hunt.
|
People > Animals. Will keeping these animals alive really have a greater benefit to people than the money they bring in?
|
Ethically, I don't see how killing a protected animal for sport is any different from doing it to any other animal. And they are not endangered. Endangered is the most severe status, they are less severely threatened than that.
|
On August 13 2011 14:06 lizzard_warish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 13:36 Swede wrote:On August 13 2011 13:02 lizzard_warish wrote:On August 13 2011 12:40 Kezzer wrote:On August 13 2011 12:35 sCfO20 wrote:I mean bears and cougars hunting humans. Oh, yeah I do believe it. Well, not in the sense we humans do, but there's plenty of instances where animals have killed humans. Timothy Treadwell is a good case. Nothing but passion for the bears, and ends up gettin eaten by them. I'm not saying that that justifies it... but it makes you see it differently. A human hanging out in bear infested Alaskan forests =/= bears hunting. If a deer broke into your house because it saw some food, and you shot it would you consider that hunting? Would you call yourself a hunter? Of course not. So don't call the bears hunters just because they have killed humans. By that logic animals can never hunt because the other animal is always in its enviroment, aka, its house. Bears hunt and kill, rarely but they do, and sometimes their target is humans. Thats a fact. Cougars are far more common, they pick off children every now and again. Of course animals can hunt. It's just that bears and cougars don't hunt. Seeing a guy wandering through your territory and then attacking him isn't hunting. Hunting means actively searching out prey for the purpose of killing or catching it. Wolves are a good example of a hunting animal. Semantics, yes, but using bears/cougars/whatever as justification for hunting is questionable reasoning at best. Yeaahhhh...both bears and cougars are known to actively look for things to eat when they're hungry enough. Hence why we said they hunt.
Ok, but they don't hunt humans, which seemed to be the crux of the original argument. There is also a clear distinction between hunting for food and hunting for sport. Intention matters.
I'm not against people hunting for sport, but the arguments in this thread for why people should be able to do it are pretty bad. It's not even a hard sell:
- Some animals are extremely common and hunting a few doesn't do ecological/aesthetic harm.
- Hunting them can be fun.
- Why not hunt?
Obviously there's "killing animals is wrong", but that's a whole different can of worms.
|
Looks like the OP has an anti-China agenda to push and is not above using misleading information in his posts to drive at it.
|
Probably some bribery involved, i doubt the CCP wants such negative publicity, probably the work of a corrupt chinese official not really "chinese authorities"
|
On August 13 2011 11:33 Kamais_Ookin wrote:
I say let the foreigners do as they please, $3million in tax revenues + is well worth the lives of measly animals. Protected animals my ass, nothings going to protect them from the double barrel shotgun between the eyes.
Where is the humanity?
|
On August 13 2011 12:13 ppdealer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:58 Rembot wrote:On August 13 2011 11:47 TerlocSG wrote:On August 13 2011 11:38 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:37 .Aar wrote:On August 13 2011 11:34 kaisen wrote:On August 13 2011 11:32 AustinCM wrote:
Do you have to say American scum bag hunters? This isn't something the average American would want to do for sure. They were Americans. What did you want me to say? Those "yankee" scumbag hunters? The fact that they were American has basically no relevance. You build a bike, people will ride it. Funny. I don't see any other people with different nationality paying money to hunt those endangered animals... yet. So by saying "... yet." your admitting your judgement on the nationality of the hunters has nothing to do with the story and you blew a whistle at their being Americans too early. As soon as ANY other hunters of another nationality participate in this hunting your comment is completely bigoted. That's what people are getting at. You didn't have to stress the fact that they were American, you chose to. You could have said "scum bag hunters" and made the same point. Said it better than I could. All I can say is, if you don't like 'murrica, you can giiiiit out! Eh? You Americans should feel ashamed that some of your fellows are out there hunting endangered species protected by International treaties. I'm of Chinese origin as well and you don't see me jump up in hoops to defend the things my government do that are just plain wrong.
I should feel ashamed that idiots that live semi- not really near me are hunting endangered animals? Uhhh. OK.
|
On August 13 2011 14:45 noobcakes wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 11:33 Kamais_Ookin wrote:
I say let the foreigners do as they please, $3million in tax revenues + is well worth the lives of measly animals. Protected animals my ass, nothings going to protect them from the double barrel shotgun between the eyes. Where is the humanity?
Where is your reasoning against his point?
|
United States11637 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
