People seem to have all sorts of animals they wouldn't hunt. I'm a bit surprised, but I'm also fine with that - you don't have to hunt anything if you don't want to - but I worry a bit with the arguments being made elsewhere against hunting one animal or another that we will create, or support the creation, of, a hierarchy of animals, some of which can be hunted and some of which cannot be.
This is a position taken by far too many people who don't think they - or - and here comes the problem - anyone else - should kill certain animals. Usually because they are too cute, or too iconic, or they were in a Walt Disney movie. I haven't heard or seen that here, but it's not a great leap from some of our arguments to that argument.
I have noted some say they are fine with others doing whatever they won't do. On my first trip to Africa, I knew I couldn't shoot elephants, lions, giraffes, and probably a couple of other animals I didn't yet know existed. But I started thinking - if I believe it is morally right or at least permissible to take the life of an animal, then how can I differentiate among animals? How can I argue, or believe, that some animals have a right to life, while others don't? I spent quite a bit of time thinking about this, and even had a conversation with my parish priest, if you can believe it, and eventually came to the conclusion that in order to be morally correct, I had to take the position that an animal was an animal was an animal. An elephant had no more right to life than a honey badger. That doesn't mean I have to hunt an elephant, but it does mean I have to be OK with the hunting of elephants (subject to CITES).
Let me be real clear. This is not the same as saying "I don't want to shoot that animal, just because I don't want to". Like I said, you don't have to kill any animals. But your reasons matter. Likewise, when it is said that I will only kill that which I can eat, that's a fine position to take, and I have no argument with it. I don't like eating fish, so I don't go fishing - but I have no problem with people killing even the most magnificent fish.
Anyway, with that long-winded introduction, let me say I will kill any animal so long as it isn't endangered, and then I'm OK if I have a CITES permit (I took a scimitar horned oryx on that basis).
And let me also add, since it's come up:
1. If you think hunting giraffes is easy, I suggest you give it a try - where they are free ranging. While you might get lucky, you might also wear out some shoes.
2. Ostriches are nasty things, and they aren't easy to hunt either. I've had long stalks busted by ostriches, and been charged by one crazy one. Any ostrich, any day, anywhere. By the way, the leather makes great anything you want, and the meat is actually healthy.
3. Cheetah. A beautiful cat, but so are leopard and lion. I've hunted all three, and the cheetah is by far harder than leopard or lion.
4. Elephants. One of the best hunts there is. I wish it was more affordable. This will test your commitment to killing animals in a way that zebra won't.
5. Zebra. At least one, and more likely more, on every safari. A challenge to hunt, and shot placement is important. A tough animal.
So there you have it. I'm OK with any animal so long as it's legal!
