Hallgeir Gravråk
AH veteran
My be they should apply this to the humansSuspicion confirmed.
I'd suggest a name change soon: National Enquirer Geographic.
The Sky is falling. Climate change is due to trophy hunting.
The CRAZY thing is that half way through the article, the lead researcher says that hunting can be a powerful force for conservation.
Suspicion confirmed.
I'd suggest a name change soon: National Enquirer Geographic.
The Sky is falling. Climate change is due to trophy hunting.
Thanks for that info, I've added a little more to the ken of my knowledge on the subject. So in the long run - an inevitable bio diversity disaster? The eventual, total, eradication of all wildlife outside designated Nat Parks. Then human pressure is increased on those remaining havens with the wildlife with no where left to go - just like that's currently happening in the palm oil industry.Model of India, and model of Kenya - work! Eco tourism is not really expensive there.
Nobody questions them. They exist for decades! Without sign of any change.
So non hunting model, (non consumptive), eco, should be considered as successful model.
The result of this models, is different type of tourists visiting national parks, and overall less numbers of wild animals in the country, in the wilderness. It is also politically correct model.
Even hunters, world wide have nothing to say against national parks.
On the other hand... South African, Namibian models... game ranching, CBL issues...World wide Hunting in general, the ball is always on our, hunters, part of the field. We know the story, been discussing daily.. No need to go into details.
Tour operators can simply turn attention to other type of clients.
game ranchers in case of trophy hunting getting to the wall, can turn to photo safari, on reduced numbers of animals, or to cattle ranching. We know then the long term outcome. (total reduction of bio diversity, and when it gets there - its too late, example is kenyan white rhino...)