Did you think we were all just blowing smoke? Banning the ownership of ivory

[Lorien]

I think the NRA has it's hands full with firearms safety and defending the 2nd amendment.

Mark, I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on what the NRA's hands are full of

But I think you and I would agree that, when it comes to powerful lobby groups in Washington, the NRA is at the top of the list. If they were interested in issues pertinent to the conversations that we're having here, and it's a fact that that's where the NRA had its origins, then I would think that they could be a powerful asset for conservation efforts around the world.

But, there is really only one driving issue for the NRA these days, so there would have to be fundamental, institutional changes in that organization in order to position itself back to what it once was- which would, in turn, diminish its lobbying power...damn. I think I just broke my own argument.

 

[sheathmaker]

Knife Rights is hand in hand with the NRA and they have certainly been very active on the Ivory ban issue. (Pro Ivory).

Now a little thread drift for which I apologize in advance.

Lorien, I'm with you….we need to save the Elephant by any and all means LOGICALLY available, but what of the other species?
I have seen videos of you callously whacking away at living fauna…for what?….. To show how a knife performs or to make a bike trail???? The living trees and brush should have the right to protection also.

Paul

 

[DEllis]

What gives some of our "hunt clubs" the right to formulate some of these statements? I am sorry but to me it is a self serving argument with one goal in mind. Pay me to shoot your trophy to hang on your wall and we will make sure the World will think we are doing the wildlife and locals a huge favor. Here is some material I read all the time.
"Without trophy hunting wild animals, in most parts of Africa (the wild animals) would have little value for the locals and would be killed indiscriminately as they compete with their livestock as well as human beings for ag land and urban development"

This type of self serving attitude is shocking to me. Is this the message we want to teach in the long run?

Gary

Gary,
With all due respect, you don't know what you are talking about.
Without the efforts of hunters and outdoorsmen, we would have seen many more species go extinct in the last century.
Outdoorsmen care about wildlife enough to put their money and energy into the cause, not just sit back and consume oil based commodities from the safety of their domicile.........which, coincidentally, is built in former wildlife habitat.
I recommend you read the book "How Sportsmen Saved The World" by E. Donnall Thomas Jr. And get yourself informed.........do not mistake the hunting and killing of wildlife as disregard for wildlife.

Respectfully,
Darcy Ellis, hunter and conservationist.

 

[Mark Knapp]

What gives some of our "hunt clubs" the right to formulate some of these statements? I am sorry but to me it is a self serving argument with one goal in mind. Pay me to shoot your trophy to hang on your wall and we will make sure the World will think we are doing the wildlife and locals a huge favor. Here is some material I read all the time.
"Without trophy hunting wild animals, in most parts of Africa (the wild animals) would have little value for the locals and would be killed indiscriminately as they compete with their livestock as well as human beings for ag land and urban development"

This type of self serving attitude is shocking to me. Is this the message we want to teach in the long run?

Gary

Gary, It is a game management system that works, at these hunt concessions is where the elephant populations are healthiest. You don't seem to want to engage in any kind of conversation about this at all. I'm sorry I've wasted my time with you.

 

[GaryFlorida]

Some flora or living trees and brush do have the right of protection as well Paul.

Gary

 

[Mark Knapp]

Mark, I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on what the NRA's hands are full of

But I think you and I would agree that, when it comes to powerful lobby groups in Washington, the NRA is at the top of the list. If they were interested in issues pertinent to the conversations that we're having here, and it's a fact that that's where the NRA had its origins, then I would think that they could be a powerful asset for conservation efforts around the world.

But, there is really only one driving issue for the NRA these days, so there would have to be fundamental, institutional changes in that organization in order to position itself back to what it once was- which would, in turn, diminish its lobbying power...damn. I think I just broke my own argument.

Well, it is called the National Rifle Association, not the National Conservation Education Association. I can't speak to what they used to do but I have been pretty active in the NRA in my area, and I am pretty clear on what they do around here. I have at times been pretty upset at the NRA but in the long run they do two things pretty well, firearms safety and and gun owners rights. I'm happy with that.

 

[GaryFlorida]

It is called a debate Mark. It takes two or more view points to have a constructive debate. There are no winners or losers.
You are trying to construct an argument to educate a less knowledgeable person on the subject.
There is no point in slamming the door on the way out imo.

Gary

 

[Mark Knapp]

Knife Rights is hand in hand with the NRA and they have certainly been very active on the Ivory ban issue. (Pro Ivory).

Now a little thread drift for which I apologize in advance.

Lorien, I'm with you….we need to save the Elephant by any and all means LOGICALLY available, but what of the other species?
I have seen videos of you callously whacking away at living fauna…for what?….. To show how a knife performs or to make a bike trail???? The living trees and brush should have the right to protection also.

Paul

Yes the NRA has been very active on the ivory issue as it pertains to gun owners rights. Along with The Safari Club and Kniferights as well as many other smaller organizations WE have been doing our best to combat these bans. I wonder how many people on this forum call these organizations "they" instead of "WE".

 

[Mark Knapp]

It is called a debate Mark. It takes two or more view points to have a constructive debate. There are no winners or losers.
You are trying to construct an argument to educate a less knowledgeable person on the subject.
There is no point in slamming the door on the way out imo.

Gary

In a debate you would have answered my questions and addressed the points I have made. You have done none of that. I have addressed every comment you have made. A debate is reciprocal, you have not been reciprocal.

You have only used this forum to spout your beliefs, not to try and understand the opposing viewpoint. This has been no debate, that's why I feel like I am wasting my time with you.

Incidentally, I have not slammed any doors, and I am not on my way out. I'm probably not going to spend much more time with you though.

Your kind of like a brick wall with false graffiti on it. Nothing gets in and no matter how many times we correct your misunderstandings of the issue with facts and statistics, you just keep painting more wrong stuff on there.

 

[2knife]

I think Mark and others have well explained the hunting stance, and have intentions to defend both a legal hunting and promoting populations where they can be protected. That makes sense. Ted Turner wanted to save a buffalo herd and found that making them a food source was possibly the best way to protect them. Killing elephants in a managed way is like having a human sacrifice to appease the gods. The virgin dies and helps feed the monster that preys upon it, and in turn receives a sort of protection for the rest of the community.

The sad thing is the crisis is happening on too large a scale and cannot be controlled. There are no arguments (to me) that make sense for the hunting, protecting them from other natural deaths. That we would go kill them in the state of decimation to protect them just shows we (mankind) are an aggressive-to-all-ends species. We have a blood lust. It may sound like I'm being critical of hunters. I am not. They may offer the only solution for elephants.

There is one northern white rhino left in the world. He is being guarded by armed guards 24/7. But, it is on the African continent. And his horn has been removed, for no poachers to take. This is the planet we live on.. Maybe we can turn elephants into cattle and build bigger fences?

I have enjoyed reading the conversation.. I don't think anyone here has made a bad argument. It's just a terrible reality.
David

 

[Lorien]

Knife Rights is hand in hand with the NRA and they have certainly been very active on the Ivory ban issue. (Pro Ivory).

Now a little thread drift for which I apologize in advance.

Lorien, I'm with you….we need to save the Elephant by any and all means LOGICALLY available, but what of the other species?
I have seen videos of you callously whacking away at living fauna…for what?….. To show how a knife performs or to make a bike trail???? The living trees and brush should have the right to protection also.

Paul

to your first point, I find it a little unfortunate that Kniferights seems to be increasingly under the umbrella of the NRA. Personally, I'd like to see Kniferights stand alone as an advocacy group focused on the utility aspect of knives. But that's besides the point entirely, a conversation to be had another time perhaps.

to the rest, all I can say is 'huh?'. I'm not following you there. However, I will note here that I'm aware of what plant species are protected, and tend to leave them be when I'm building and clearing trails.

the NRA has been successful in supporting conservation efforts in the past, (through taxation!) and the point I was trying to make is that their powerful lobbying arm could be utilized for educating people about the value of sport hunting wrt endangered species. There are a lot of NRA members, (claimed to be 5 million) who could be mobilized in these efforts.

 

[Mark Knapp]

I think Mark and others have well explained the hunting stance, and have intentions to defend both a legal hunting and promoting populations where they can be protected. That makes sense. Ted Turner wanted to save a buffalo herd and found that making them a food source was possibly the best way to protect them. Killing elephants in a managed way is like having a human sacrifice to appease the gods. The virgin dies and helps feed the monster that preys upon it, and in turn receives a sort of protection for the rest of the community.

The sad thing is the crisis is happening on too large a scale and cannot be controlled. There are no arguments (to me) that make sense for the hunting, protecting them from other natural deaths. That we would go kill them in the state of decimation to protect them just shows we (mankind) are an aggressive-to-all-ends species. We have a blood lust. It may sound like I'm being critical of hunters. I am not. They may offer the only solution for elephants.

There is one northern white rhino left in the world. He is being guarded by armed guards 24/7. But, it is on the African continent. And his horn has been removed, for no poachers to take. This is the planet we live on.. Maybe we can turn elephants into cattle and build bigger fences?

I have enjoyed reading the conversation.. I don't think anyone here has made a bad argument. It's just a terrible reality.
David

Hi David, You do understand though, that there are several different populations of elephants. There is not just one herd that is being pouched to extinction.

There are many herds throughout Africa that are healthy, and I small percent of them are hunted every year to keep them healthy.

No one is advocating killing any elephants in the depleted herds to try and save the remaining elephants.

The first step is take meaningful steps to save elephants in the depleted herds, like the ones I mentioned. Then build them up to sustainable levels. After they are healthy and have reached a level that the habitat won't support any more, manage the population through proven wildlife management methods. You take the number of new births every year and remove that many individuals that have already lived a long healthy life and can no longer reproduce.

That's the way it would be in a perfect world, this is not a perfect world, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. I think it's the only thing that will help. Making criminals of people who own ivory from elephants that died over 30 years ago isn't going to save any elephants, that of course is just my opinion.

Nice talking to you

 

[2knife]

Thanks Mark! Good information to know..
David

 

[Mark Knapp]

to your first point, I find it a little unfortunate that Kniferights seems to be increasingly under the umbrella of the NRA. Personally, I'd like to see Kniferights stand alone as an advocacy group focused on the utility aspect of knives. But that's besides the point entirely, a conversation to be had another time perhaps.

to the rest, all I can say is 'huh?'. I'm not following you there. However, I will note here that I'm aware of what plant species are protected, and tend to leave them be when I'm building and clearing trails.

the NRA has been successful in supporting conservation efforts in the past, (through taxation!) and the point I was trying to make is that their powerful lobbying arm could be utilized for educating people about the value of sport hunting wrt endangered species. There are a lot of NRA members, (claimed to be 5 million) who could be mobilized in these efforts.

I read that article you linked to, no where in it did it say that the NRA was involved. I must be missing your point. I know very well the success story of Pittman-Robertson funds, it involves a whole lot of people that may also have been NRA Members but I am not aware of any involvement of the NRA in it. They could be a powerful ally in educating people about wildlife management but really, that's not what they (we) do.

Anyway, no point in beleaguering the point.

 

[Lorien]

here you go. The NRA was relatively recently involved in getting the legislation back on track, and I continue to believe there are numerous ways the NRA could be beneficial in current affairs wrt this topic that they aren't currently pursuing.

But, you're right. No point in continuing talking about this if I'm the only one in the room who sees the potential here.

I have nothing further to add, (everyone sighs with relief )... I'll just follow along and learn what I can.

 

[JParanee]

What gives some of our "hunt clubs" the right to formulate some of these statements? I am sorry but to me it is a self serving argument with one goal in mind. Pay me to shoot your trophy to hang on your wall and we will make sure the World will think we are doing the wildlife and locals a huge favor. Here is some material I read all the time.
"Without trophy hunting wild animals, in most parts of Africa (the wild animals) would have little value for the locals and would be killed indiscriminately as they compete with their livestock as well as human beings for ag land and urban development"

This type of self serving attitude is shocking to me. Is this the message we want to teach in the long run?

Gary

Gary

Not to be argumentative

But you have no idea of what you speak of

Not even a little bit

 

[Mark Knapp]

here you go. The NRA was relatively recently involved in getting the legislation back on track, and I continue to believe there are numerous ways the NRA could be beneficial in current affairs wrt this topic that they aren't currently pursuing.

But, you're right. No point in continuing talking about this if I'm the only one in the room who sees the potential here.

I have nothing further to add, (everyone sighs with relief )... I'll just follow along and learn what I can.

Wait just a moment, you are giving the NRA credit for putting Pittman -Robertson funds back on track because Don Young is a board member of the NRA? That's kind of a reach, it doesn't say the NRA did it, it says Don Young did it. It doesn't even say he did it in behalf of the NRA. Anyway here we are beleaguering the point. Talk to you later.

 

[JParanee]

So many groups on both sides

One is uneducated on the subject the others can only do so much

I for one as a Hunter know that even though I have no personal interest in hunting elephants and I have had the opportunities and seen it done

I saw how meat was utilized and where the funds went

So yes I know how it works

My point is as a Hunter I can not in good conscious tell someone what they should or should not hunt especially when it could be the salvation of the species

As a knife owner and gun owner I do understand why the Knife Rights folks and The NRA should get involved with the fight

Many think they have more important issues but in reality all of the issues are important

Especially if one group has a much better understanding of what it's going to take to save the Elephants

Some people question who should be involved in the issue ...... My answer is the people that know the truth not someone living in a Disney movie hoping their nonsense is the truth

 

[Mark Knapp]

So many groups on both sides

One is uneducated on the subject the others can only do so much

I for one as a Hunter know that even though I have no personal interest in hunting elephants and I have had the opurtunities and seen it done

I saw how meat was utilized and where the funds went

So yes I know how it works

My point is as a Hunter I can not in good conscious tell someone what they should or should not hunt especially when it could be the salvation of the species

As a knife owner and gun owner I do understand why the Knife Rights folks and The NRA should get involved with the fight

Many think they have more important issues but in reality all of the issues are important

Especially if one group has a much better understanding of what it's going to take to save the Elephants

Some people question who should be involved in the issue ...... My answer is the people that know the truth not someone living in a Disney movie hoping their nonsense is the truth

Did you mean to say that NRA and Kniferights should or should not be involved in the fight?

 

[JParanee]

Did you mean to say that NRA and Kniferights should or should not be involved in the fight?

They should

Because it's the right thing to do

And you quoted me before I could check my spelling

(opportunities)