It is with absolutely no surprise that at breakfast this morning, Peter informed us of the “Cecil Effect“, which is simply a Social Media-friendly iteration of the “Law of Unintended Consequences“.
For those Gentle Readers who may have been living under a rock, last July an American hunter thumped a lion in Zimbabwe — legally. The international media must have been short of neurologically-room-temperature reality stars that day, and turned this fairly routine killing into an ecological frenzy.
It is safe to say that out of 10,000 Zimbabweans, 9,999 of them had not one clue regarding the life of this lion — and frankly, did not care. This did not stop the media from deciding that this lion was obviously beloved by all, and the Twitter Twinkies lost their ever-loving minds.
Rallies were held! Speeches were made! T-shirts were sold! Petitions signed! Appropriate hate directed! Knee-jerk laws passed!
Pfagh.
Fast-forward seven months — about two months longer than I had thought, truth be told — and this morning we learn that one concrete consequence of all of the knee-jerk bushwa restrictions is that about 200 lions are probably going to have to be culled, because the furry great bastards are eating the game preserve out of house and home.
As a child of Africa I’d like to point out a gritty reality that the Mainstream Medi and the Twitter Twinkies are going to be deep in denial over:
It costs about $USD50,000 to buy a tag for a lion in Zimbabwe — that (stable) money goes to Zimbabwe.
Every hunter who buys a tag for a lion must stay somewhere in Zimbabwe — and lodging costs money, which stays in Zimbabwe.
Every hunter who buys a tag for a lion must eat during his stay — and food costs money (which stays in Zimbabwe).
Knick-knacks, souveniers, tchotchkes, trinkets, gifts for friends and family back home, and other mementos of a trip to Africa would be purchased. Money which doesn’t go back State-side.
We won’t even discuss tips and bribes, other than to say … it’s Africa. Tips and bribes will be significant.
So.
As a mental exercise, let us take fifty thousand US dollars (plus all the other money, noted above), multiply that number by two hundred lions, and see how much money the bunny-huggers and the spine-less, knee-jerk politicians and bureaucrats have kept out of the mouths of starving Zimbabweans and the game reserve.
That’s right, Tofu Breath: those game parks you’re dotting your cupcakes over? A large percentage of their budget and operating capital comes right out of the wallets of hunters.
In one fell swoop — over one idiot furry predator — you’ve not only managed to take the food right out of the mouths of the families that have come to rely upon it, but you’ve also managed to make a significant dent in the operating capital of the park itself.
On top of being forced to kill 200 lions — for free.
Well done, old chaps. Jolly well done.
Sigh.
This is what happens when people whose entire knowledge of the subject comes from a grotty Disney version of Hamlet (with dancing hippos, and singing giraffes!); these Disney-sotted simpletons decide that this gives them insight into a complex situation in a complex country on the other side of the world, and throw a monumental hissy-fit until Someone Has Done Something, and be damned to the consequences.
While this sort of idiocy does win up hurting someone — the eco-bullying, patchouli-reeking Twitter Twinkies, sitting smugly in their parent’s basement never really get to feel the consequences of their brief shining moment of Social! Justice! For! Cecil! Yeah!
Grr.
Sod ’em all.
LawDog
Yeah, it falls into the this is why we can't have nice things.
Hopefully the lions are in better shape then the deer I've seen get culled out of Valley Forge. Between the mange and the malnourishment they looked like a cross between a wildlife documentary and a zombie movie. There's a weird disconnect in some people's head that a park isn't an artificial thing so it doesn't need to be managed or cared for.
Wolves in Yellowstone, Eagles in Alaska, Bison, Carrier pigeons – we have a really crappy record of "engineering" wildlife. It's a bit akin to what the Fed Gov does all the time. They take an extremely complex system, tinker with a significant cog, and…. expect EVERYTHING ELSE to stay the same. Deer are like lice where I am, because nothing kills them – unless one pays the state for the privilege, during a very short period in the fall. Then everybody wonders why deer get EHD, bluetongue, CWD and mange, or why so many are malnourished and die during a harsh winter. Balance, people, balance!
I say drown your sorrows in a good book, and throw this onto your Kindle for free:
http://www.amazon.com/Man-Eaters-Tsavo-Other-African-Adventures-ebook/dp/B00YBDCMOY/ref=as_sl_pc_ss_til?tag=actiresptrai-20&linkCode=w01&linkId=6I3WQROANDX3ZRS7&creativeASIN=B00YBDCMOY
Everything the libs touch produces the opposite of its intended effect. It's like a maxim.
The problem with making "environmentalism" a popular movement is that it inevitably involves issues too compex for that casually interested to understand. Consequently, there are two kinds of environmemtal initiatives: the ones involving people who actually want to solve a problem, and the ones that involve only people who want to polsh their own images.
I too saw that news article…oh well, the anti's shall reap what they sow, or in this case, force the Zimbabweans to suffer for our first world issues…
Perhaps we should re-wild Berkeley CA, and introduce lions there?
Nah. Too close to Oakland. The lions wouldn't stand a chance.
Cause & Effect.
A concept that Liberals have never grasped.
I must say you were MUCH more polite here than you were this morning… 🙂 But the truly sad part is the twinkie POS will never 'feel' they pain they are inflicting on the people of Zimbabwe, they will be on to the next outrage, since this one is played out.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Perhaps the problem then isn't with the poachers or with the animal activists. Perhaps the problem is with a system in which a lack of corruption leads people to being unable to feed their children. If the revenue for this park comes from poaching, then the issue isn't poaching or a lack thereof- it's with the government of Zimbabwe for creating this environment.
I am an obligate carnivore- if my three meals a day don't involve meat, I get very grouchy. However, when I hear about an animal that was allowed to bleed and suffer for forty- count 'em, four-tens- hours for no other reason than some dentist wanted to weenie-wag, I think that this is disgusting and needless. So yes, I signed some petitions to try and stop this. "If it ain't attacking you, and it ain't attacking your sister, you must be hungry. Eat it." were the words of my grandfather when my uncle shot a crow five minutes after being given his first rifle. I don't think Palmer was very hungry that day.
If this animal population depends on poaching to keep in check, this ecosystem is highly sideways anyway- which would fall back on the hands of this underfunded, understaffed, undermanaged park. And it comes to mind that "we need to kill 200 of these lions" might- MIGHT- just be a way to milk more money from either their own govt or those"eco-bullying, patchouli-reeking Twitter Twinkies, sitting smugly in their parent's basement"that you seem to think I am. Just a thought.
Screw the science.
Two legs bad, four legs good! Two legs bad, four legs good!
Gerry
You all have heard of the Midas Touch…turns stuff to Gold…
Well let me introduce you to the Angus Touch…(Wait for it)
Its a Prog/Lib device that turns everything they touch to B***S***…usually loads of it.
"If the revenue for this park comes from poaching,"… Where in hell did you come to that conclusion?? People who pay an enormous sum for a tag and then spend even more money to stay and hunt are not poaching. If you think this is poaching wait 'till you see what they do to cull those 200 lions.
@ Bayushi Midori:
"Poaching"
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
A friend of mine, when faced with idiot Bambi lovers who think hunting is "cruel", would offer to let them come and hang out at her parents' house during the winter and watch the deer starve to death in the back yard.
I don't think anyone ever took her up on it.
If they were to let the 200 liôns eat some of the locals, wouldn't that free up some jobs and alleviate at least some of the unemployment issue??
Sidenote: That book Phil Wong mentioned? It's -free- on Kindle.
I like free things.
Twitter Twinkees,….gawd I love that. Good to see you back Dawg. I knew if I just get tagging that bookmark I would be rewarded….
Morons one and all
@Jake:
Poaching: illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own, or in contravention of official protection
One) the guide was unlicensed. (Illegal). Two) lion hunting requires a permit, which he did not have (illegal). Three) Whenever a professional hunter intends to take a person who is not ordinarily a resident of Zimbabwe on a hunting safari, he is required to give the Authority notice of intention to conduct the safari. (PWRs sec. 59.) (Illegal) Four) A hunting permit may be issued only if the animal is injured or sick, causing damage to property, or considered to be a danger to humans. (PWA sec. 23.) (Illegal) Five) The Regulations also prohibit the offering any food to any animal within the Parks and Wildlife Estate. (PWRs sec. 8.) (Illegal) Six) Hunting any wildlife in a national park, including lions, is punishable by a fine and/or a maximum of three years in prison. (PWA sec. 24.) (Illegal)
Anyway you look at it, this person was "illegally hunting or catching game or fish on land that was not his own". Poaching, legal definition. It means EXACTLY what I think it does.
"One) the guide was unlicensed."
Source? I've seen no allegations of this, and from what I read this guide has been in business since the early '90's.
"Two) lion hunting requires a permit, which he did not have"
Except that he did, according to the Zimbabwe government.
"Three) Whenever a professional hunter intends to take a person who is not ordinarily a resident of Zimbabwe on a hunting safari, he is required to give the Authority notice of intention to conduct the safari. (PWRs sec. 59.)"
and
"Four) A hunting permit may be issued only if the animal is injured or sick, causing damage to property, or considered to be a danger to humans. (PWA sec. 23.)"
Again, statements from the Zimbabwe government are that "all the papers were in order".
"Six) Hunting any wildlife in a national park, including lions, is punishable by a fine and/or a maximum of three years in prison."
He wasn't hunting in the park, he was outside it.
If you were talking about only Palmer's hunt, then I stand corrected. Though you are wrong on several points, it does seem that the actions of his guide were such that it would fall into the realm of "poaching", though Palmer himself seems to have believed everything was being done legally. Your comments, though, seemed to equate poaching with all hunting not for food.
Let me sit you down and explain the real world.
To the locals, when a lion kills livestock they can recoup the loss with the money paid by hunters, no hunters, no money.
So there is absolutely NO incentive to allow the predators to roam freely, but there is one to exterminate them.
Remember that we are talking about people where the loss of a couple of goats can spell the difference between starvation and a full belly.
ScribblersDad said…
because nothing kills them
Obviously you don't have enough cars up there.
They had to institute a hunting season on the AF Academy in Colorado 3 decades ago because the place would fill up with them all winter long (they know where they're safe from hunters) and they would die by the bushel being hit by cars all winter long.