Bowsite.com

It amazed me that in the face of cold hard facts how many people still disregarded Humes position on legal trade of rhino horn. He basically said keep horn trade illegal and his 1400 rhinos will die off because he cant afford to keep them alive and if they legalize it he can increase to 10,000 rhinos. Hes not even hunting them and he still had "pro rhino" opposition during his testimonies.

I was young then but will never forget it.

What little positive that was portrayed was quickly negated by the deliberate portrayal of that A$$hole hunter who shot the croc as a typical representative of hunting methods and hunters which is obviously false. Also, focusing in detail on the long, drawn out deaths and close-ups of the animals eyes only played into emotion which is the only argument the anit's have or ever will have.

The other gentleman hunting the Big 5 was also a negative portrayal in my view. Allowing the cull elephant to die a slow, drawn out death was baffling to me? Never seen this done on any dangerous game hunt I have ever been a part of....Furthermore, his main argument was a philosophical one of religion in regard to man's dominion over the beasts of the Earth is God's will was ridiculous. Although I agree, that animals exist on this Earth specifically for the benefit and use of higher species, that is not the strongest argument, by any stretch, to support the multitude of undeniable benefits as a result of hunting through managed use and habitat conservation.

Legitimate hunting conservation groups need to put out their own "documentary" showing the real facts and numbers. It seems however, that since Cecil, the strategy of these groups has been to hide in hopes of not being noticed. Every dollar that these "anti" groups raise through their emotion-driven propaganda goes into paying the salaries of the board members and a barrage anti-hunting media of every form. Zero goes into actual conservation, wildlife management, or habitat preservation. When the neutral majority of most folks on the fence about hunting only hear one side, they start to wonder why the other side is deliberately staying quiet. It makes it look as if we truly do have something to be ashamed of.... Just my 2 cents. I would love to hear more opinions on this....

To each their own, but this did no favors to the average person who is out hunting for food or the enjoying the cultural traditions hunting has in rural America. It did nothing to show how millions of hunters contribute their time, money, and advocacy to the cause of wild places and wild things as a different form of conservation than raising animals on farms as a substitute.

Maybe what was portrayed is "Conservation" in Africa. I can't speak to that, as I've never been there. The message came across as though hunters are willing to accept farming of scarce and coveted animals as conservation. That is not how hunters view conservation in the place that I am most connected to, North America.

The average viewer has no context in their life experiences by which to separate what they saw on that documentary from hunting as it happens for most on this forum. Most viewers will think that the whitetail doe, or the bull elk, or the (insert here), was pen raised, that we went out half-drunk, shot it in some artificial setting, and then notched another item on our score sheet.

Maybe I live in a small world, but if this documentary is how the majority of society does see, or will come to see, our actions; if this becomes even more of their stereotype of a hunter; if this is what they think is our expressed motivations for hunting; and they resolve that hunters have a seeming willingness to farm animals as a substitute for conservation, then I see the road ahead to be a lot rougher than the road we have already traveled.

"Trophy hunting" to most of us means hunting older individuals of our native big game animals.

This documentary defined "trophy hunting" by the first definition.

It costs around $50,000 to kill an #elephant, but a living elephant can generate 30x's more in tourism revenue over the course of its life in #ecofriendly tourism!

The WWF says there are about 400,000 elephants in Africa. That equates to over 600 billion dollars over their lifetime. 21,000 per elephant per year. Where is all this money?

On Ike's point, I personally think that's a great idea, but would anybody air it ?

I have never hunted in Africa but I did not realize, if true, the height of farming and breeding that may go on vs the natural production of the various species.

To me, the unfortunate downside is that hunters in the U.S. are going to be labeled as trophy hunters across the board. Not one mention of meat usage and enjoyment of the outdoors. It was 100% focused on killing and trophies and money generated to do just that. It was presented as being fair-presenting both sides-when in fact, it did everything but that. It said, "Money goes to promote conservation". Then went on to point out nothing supporting that. The focus on the rhino horn controversy dealt with poaching and rhino depletion. That is a problem, no question about it. It is an economic situation. What has that to do with trophies? That is no different than drilling oil wells in a national park or smuggling drugs into the U.S. If I were going to title a program "Trophy", I believe I would have dealt with "Trophyism". But I saw nothing in that program presenting the good side of true hunting. Why was I not surprised?

Of course, that is just my opinion.

Yes, I realize some of the game farms are more wild than the others. However, many of these bait and even cover the pans/water so that they are only open during hunting hours to force the animals to comply. If I go to DSC or SCI in Vegas, you won't catch me gawking at the high fence genetically mutated whitetails. They are livestock, not game.

The problem is that we all have to stand united: rifle, bow, traditional, and even the high fence boys. Am I anti-high fence? No. My best response is that it's not my thing. In some instances, it can be equated to hiring a call girl--it's that easy and predictable.

The rednecks in RSA that were shooting the croc and yelling, "Hell yeah, motherbleep!" are probably not the people with whom many of us would wish to share a camp. They are also not the people I would wish to have representing us on national TV. A little slighted--absolutely.

The guy from TX seemed like a nice guy but a bit of a different duck. What was the point of adding the evolution comments? I really disliked the elephant scene, as most of us know that a brain shot on an elephant is the most desirable way to harvest one. It's quick and painless.

I must say though, it could have been a lot worse. As others said, it didn't cause anyone to shift their views on the matter. There are plenty of "hunting" shows on the networks that have idiots that almost want to make me anti at times. You are going to have your groups who are embarrassments in hunting, golf, tennis, and just about everything else in life. That's just the way it is and we won't change it.