anon6789

I don’t intervene however if it is predator vs prey.

The prey will often be mortally wounded before one can do anything anyway. Chasing off a predator often just results in both parties losing. The prey just dies in vain…

Two kinds of people typically hunt endangered animals: rich assholes and starving people. A straight ban on hunting these animals does nothing to solve either problem.

We know rich assholes are going to do what they want by whatever means, including exploiting animals and the poor, so I don’t think I need to go into that.

Poor people will hunt endangered animals or take rich people to hunt them because both those paths lead to them and their families eating. They may care about the animals, they may not, but they and their families need food and money to live.

Legalized hunting of endangered game does a lot to solve all these problems. Poor people become legitimate guides. Poachers in places like Tanzania were for a while allowed to be killed legally. Now they aren’t shot for trying to provide food for people and are putting the money into their villages. The people now have economic incentive to protect these animals to protect their new local tourism. Associated services are created to make the destination attractive. Governments see the benefit of monitoring and protecting these species.

It’s not perfect. Anti-poaching measures leads to violence on both sides, just as things like the war on drugs. Things like legalized gambling, drugs, and prostitution help prevent exploitation, keeps participants safer in their activities, and allows monitoring and oversight by regulators. Some will still poach no matter what. But it brings more things to the open and people can work with facts and figures about their local situations.

I don’t like the idea of trophy hunting anymore than I like seeing people participate in other senseless and destructive vices, but we can ensure people do things in ways that are better and safe for all involved.

I do hunt for one deer a year myself. Where I am has a higher number than is sustainable, and with people having less money and time off than ever, the state cannot get all the deer they want to be hunted as things are. It lets me take one animal that gets me through most of the year instead of however many from the store, and I know it’s all natural and never spent a moment in captivity. Hunting is mostly a chore for me, though I do enjoy the time in the woods and spending a few days with my brother.

I don’t often agree with your takes or tone, but you are right on here. As a PA resident who has to own their vote for Fetterman, he was and is still better than Oz. Did he misrepresent himself? Totally. Will I vote for him again? Not if I have even a slightly better option.

But for as political as Lemmy acts, I see so few people actually looking at details. Congressional votes are not private, anyone can look them up. Fetterman is the “worst” Democratic by voting record. This is undeniable. He was bad before, and he’s worse now. But he still votes in line with what he was sent to Washington to represent 80% of the time. He’s still better than any Republican that could get the job. So yeah, vote the dude out the second we get someone running against him, but until then, he’s a win 4/5 times. Push him to be a Republican, and what do we get? Say goodbye to that 80%.

That is politics.