Would you shoot a giraffe ?

[froggy]

re-

Erm... define in danger of extinction please...

Dr Yigal Horowitz declined my offer of an interview mumbling something in German about the guilt of the Giraffes' final solution ...
sorry cant be any further help .

[Christel]

:lol: :lol:

I bet he did!

[Blackstuff]

I probably wouldn't do it myself but i have no problem with others doing it, providing its done ethically and cleanly. As others have said, there is a bigger picture when it comes to conservation and some of the local economies are heavily dependant on big game hunting. I'd rather they made their living that way, than through drug production, or just sitting in the sand and hoping Oxfam came to the rescue :roll:

[froggy]

Re-

As others have said, there is a bigger picture when it comes to conservation and some of the local economies are heavily dependant on big game hunting.

Agree but this is not the point .
To re-phrase the question : I'd feel like a right plonker shooting such a huge target but not a warthog, a buffalo or even an antilope.

[Mike357]

Good thread!!

I guess Giraffes are like other herbivores in Africa, antelope, boar, zebra and cows in the west. As long as the meat is eaten (often gifted to local villages) or sold on for a financial return to the locals then I have no issue with it.

Shooting the "Big 5" is often an emotional subject too. Elephants in places have to be culled due to their numbers but I believe their meat is used. I guess what I'm saying is that shooting an animal for the sake of a photograph or just a trophy I find wrong. By all means eat or sell what you shoot so that others (preferably locals) benefit.

As westerners, we are sensitized to this kind of thing whereas it is everyday reality to those involved in it.

[Blackstuff]

Re-

As others have said, there is a bigger picture when it comes to conservation and some of the local economies are heavily dependant on big game hunting.

Agree but this is not the point .
To re-phrase the question : I'd feel like a right plonker shooting such a huge target but not a warthog, a buffalo or even an antilope.

Why would you feel daft shooting a large animal? Because it's a big target so it would be easy to hit?

[froggy]

I bet you do not get a lot of change out of GBP2500 if you want to shoot one of these either.

Reminds me of this group of Victorian hunters having a chat upon the return of one of them from Afrika back in their club in Pall Mall.

"Afrika... joly splendid,
terrific fun ...
1st day , 1 lion and 2 noothus
2nd day, 1 elephant and 3 noothus
3nd day, 1 buffalo and 4 noothus
Bloody marvelous!!

Sounds good old chap but what kind of game are the noothus ?

Dunno really ,
They make a right old racket, keep jumping out of bushes,
kind of ugly monkeys they are , squealing "not us !! not us !!"
:lol:




Anyway I bet one can shoot a local and for 2,5K the police and the judge will let you off ...

[Porcupine]

I've heard people use the phrase 'that's not hunting, that's killing,' before when talking about people who hunt species of game that are very common and therefore easy to find, or that aren't fearful enough of humans to run away when within rifle range. The implication is firstly that hunting is somehow superior to, more noble than, simply killing an animal, and secondly that to be considered hunting, killing the animal has to be difficult.

Surely hunting is setting out to kill any wild animal while it is still wild (as opposed to trapping where you kill it once captured). But the second point is more important. Why should killing become better and better the harder it is. When hunting was done purely for food and not recreation, the whole activity was geared towards making it as easy as possible. The same at least is true of pest control - nobody feels a plonker for lamping a fox even though that makes it a hundred times easier than doing it the old fashioned way. You want it to be easy. Even recreational hunting people make very easy these days with camouflage, tree stands, calls, hides, scopes, game cameras, and all the rest - even a total novice will get a kill if he keeps at it long enough.

If you want mushrooms, you go pick mushrooms. You don't spurn the first clump you find because that's too easy, you just pick them and go home. Why should animals be different? If you want to kill a giraffe, go kill one, you don't need to feel like it should be more difficult than it is. Certainly people will be more impressed with your skill if you do something more difficult like bighorn sheep or polar bear, but you're not an idiot for doing something that's easy. Gardening is a lot easier than climbing Everest, but that's ok!

[froggy]

Why would you feel daft shooting a large animal? Because it's a big target so it would be easy to hit ?

Kind of I guess ...
I shot couple of pheansant drives in the UK and I did not like it at all. I dont critise at all, it is just not for me. I much more enjoy the rough shooting I was doing in France. I did some boar drives which I enjoyed but I must admit I love going with the beaters. I did posted boar shoots in Poland and beside freezing my nuts off I thought it was one of the most teedious and pointless shoot ever. If I had time I would really like trying deer stalking. My best experience was mouflon (mountain goat ?) hunting as a bag carrier, we did not get close enough to get a shoot but I love every single second of it.

To go back to the giraffe business, whichout knowing anything about the skills required, it just feel plain silly - cant put my finger on it - I was hoping some comments would enlight me

[froggy]

Re- Porcupine,

nobody feels a plonker for lamping a fox

I come from a country where night hunting is strictly illegal ... the only exception is "water game" such as ducks. The penalties are very very heavy but more to the point it is deemed "not cricket" and would seriously be frown upon...

hunting people make very easy these days with camouflage,

Same for the idea of camo guears. In my circle of friends, and they are not snobs, the common reason quoted is "we hunt them but they have not declared war yet" .


To go back to our present Afrikan case, the aim is obviously not to feed, but the "sport" side to it, ie : the more difficult, strenuous or dangerous ... the better.
Pierre Corneille allegly said "When we conquer without danger, our triumph is without any glory".