(July 21, 2017 at 10:06 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: For me, it's not about what the lion hunters get out of it. It's about what the lions get out of it. Conservancies that protect lions often depend on the revenue from legal hunting to maintain their operations.
As a practical matter, rich people who want to hunt lions legally pay through the nose to be allowed to kill lions targeted for culling by conservancies anyway. Hunters finance conservancies so well that they often suffer from lion overpopulation, which is not sustainable.
The main enemy of lions in Africa is loss of habitat, not hunters. The legal hunting model where hunters pay exorbitant fees to be allowed to hunt is limited by available room for the lions, not over-hunting.
Thank goodness for rich people with small dicks! They're the best friends a protected population of lions has.
This is what I was going to say. People often conflate 'conservation' with 'making sure every single animal of a species survives.' You don't need a ton of adult male lions around to keep the species at a healthy state, especially if a male is sick, ultra-aggressive, or infertile. As rough as it sounds, superfluous lions get shot, easing pressure on prey animals, preventing conflict and infanticide within the pride and paying for the park rangers who protect the lions from poachers.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
- Thomas Jefferson


