To Ban, or Not to Ban?

Once again, the MSM (mainstream media) has proven how effective they are at manipulating people, by using your feelings against you. This has become so blatantly obvious that I don’t understand how people can just go along with it. If any “newsworthy” story breaks, their first action is to pull the emotional strings to grab your attention.

The most recent case being the “elephant trophy” hysteria. This is a perfect situation for the MSM: they know that humanitarians will be outraged at the thought of trophy hunting elephants, and they get to make Trump look like a monster again. Everybody likes elephants, nobody likes ivory poachers, and Trump made the move to “remove the ban on people who poach elephants and bring back their ivory”.

“Why, that's outrageous!”, exclaims anybody with a sense of compassion. Why would he do that? Well, from what I have learned, there are quite a few good reasons. But you will never hear the MSM talk about the reasoning, because people might actually like Trump’s decision.

I will describe all the details that the MSM neglected to mention. First of all, this ban only pertained to two countries, Zimbabwe and Zambia. You could still go to any other country and kill elephants and bring trophies back to the states. And, you could still hunt elephants in Zimbabwe and Zambia, you just were prohibited from bringing trophies home. So why just those two countries?

Well, in African countries the wildlife conservation establishments allow the hunting of elephants for a number of reasons. When the elephants become overpopulated, they destroy that area and they ultimately starve and die. They can also become a nuisance to nearby villages when their numbers grow too large.

But one of the greatest reasons is that, when the elephants grow old or get too sickly, they become sterile and/or aggressive. When they become sterile, they still claim their females, and fewer babies are born. When they become aggressive, they harm the other elephants, especially the young ones. At times, they even bully other elephants into starving and dying of thirst by blocking access to sources. And sick elephants are likely to spread disease to others.

So, these conservation groups hold hunting expeditions that are managed scientifically to benefit all species and the ecosystem. Now I’m sure we can all agree that makes sense, right? So then why was there a ban against returning with trophies from just those two countries?

I have read a number of reasons, with very few details. Some say it was all politics, while others say it was business. It could be either (or both), but the best answer I have found is poor record keeping within the Zimbabwe wildlife conservation. This could be either due to lack of staff, lost records, or corruption.

These countries are supposed to provide data showing that each hunt is beneficial. When they failed to provide that data, they were slapped with a ban. What that ban did was deter hunters from choosing those countries to hunt in, because they couldn’t return with their trophy. So, those hunters spent their money in the countries that they could take trophies, and these two countries took a massive economical hit.

During the time period of this ban, Zimbabwe and Zambia had to cut funding for conservation. There was not enough staff to patrol the land, and poachers ran rampant. Not only were poachers on the rise, but the elephant population ballooned, and they have destroyed grazing areas beyond repair. Future generations of elephants, and the villagers that benefited economically, are the ones who will suffer most with that ban in place.