Cecil the Lion and the Phenomena of Public Shaming.

[Derek 2.0]

Modern archery equipment and hunting arrows are quite lethal in the hands of a skilled user. I suspect that the efficacy of bow hunting with repect to kill shots is probably no worse than firearms, and typically range distances are shorter compared to rifles.

A Rage broadhead tipped hunting arrow has a big cutting diameter....

I doubt Roman big game hunters had as much, but still managed.

[Argus]

The problem isn't with the man that killed the lion, but with the people that took his money and arranged it all.

Maybe... except that he was previously convicted of doing much the same thing in the US.

[kimmy]

Modern archery equipment and hunting arrows are quite lethal in the hands of a skilled user.

...and apparently that doesn't include Dr Walt...

I suspect that the efficacy of bow hunting with repect to kill shots is probably no worse than firearms, and typically range distances are shorter compared to rifles.

A Rage broadhead tipped hunting arrow has a big cutting diameter....

With a hunting rifle, the surgical path is of secondary importance. What does most of the damage is usually the massive hydrostatic shock that a hunting bullet brings with it. A bullet (or an arrow) doesn't usually hit an artery or vital organ that incapacitates the animal. But with a hunting rifle, what you get is a shock wave that is transmitted through the blood and fluid in the target, crushing cells in a radius around the wound and often causing unconsciousness or death when the huge spike in blood pressure hits the brain. That's what usually makes the animal fall right in its tracks, not the damage in the cutting channel.

I was buying ammo one day and overheard a hunter talking to the shop owner about the problem of trying to hunt deer with his Remington Ultra Mag. He was hoping the store had some lower-power ammo for the gun, because when he shot deer with his Ultra Mag, it left most of the meat in the animal bruised and ruined. That's hydrostatic shock.

I don't know that .375 H&H would be the minimum caliber, more like the safest recommended minimum to allow the hunter to be at a greater distance, well still allowing for a greater velocity at impact.........The Inuit hunt Polar Bear with 243, and though .22lr isn't allowed for deer and up, .223 is, which is nearly the same bullet size, but far different velocity........a safe assumption to make though would be that most lions taken with a firearm have been .303 British for a century+

I was reading about this on Wiki a while back when I was interested in those Swedish 9.3x62 rifles they sell at Tradex.

The 9.3×62mm is ideal for eland, zebra, giraffe and wildebeest, and most who hunt in Africa consider it a viable all-around cartridge comparable to the .338 Winchester Magnum, the 9.3×64mm Brenneke, the .375 H&H Magnum and the .404 Jeffery. The 9.3×62mm has taken cleanly every dangerous species on the continent. Though it is of smaller bore than the legal minimum for dangerous game in most countries, the .375 calibre, many countries specifically make an exception for the 9.3×62mm.^[2][3][4]

Makes it sound like it's a legal requirement, as opposed to a guideline or rule of thumb.

-k

[Derek 2.0]

I was buying ammo one day and overheard a hunter talking to the shop owner about the problem of trying to hunt deer with his Remington Ultra Mag. He was hoping the store had some lower-power ammo for the gun, because when he shot deer with his Ultra Mag, it left most of the meat in the animal bruised and ruined. That's hydrostatic shock.

And that is very common gripe, I've owned a .300 RUM and hunted one season in Alaska with it, but in actual fact, the larger calibers and loads will drop at greater ranges larger game, but won't make an animal any deader than a 30-06 in the lungs........ 300 RUM for deer is overkill.

I was reading about this on Wiki a while back when I was interested in those Swedish 9.3x62 rifles they sell at Tradex.

Makes it sound like it's a legal requirement, as opposed to a guideline or rule of thumb.

-k

I've hunted rooibok, springbok and blesbok in South Africa and the most common calibers then (~20 years ago) were 270 and 30-06, much like Canadian deer and elk hunters use........because the game is in Africa doesn't equate to it being tougher then similar sized game in North America.

With that, many of those unique calibers might perform slightly better then more common calibers on ballistic tables, but in actual practice, in my opinion, there isn't much difference between the animal dying once its impacted by the bullet versus once it hits the dirt after the impact........as I said, some countries/ game reserves could very well have such requirements as a guideline, or even law, but I doubt that the case for most, and one would find in Africa, like North America, .270/.308/30-06/.300 Win Mag would be the most common.

[cybercoma]

One thing I find odd is that I thought you were required to have a certain grade of weaponry before you go hunting (ie, in Canada you're not allowed to hunt deer with a .22). And I thought that in most parts of Africa, a .375 H&H rifle was considered the minimum amount of firepower to go hunting for big game.

It seems odd that a bow would be legal for hunting lions, for reasons demonstrated by this story. Unless you're Katniss Everdeen or Hawkeye, maybe you should get a proper weapon for hunting.

-k

Ted Nugent would like to have a word with you.

[On Guard for Thee]

There was a story on radio news that another lion was shot in a park in Zimbabwe, apparently a relative of Cecil's, causing a closure of hunting in the area. I guess the trophy guys will have to find another way to get their jollies for a while.

[sharkman]

What a joke, the media whores shine a big spot light on a single lion when thousands of animals in Africa have been butchered for their tusks, etc. No on-the-spot reporter for the latest elephant slaughter but a lion with a name and a group agenda ruin the life of a guy who was merely stupid. You who are cheering this on have to look at the big picture.

[eyeball]

OK...we "Earthlings" also say stop destroying marine species and ecosystems with commercial fishing. Stop it now.

We are stopping...have you been living under a rock or just not paying attention? In any case what we really need to stop is the malgovernance that authorized the destruction.

Then let Africans decide what goes down in Africa. Tell your queen to bugger off.

Actually what we should have done decades ago was tell her to do something about the malgovernance she and her ilk authorized.

[bush_cheney2004]

We are stopping...have you been living under a rock or just not paying attention? In any case what we really need to stop is the malgovernance that authorized the destruction.

Sure "we" are...slowly stopping the marine ecosystem destruction because it's already so effed up. One dead lion is nothing compared to what commercial fisherman have done for generations. The "bycatch" killing alone is staggering.

Actually what we should have done decades ago was tell her to do something about the malgovernance she and her ilk authorized.

No way....hail to her majesty...Queen of the Commonwealth !

[eyeball]

Sure "we" are...slowly stopping the marine ecosystem destruction because it's already so effed up. One dead lion is nothing compared to what commercial fisherman have done for generations. The "bycatch" killing alone is staggering.

I said we as in Canadian. The last two boats I ran are in Alaska where the by-catch of Canadian salmon probably exceeds what's left to catch in Canada.

No way....hail to her majesty...Queen of the Commonwealth !

That's what US fishermen probably say alright, the biggest thing to their advantage is how we're governed.

[bush_cheney2004]

I said we as in Canadian. The last two boats I ran are in Alaska where the by-catch of Canadian salmon probably exceeds what's left to catch in Canada.

Doesn't matter....Alaska....BC...Grand Banks....whatever. Commercial fishing has destroyed far more than all the trophy hunters that have ever existed.

...and they are still doing it.

[kimmy]

What a joke, the media whores shine a big spot light on a single lion when thousands of animals in Africa have been butchered for their tusks, etc. No on-the-spot reporter for the latest elephant slaughter but a lion with a name and a group agenda ruin the life of a guy who was merely stupid. You who are cheering this on have to look at the big picture.

Merely stupid? The whole problem is people being merely stupid. Whether it be poaching for a lion fur rug, or for tusks, or for rhino horns for idiotic Asian medical superstitions, stupid is the root of the problem. This guy is, by definition, a poacher. He's just one of many, but he's part of the problem. And unlike all the other poachers in the world, we've got his name and face to put to the problem. Sucks to be him, but I don't really care. Like they say "couldn't happen to a nicer guy."

Hopefully the giant Acme anvil of karma that has landed on Dr Walt will help promote more interest in the plight of endangered animals.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Not yet...hasn't changed the sport hunting of polar bears in Canada, the only nation to permit such a thing.

[sharkman]

Merely stupid? The whole problem is people being merely stupid. Whether it be poaching for a lion fur rug, or for tusks, or for rhino horns for idiotic Asian medical superstitions, stupid is the root of the problem. This guy is, by definition, a poacher. He's just one of many, but he's part of the problem. And unlike all the other poachers in the world, we've got his name and face to put to the problem. Sucks to be him, but I don't really care. Like they say "couldn't happen to a nicer guy."

Hopefully the giant Acme anvil of karma that has landed on Dr Walt will help promote more interest in the plight of endangered animals.

-k

So we don't depend on laws and the justice system anymore? Having the media horde descend on whomever they don't like to ruin a life, one's business, all without the nuisance of a court of law?

Comparing this one guy to poachers is not thinking it through. Yes he might have poached, but it's one guy killing one animal. Wrong and he should get charged for what laws he may have broken, but poachers who kill all year long for profit are in another category, and I'm surprised you can't see that. The guide company that advertises and takes out dozens of people are the problem, but no media horde bothers with them. Talk about focusing on the mole hill instead of the mountain.

Edited August 2, 2015 by sharkman

[BubberMiley]

There may be positive blowback though. People might be so thrilled with the satisfaction they got from destroying this a**hole's life that they may continue to go after poachers. Any instance of making poachers' lives difficult is worthwhile. It doesn't have to solve the problem; it just has to make it more visible. Ideally, it would be possible to go after every single poacher all at once, but in the real world this guy pulls the long straw and gets to be the example.

Unless, of course, one would rather put their faith in the Zimbabwean justice system eliminating poaching all on their own.

Edited August 2, 2015 by BubberMiley

[kimmy]

So we don't depend on laws and the justice system anymore? Having the media horde descend on whomever they don't like to ruin a life, one's business, all without the nuisance of a court of law?

Comparing this one guy to poachers is not thinking it through. Yes he might have poached, but it's one guy killing one animal. Wrong and he should get charged for what laws he may have broken, but poachers who kill all year long for profit are in another category, and I'm surprised you can't see that. The guide company that advertises and takes out dozens of people are the problem, but no media horde bothers with them. Talk about focusing on the mole hill instead of the mountain.

No single drop of rain thinks it caused the flood.

An Asian tycoon just wants one rhino horn so that his witch-doctor can make a magic potion to enlarge his dong.

A rich American guy just wants one lion fur rug in his man-cave.

But there's lots more Asian tycoons and rich American guys lots of others just like them and they just to kill one animal each, too.

Like I posted earlier, white rhinos are on the brink of extinction. The population of lions in the wild has decreased by over 90% in the last 30 years. Those poachers who make their livelihood at this would be out of business without Dr Walt and guys like him. They're only participating in this because they have paying customers. They're not out there risking prison-time and potentially death for the fun of it. It is very risky work, and they are doing it because they can make a lot of money doing it.

So yes, punish the poachers (and they're already arrested and charged) but you have to attack the profit motive that has them doing this in the first place. If more guys like Dr Walt were exposed, less guys like Dr Walt would be doing this.

Another interesting attack on the profit motive I heard of recently: I heard of a plan involving advanced 3d printing technology to create fake rhino horns. If a bunch of fake poachers start showing up with fake rhino horns to sell, it could make life difficult for real poachers.

-k

[sharkman]

Attacking the profit motive, as you say, seems like a fruitless mission. How many rich guys are there around the world? I don't even think this dentist can be called wealthy. Can a dent really be made in the demand? Compare this to the drug trade, going after the drug users is pointless. The African nations should be going after the traffickers of animal parts, but they don't seem to be able or willing to do much about it. Wrecking one person's life over a single animal is typical of the media horde.

[kimmy]

He had $50,000 (plus travel expenses) to blow on this adventure, and on other safaris in the past. He had $125,000 to compensate his receptionist for unlawfully firing her after she threatened to report him for ongoing sexual harassment. He might not be up there in the billionaire club, but it seems like he's doing all right.

I think that in light of Dr Walt's misfortune, a lot of people who depend on the goodwill of consumers might have second thoughts about going hunting for endangered animals.

And I think that the fake rhino horn idea is pretty brilliant, provided they can create convincing fakes. If you're shopping for a rare item, say on eBay, and you discover that 95% of the eBay listings for the item are actually fake and you have no way to tell which ones are real... are you still going to fork over big money for it? If you're a seller, how do you convince a prospective buyer that unlike most of the other listings you have the real thing?

-k

[Big Guy]

This is still vigilante injustice. He has been convicted by social media without either a trial or a charge. This is a dangerous process. This person has been found guilty without any fairness or right to rebuttal.

What if after investigation the "facts" as stated by the media are incorrect? After all the piling on will anybody care?

You cannot un-ring a bell. You must make sure of your facts before you ring one.

[kimmy]

He himself has admitted to the facts; the defense he has offered is not "I didn't do it" but rather "I thought I was doing it legally."

I don't even care if he thought he was doing it legally.

-k

[sharkman]

This is still vigilante injustice. He has been convicted by social media without either a trial or a charge. This is a dangerous process. This person has been found guilty without any fairness or right to rebuttal.

What if after investigation the "facts" as stated by the media are incorrect? After all the piling on will anybody care?

You cannot un-ring a bell. You must make sure of your facts before you ring one.

This is the bottom line for me. The media horde often get things wrong. The morons they stick a mic in front of often get things wrong, and then it's out there being bounced around the media outlets like it's facts. You can't reel these errors back in afterward and the media never lead with retractions of errors. It's a lynch mob mentality.

[Big Guy]

And if he is telling the truth and doing something legally then why is he being pilloried?

Are we going to shut down slaughter houses of commercial processing of meat because some people do not like to kill animals?

Surely one must err on the side of fairness rather than playing into an emotional knee jerk reaction to a personal view of the world.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Big Guy

[BubberMiley]

But killing endangered animals is not something you can expect the proper authorities to deal with in a court of law. It's too late for that and it might be too late to save most of these species at all. If, from now on, these "hunters" will think twice because there is a legitimate danger their lives will be ruined too, then it was certainly, without question, worth it.

Edited August 2, 2015 by BubberMiley

[WIP]

What a joke, the media whores shine a big spot light on a single lion when thousands of animals in Africa have been butchered for their tusks, etc. No on-the-spot reporter for the latest elephant slaughter but a lion with a name and a group agenda ruin the life of a guy who was merely stupid. You who are cheering this on have to look at the big picture.

He deserves his life ruined! As for the media, who knows the wherefore or why's, but it's always by shear luck or accident and social media frenzy today, that any particular story catches fire and becomes the focus of attention.

Other, wealthier hunters of near-extinct animals and the assholes who pay others to kill black rhinos for their tusks,and Siberian tigers for their penises should be on that list too! But one is better than nothing.

[BubberMiley]

Other, wealthier hunters of near-extinct animals and the assholes who pay others to kill black rhinos for their tusks,and Siberian tigers for their penises should be on that list too! But one is better than nothing.

They'll be more likely to think twice now too. That can't hurt.