German Environment Ministry Official in Elephant Killing Scandal

00847AF6_B0E63080B13AC39D9CCC0EE6E0B44890

Udo W. (German law prohibits the release of his full name) is a high official in the environment ministry of the German county of Thuringia and actually still holds a leading function in the wildlife species protection department.

Just days before Botswana closed trophy “hunting” on 31. December 2013, achieving that since first of January now all such sport-killing is prohibited in the African country, the civil servant went on a trophy hunt in Botswana and bragged himself now to have killed a 40 year old, middle aged bull.

Though it apparently was a legal big-game safari in old colonial style, the case has raised a storm of protest in Germany and calls – e.g. by the Green Party – for the immediate dismissal of the civil servant from his post.

The biggest shame, however, has not yet become a viral twitter storm and that is given by the fact that Botswana actually permitted such colonial style killing for money of an elephant by a foreign trophy hunter, while at the same time and under the helm and often enough at the hands of the same Botswana officials, members of the First Nation in Botswana, the San bushmen, are tortured, killed, raped, alienated from their wildlife resources and expropriated from their wildlands. All these atrocities against the San must be seen as what they are: Outright genocide.

While peoples the indigenous hunter-gatherer cultures are driven to extinction, the kill-for-money psychopaths are allowed to continue their shameful acts in other African countries.

The leaked photos from the kill:

http://media401.zgt.de.cdn.thueringer-allgemeine.d…
http://media101.zgt.de.cdn.thueringer-allgemeine.d…

Read also the background to these atrocities against the San:

Tswana Atrocities 4.0

http://groundreport.com/5058632/

ECOTERRA Intl.
SURVIVAL & FREEDOM for PEOPLE & NATURE

2013: The Year of the Big Backslide?

The year of our lord, 2013, could be known as the year of the big backslide, at least in terms of attitudes toward animals and the environment, as well as the general acceptance of scientific fact.

For example, CBS News reports that the number of Republicans who believe in evolution today has plummeted compared to what it was in 2009, according to new analysis from the Pew Research Center. A poll out Monday shows that less than half – 43 percent – of those who identify with the Republican Party say they believe humans have evolved over time, plunging from 54 percent four years ago. Forty-eight percent say they believe “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time,” up from 39 percent in 2009.

I can’t help but think this is because many people still aren’t comfortable admitting they’re animals. And this supremacist attitude is reflected in everything they do in regard to our fellow species.

Anyone who has been following the wolf issue since gray wolves were removed from the Endangered Species List in a handful of backward states has certainly noticed a rapid backslide pertaining to how wolves are perceived, treated and “managed” by those bent on dragging us back to the dark ages for animals—the Nineteenth Century—when concepts like bounties, culls and contest hunts were commonplace. Hunters and ranchers in the tri-state area surrounding Yellowstone National Park, as well as in the Great Lakes region, are doing everything they can to resurrect the gory glory days of the 1800s, and wolves are paying the ultimate price.

Meanwhile, in spite of great efforts to educate people about the myriad of problems associated with factory farming and the dependence on meat consumption in an ever more crowded human world, the number of ruminants raised for food on the planet today is at an all-time high of 3.6 billion, double what is was 50 years ago. Regardless of or our burgeoning human population, not only do we have a chicken in every pot in this country, we now have cow and sheep parts in every freezer and pig parts in practically every poke. This, of course, is all thanks to ever-worsening living conditions for farmed animals.

Professor William Ripple and co-authors of a research paper, “Ruminants, Climate Change, and Climate Policy,” prepared in Scotland, Austria, Australia and the United States, noted that about 25 percent of the earth’s land area is dedicated to grazing, and a third of all arable land is used to grow food for livestock, according to the report. Reducing the number of cattle and sheep on the planet, and thereby reducing the methane gas emissions they produce, is a faster way to impact climate change than reducing carbon dioxide alone, the report concluded. The researchers concluded that greenhouse gas emissions from cattle and sheep are 19 to 48 times higher per pounds of food produced than the gas emitted in the production of plant protein foods such as beans, grains or soy.

To get an idea of how unnatural and unsustainable 3.6 billion large ruminants is, think back to when vast bison herds blackened the plains. At that time there were only 50 million bison in all of North America. There are over 300 million human beef-eaters in the United States, every one of them expecting to see a fully stocked steak house, Subway or McDonald’s on every street corner.

Meanwhile, the media’s busily cooking up a spin to answer to meat’s culpability in this planet’s climate crisis. Articles on how methane from grass-eaters is a primary greenhouse gas are often accompanied by the suggestion that pigs and chickens don’t produce as much. In other words, don’t worry your little meat-addicted heads if this beef-cow-causing-global-warming thing becomes a recognized issue, you can just switch over to other non-ruminants’ carcasses—no one really expects you to become a vegetarian, after all.

One of the most outrageous spins ever concocted aired on a “Ted Talk” just last March. Allan Savory, a former Rhodesian provincial Game Officer, has been spreading the counterintuitive notion that to control desertification and stop global warming we need to turn even more cattle out onto arid land. This notion comes from a man who, as late as 1969 advocated for the culling of large populations of elephants and hippos because he felt they were destroying their habitat. Savory participated in the culling of 40,000 elephants in the 1950s, but he later concluded it did not reverse the degradation of the land and called the culling project “the saddest and greatest blunder of my life.” Now he’s trying to sell us on another blunder with even more destructive consequences. What will this guy do for an encore? Never mind, I don’t want to know.

Speaking of Africa, 2013 saw the fastest growing and second most populous continent on its way to adding another billion people to the planet. By the end of this century, 3/4 of the world’s growth is expected to come from Africa, and projections put its population at four billion—one billion in Nigeria alone. Most African countries will at least triple in population, as there are very high fertility rates and very little family planning in most regions. No one is quite sure how the continent will provide for that many hungry humans; only time will tell.

And even though China’s overwhelming population is already well past a billion, in 2013 they abandoned their one child policy and affectively doubled it by implementing a two child policy at the stroke of a pen.

Sorry, but this shit is scary, at least if you care about the plight of non-human species on this planet. Sure, cultural diversity is important—to people. But it sure as hell doesn’t trump biological diversity in the scheme of things. Regardless of what you may or may not believe about whether we were created in the image of a god, life on Earth as we know it will not go on if we humans are one of the only species left around.

The coming decades are going to test just what Homo sapiens are made of. Are we progressive and adaptable enough to learn to share the planet with others and become plant eaters, as some people have? Or is our incessant breeding and meat consumption going to put us into an all new classification—planet eater?

1535443_10151792030721493_1254752217_n

NBC Sports Network Cancels NRA-Sponsored Elephant Hunting Show After Host Compares Critics To Hitler

[Interesting that the network cancelled the show because the host dared to mention Hitler, not because he shot an elephant twice in the face and then celebrated its death over champagne… Why he thinks we only care about elephants and not the hunting of ducks, deer, rabbits, etc. is beyond me. Not all anti-hunters are “animal racists,” as he put it, or species favoritists, as I call it. Many of us don’t want to see the hunting of any non-human animals.]

 September 29, 2013  1:41 PM EDT ››› SOPHIA TESFAYE

Photo by Lord Mountbatten

NBC Sports Network has announced that it has canceled the hunting show Under Wild Skies after host Tony Makris compared critics to Hitler.

Controversy began after the show aired an episode in which an elephant was shot in the face twice by host Makris. Makris, who has longstanding ties to the NRA, celebrated the killing of the elephant with a bottle of champagne.

Following days of outrage and a petition calling for NBC to cancel the show, Makris took to NRA News on September 26 to respond to critics by claiming they advocated for a form of “animal racism.” Makris said the following about critics who argued that elephants not be targeted:

MAKRIS: The nice ones will come up and go, you shoot elephant? Why? And I said well, the short answer is because hungry people eat them and because I’m a hunter. You know, I’m not an elephant hunter. I’m a hunter. I hunt all things. And they go, well nobody should shoot an elephant. I said, why? And they go they’re so big and kind and gentle and smart and I said, okay, let me ask you a question. Should I be able to shoot birds? Well, I guess that’s okay. Ducks? Yeah. Pigeons? Oh, they’re flying rats, okay. Rabbits? Well rabbits are cute. But yea. Squirrels? That’s nothing but a rat with a tail — with a fuzzy tail. And I said, well deer eat all my mother’s roses in Long Island and I go– so I can shoot all of those, but not an elephant? No. Do you realize that if you subscribe to that philosophy you are committing a very unique form of animal racism?

CAM EDWARDS, HOST: [laughter]

MAKRIS: And now they’re shocked. And they said but they’re so big and special and they’re smarter. And I went, you know, Hitler would have said the same thing.

On September 28, NBC Sports Network announced in a statement to Deadspin that Under Wild Skies has been canceled due to Makris’ comments:

Under Wild Skies will no longer air on NBC Sports Sports Network due to the program’s close association with its host, whose recent comments comparing his critics to Hitler are outrageous and unacceptable. NBCSN will continue to air all of our other quality outdoor programming.

Hunting is Not a Crime, It’s a Sin

After posting yesterday’s blog post, “White Hunter “Perverse Little Creatures from another Planet without any Dignity,” I remembered that there was another good line in the Clint Eastwood film, White Hunter Black Heart:

When Eastwood’s character, John Wilson (the director of a movie being filmed in Africa), announces, “I’m staying till l get my elephant,” Pete Verrill (the movie’s screenwriter) tells him, “You’re either crazy or the most egocentric, irresponsible son of a bitch that I’ve ever met. You’re about to blow this whole picture out of your nose, John. And for what? To commit a crime. To kill one of the rarest, most noble creatures that roams the face of this crummy earth. In order for you to commit this crime, you’re willing to forget about all of us and let this whole goddamn thing go down the drain.”

To which John Wilson answers, “You’re wrong, kid. It’s not a crime to kill an elephant. It’s bigger than all that. It’s a sin to kill an elephant. Do you understand? It’s the only sin that you can buy a license and go out and commit.

“That’s why I want to do it before I do anything else in this world. Do you understand me? Of course you don’t. How could you? I don’t understand myself.”

And neither do we, John.

photo IFAW.org

photo IFAW.org

White Hunter “Perverse Little Creatures from another Planet without any Dignity”

Hoping to hear a good anti-hunting line or two, I watched the Clint Eastwood film, White Hunter Black Heart last night. Though overly focused on Eastwood’s character, John Wilson (a thinly-veiled representation bordering on caricature of the director John Huston), who flies to Africa to shoot a film…but is really more interested in shooting an elephant—literally and lethally. After spotting a large “tusker” bull, Wilson becomes obsessed with getting “My elephant” (as he referred to the noble animal).

As it turns out, it was John Wilson’s sidekick, Pete Verrill (played by Jeff Fahey), the screenwriter on Wilson’s film project (and the stand-in for the director’s non-existent conscience) who voiced the story’s classic anti-hunting line. Looking at the impressive bull elephant (the object of Wilson’s obsession) through binoculars, Pete Verrill remarks, “Oh. I’ve never seen one before, outside the circus or the zoo. They’re so majestic; so indestructible. They’re part of the earth. They make us feel like perverse little creatures from another planet. Without any dignity.”

Though Clint Eastwood has a hard time losing himself in his characters, he was clearly not portraying himself through this director with a big-game trophy-hunter wanna-be fixation. Eastwood himself is a bit too evolved and intelligent for that, as evidenced by his statement to the Los Angeles Times: “I don’t go for hunting. I just don’t like killing creatures.”

ImageProxy

Upstaged by an Elephant

I feel like a circus performer doing daily death-defying feats on a high wire only to have the show stolen by an elephant. No sooner did I compose a post bemoaning the glacial speed of karma (even daring to question its very existence), than along came a story about an elephant—a very angry, rampaging elephant at that—who metered out some instant karma on his ivory poachers. (An upside of climate change? Perhaps global warming is speeding up karma along with the rate of ice-melt.)

But this was more than the faceless fate that seems to well up from the soul of Nature Herself (such as when a hunter falls out of his tree stand). This is a case of direct action on the part of an injured animal who decided to take his would-be assassin out with him in a single stomp.

Now that the story has gone relatively viral, I’m thinking maybe I should not waste time philosophizing and save my posting for any other entertaining acts of animal karma that come along (like when a deer trees a hunter or a trapper steps into his own freshly set torture device).

We can all use a good cheering up once in a while.

HNTSTK_1_2__66133_1314490481_1280_1280

Elephant Kills His Poacher and People Aren’t Exactly Sad

Speaking of karma…

Elephant Kills His Poacher and People Aren’t Exactly Sad

Since the African elephant population has been devastated in recent years, it’s pretty hard to see things from the poacher’s point of view.

http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/05/15/african-elephant-poacher-killed-zimbabwe?cmpid=tp-ad-outbrain-general

May 15, 2013, by

Noluck Tafuruka may not sound like a lucky man, but he’s lucky to be alive. His “business partner,” Solomon Monjoro, was recently discovered, a crushed corpse in blood-stained bushes. How did it happen? And what was the motive? One really mad elephant that didn’t want to become a poaching statistic.

It all happened last month in Zimbabwe’s magnificent Charara National Park. The two alleged poachers entered the park with firearms, but apparently were not able to immediately kill their target elephant, which took karma into its own hands, or shall we say tusks, and charged, trampling one of the men to death.

The other man, Tafuruka, was arrested shortly thereafter along with one other in the capital city of Harare.

Elephant poaching has soared in recent years thanks to a growing demand for ivory sculptures and trinkets among China’s emerging middle class, who view the items as status symbols. A recent report by the Wildlife Conservation Society estimated that about 62 percent of forest elephants in Africa have been poached over the past ten years. Just this spring, poachers on horseback, armed with AK47s, gunned down almost 90 elephants in Chad in just one week, including 33 pregnant females.

Ivory currently fetches about $1,300 per kilo in China.

This level of destruction would be tragic for any species, but it is especially sickening in this case, because elephants are extremely intelligent creatures with tightly knit family communities, sophisticated communication systems, and, some researchers believe, highly developed emotions.

In recent years there have been increasing reports from throughout Africa that elephants are changing their behavior because of the enormous emotional stress caused by poaching.

“Elephants in areas that have been heavily poached, display an understandable fear of humans,” said Catherine Doyle, Director of Science, Research, and Advocacy at PAWS. “They often display aggressive behavior when approached.”

Joyce Poole of Elephant Voices recounted how a Masai friend in Kenya was noticing a difference too. “When the elephants come down on that old trail, as they do every year, they no longer come down during the day trumpeting their arrival; they now slip down quietly at night, and when we look at the tracks of these animals, we only see small footprints.”

It’s hard to imagine a world without elephants, but it’s almost equally disturbing to imagine a world where majestic elephants have to cower in the bushes like scared rabbits in order to survive.

elephant-range-map

Hold On to Your Sanity

Seeing the photo of a young Trump troll holding a severed elephant trunk makes me so enraged I could tear it out of his hands and beat him to a bloody pulp with it. There, I said it. Make no mistake, photos of sick, gloating psychos inspire as much murderous rage in me as they do in any other good person who cares for animals and who knows that the elephant was a far more worthy soul than the grinning, scum-bag sport hunter.

Does this bring me “down to his level?” No, that’s an overused cliché that I should have avoided in my last post, because it put some readers on the defensive and made them miss my whole point (which was simply:  even in our talk of retribution, we should strive to sound more humane than those who enjoy killing). Would I enjoy flogging someone to death with the trunk of an elephant (justified as it might well be)? If so, it may be time for some serious introspection; time to ask myself, “Have I crossed the line and temporarily lost my sanity?”

The tag line for my book and blog is “Forget hunters’ feeble rationalizations and trust your gut feelings; making sport of killing is not healthy human behavior.” The word “sport,” which hunters make no bones about using, suggests taking pleasure in the act of something—in the case of hunting that means offing a living being. Regardless of how you justify it, deriving pleasure from killing is not healthy behavior. No matter how tempting it is to go on the warpath on their behalf, the animals need us to stay sane. Any lethal action we take will be perceived as another sign that we “put animals above humans” (guilty as charged?) and justify further oppression of the animals. Thankfully, nobody here has been driven to cross that Rubicon yet.

I included only photos of live animals throughout my book, in part help people identify with the subjects, but also to avoid making the reader see red, drop the book, and go out and commit some act of homicide that could set back any progress made for the animals and inspire a fully armed retaliation against them. All laws are on the side of the exploiters, and they have all the weapons (well, at least most of them).

My advice to folks who find themselves at the end of their rope: whenever you feel you’ve viewed one too many snuff shots of evil, smug little men and women with their trophies, file that rage away for a minute and take some time to regain your composure. Maybe pet your cat or dog, gaze out the window at the sunset or appreciate a photo of a live, free-roaming animal. But if you keep staring at a computer screen full of morbid, infuriating images of animal murderers, it might make you sink to their level…of sanity, anyway.

The fight for the animals is a war of attrition; a war of hearts and minds. Everything we do or say can have a bearing in the case against animal cruelty.

No matter how enjoyable the thought of beating a hunter or trapper with their victim’s severed body part might seem be, for the sake of the animals we must try to hold on to our sanity.

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson