Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon sponsors predator slaughter?!  (Read 10437 times)
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« on: November 22, 2009, 09:59:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Please tell me that this is some kind of mistake!

http://iamidaho.deviantart.com/

http://news.deviantart.com/article/100543/

- Bobcats are worth 2 points
- Foxes are worth 2 points
- Coyotes are worth 2 points
- Wolves are worth 3 points
- Ties are resolved by weight.

A "shooting spree" of apex predators for "points" in some kind of game -- and Nikon is sponsoring this?   WTF?!

Vomit!!!!!!!

Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2009, 10:31:59 AM »
ReplyReply

For those who are unaware: Nikon makes fine hunting scopes.
Logged

MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2009, 10:46:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: feppe
For those who are unaware: Nikon makes fine hunting scopes.

This is not about hunting, this is about slaughtering predators for fun and "points" while throwing away the carcasses.

People can argue about the ethics of hunting -- and there are a lot of points of merit on both sides -- but I find it difficult to believe that any lover of nature could agree with or sanction this event which is about slaughtering predators for fun and to win a contest.
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2009, 12:32:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
This is not about hunting, this is about slaughtering predators for fun and "points" while throwing away the carcasses.

People can argue about the ethics of hunting -- and there are a lot of points of merit on both sides -- but I find it difficult to believe that any lover of nature could agree with or sanction this event which is about slaughtering predators for fun and to win a contest.

You're implying I somehow condone activity described in your links. I don't. You're free to express your indignation, but don't use me as a conduit for it.
Logged

MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2009, 01:05:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: feppe
You're implying I somehow condone activity described in your links. I don't. You're free to express your indignation, but don't use me as a conduit for it.

I think your understanding of English needs some work.  I implied no such thing.  I merely responded that this is not about hunting.


Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2009, 01:08:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
I think your understanding of English needs some work.  I implied no such thing.  I merely responded that this is not about hunting.

No, sir, it is your reading comprehension.

I'm done with this. And IBTL.
Logged

MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2009, 03:59:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Feppe,

I did not imply that you condoned either this activity or hunting.

My initial reply was only to note that this was NOT about hunting but rather about the mass slaughter of predators for "fun" and to gather points for a contest.  I know many hunters who also find this "contest" sick and twisted.

I have to imagine that when Nikon hears from its wildlife-loving customers tomorrow they will pull their sponsorship of this event.

Logged
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2009, 11:06:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Thom Hogan has mentioned to me in a private email that he believes that Nikon is not actually sponsoring this event, because the web site linked by the Nikon logo on the predator shoot website is not actually owned by Nikon.

Hopefully we will get some clarification from NikonUSA soon and if in fact Nikon is not sponsoring this event their logo will be removed from the predator slaughter website.   I will update this thread when I find out more.
Logged
Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2009, 12:38:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
Thom Hogan has mentioned to me in a private email that he believes that Nikon is not actually sponsoring this event, because the web site linked by the Nikon logo on the predator shoot website is not actually owned by Nikon.

FWIW, I went to the event website and clicked on the Nikon logo.  It is linked to a currently non-existent site called www.nikonoutdoors.com.

Paul
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 12:38:30 AM by PaulS » Logged

Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1910



WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2009, 01:43:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
Please tell me that this is some kind of mistake!

http://iamidaho.deviantart.com/

http://news.deviantart.com/article/100543/

- Bobcats are worth 2 points
- Foxes are worth 2 points
- Coyotes are worth 2 points
- Wolves are worth 3 points
- Ties are resolved by weight.

A "shooting spree" of apex predators for "points" in some kind of game -- and Nikon is sponsoring this?   WTF?!

Vomit!!!!!!!

UTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS, HORRENDOUS AND DISGUSTING IN THE ABSOLUTE.

I felt ill just reading it.

I shake my head in shame that elements of humanity can be so cruel.


Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2009, 08:45:36 AM »
ReplyReply

2 points:

1. The Nikon logo links to a non-existent web site, so it's highly doubtful that Nikon is sponsoring or involved in this event in any way. Going after Nikon half-cocked about this is just going to make you look stupid, and deservedly so.

2. The so-called "friends of the animals" who get their panties in a knot about this sort of thing actually cause more pain and suffering to the animals they are trying to protect than the hunter they abhor. When a predator gets absolute protection from hunting, two things happen: the predator population increases until they run out of prey, the species the predator preys on (some of whom are endangered in their own right) run the risk of getting wiped out by over-predation. Instead of a nearly-instantaneous humane death from a rifle bullet, many of the predators slowly starve to death over weeks or months. The reason wolves were taken off the endangered species list is because their numbers had increased to the point that they were wiping out the deer and elk populations in some areas. Keeping predator and prey populations in balance requires a continuously adaptive approach, increasing protections when a population drops too low, and decreasing them when a population becomes too large. It is just as destructive to an ecosystem to allow a predator to multiply until it consumes the entire prey population as it is to eradicate the predator and allow the prey population to increase until it consumes its food resources.

I'm not convinced that this "predator derby" is based on sound wildlife management principles; in most states, the wildlife management agency tracks the populations of various species of game animals, calculates what the optimum populations and predator-prey ratios should be to prevent any species from overpopulating, and issues a controlled number of hunting permits based on the difference between current population and optimum population. There is no reason any predator should be completely exempted from controlled hunting when there are sound reasons for keeping the population at a controlled level, but that doesn't mean that indiscriminate eradication is a good idea, either. The best course, both for the long-term health of the environment and the survival of all species of predator and prey, is a middle ground.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2009, 09:02:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Josh-H
UTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS, HORRENDOUS AND DISGUSTING IN THE ABSOLUTE.

I felt ill just reading it.

I shake my head in shame that elements of humanity can be so cruel.

Being killed with a rifle is less cruel and disgusting than having your guts or other body parts chewed and eaten while you're still alive to appreciate the experience, or being slowly strangled by being bitten in the neck hard enough to cut off your air supply. Most predators are oblivious to the concept of a clean, quick kill, and the experience of their prey becoming dinner is often horrendous, drawn-out torture. Have you ever seen a cat play with a mouse? From the mouse's view, it's sick and twisted sadism--the intentional infliction of pain and suffering deliberately drawn out for extended periods of time for the sole purpose of entertaining the cat. Wolves aren't quite as sadistic as cats, but I'd much rather be shot by one of the hunters you find disgusting and abhorrent than eaten by wolves if I was forced to choose one or the other.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2009, 01:50:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I am quite sure that nature can no longer balance itself, perhaps because of the input from humans over many years, and I can accept that some form of intervention is needed to keep stocks at some kind of sustainable balance that is compatible with our own survival.

Where I feel this all goes badly wrong is when fun, sport and money are invoked. In my opinion, killing for those reasons is not acceptable, reasoned adult behaviour; it is blood-lust. If control is needed, then that's why there are professional gamekeepers, rangers who have the skills to do the job cleanly and without turning it into a carnival.

That anyone can take life and derive pleasure from so doing says a lot more about the individual than he/she might think.

Rob C
Logged

N Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2009, 02:56:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Where I feel this all goes badly wrong is when fun, sport and money are invoked. In my opinion, killing for those reasons is not acceptable, reasoned adult behaviour; it is blood-lust. If control is needed, then that's why there are professional gamekeepers, rangers who have the skills to do the job cleanly and without turning it into a carnival.

That anyone can take life and derive pleasure from so doing says a lot more about the individual than he/she might think.

Rob C
[/quote]

Rob,

I couldn't agree more.

I would strongly recommend watching this superb BBC documentary, Earth Pilgrim a Year on Dartmoor, about Staish Kumar - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=377595686481237910#

A highly acclaimed documentary that mixes eastern philosophy with the western landscape of Dartmoor. Satish Kumar was born in India and has lived in Devon for the last 40 years.

The landscape and wildlife photography is beautiful, his words uplifting. - Ironically in contrast to this film showing Dartmoor as a jewel of our island it is normally depicted in films as a baron, wind and rain swept place where escaped convicts are melodramatically chased across the Moors.

It covers our species behaviour and the way we treat our animals instead of valuing all life equally.

https://secure.resurgence.org/satish-kumar/
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 03:29:35 PM by Nick Walker » Logged

Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1910



WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2009, 04:15:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jonathan Wienke
Being killed with a rifle is less cruel and disgusting than having your guts or other body parts chewed and eaten while you're still alive to appreciate the experience, or being slowly strangled by being bitten in the neck hard enough to cut off your air supply. Most predators are oblivious to the concept of a clean, quick kill, and the experience of their prey becoming dinner is often horrendous, drawn-out torture. Have you ever seen a cat play with a mouse? From the mouse's view, it's sick and twisted sadism--the intentional infliction of pain and suffering deliberately drawn out for extended periods of time for the sole purpose of entertaining the cat. Wolves aren't quite as sadistic as cats, but I'd much rather be shot by one of the hunters you find disgusting and abhorrent than eaten by wolves if I was forced to choose one or the other.

Its just this kind of twisted logic that 'shooters' use to justify their actions.

Nature is cruel; we all know that. But that is NOT the point. Many of these animals that will be shot may have lived many more years and contributed to their environment. The point is that they are being shot for nothing more than the pleasure of it - and that is sick.

Nature has something called 'survival of the fitest' - which basically ensures the strongest of the species survive to perpetuate the species. So a certain amount of animals must die to predators to keep the species healthy. But this is a natural process - it is not about blowing animals apart with high powered rifles for the thrill of it.

Shooting animals for sport and pleasure is just SICK. And no amount of justification makes it acceptable or excusable.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 07:09:29 PM by Josh-H » Logged

ternst
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 425


« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2009, 05:37:59 PM »
ReplyReply

How about killing an animal so that you can hold your pants up (leather belt), or killing an animal just so that you can bite into a big, juicy steak instead of corn on the cob - is there a difference? Animals are killed every day so that all of us can live better lives - fact of life that a lot of folks seem to ignore (millions of products we use everyday use animal parts, not just what we eat or wear). That hamburger didn't come out of a plant. We don't actually REQUIRE meat every day in order to survive, nor do we REQUIRE leather shoes or belts, but we like them - makes us feel good. Visit your local slaughter house sometime. It's kind of the same thing...
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 24, 2009, 10:12:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
I did not imply that you condoned either this activity or hunting.
Actually you did, but quoting his message and making your reply seem a direct response to his statement. That may not have been your intent, but that's how I read it (and I'm guessing many others would, as well).

On the issue of the event described in the link, it certainly strikes me as distasteful and unpleasant, but I won't pretend to have a full grasp of the issues at play and whether or not this sort of culling is truly necessary in some areas to maintain a balance in predator populations.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2009, 10:13:58 AM by JeffKohn » Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #17 on: November 24, 2009, 10:22:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Gotta kill something..
Logged
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2009, 07:58:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you everyone who wrote and called Nikon.  They have pulled their sponsorship of this event.
Logged
Josh-H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1910



WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 25, 2009, 01:19:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
Thank you everyone who wrote and called Nikon.  They have pulled their sponsorship of this event.

Thats a good start.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad