first_imgArticle published by Shreya Dasgupta Big-game trophy decision will be announced next week but will be very hard pressed to change my mind that this horror show in any way helps conservation of Elephants or any other animal.— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 19, 2017Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke tweeted a statement, saying “President Trump and I have talked and both believe that conservation and healthy herds are critical. As a result, in a manner compliant with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, the issuing of permits is being put on hold as the decision is being reviewed.”The USFWS justified lifting the 2014 ban by arguing that well-managed trophy hunting can benefit conservation “by generating funds to be used for protecting wildlife habitat, monitoring populations, wildlife management programs and law enforcement efforts”. The agency also argues that trophy hunting fees provide an incentive for the local communities to protect wildlife.In its report, the USFWS said that the Service had sent a letter to Zimbabwe on April 4, 2014, requesting information on elephant population in the country and how U.S. hunters contributed to the enhancement of the species. Based on the information provided to the USFWS in the following years, the Service concluded that “there now appears to be a greater effort on the part of ZPWMA [Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority] to work with NGOs, landowners, and safari area concessionaires to improve elephant management and anti-poaching efforts.”African elephant. Photo by Rhett A. Butler / MongabayBut the African Wildlife Foundation said that although ZPWMA has developed a good elephant management plan, the authorities lack the necessary funding to operationalize it. “ZPWMA is terribly under-funded,” AWF said in a statement. “They lack vehicles, fuel, ammunition, and even rations. While it is true that hunting can provide revenue for conservation, it is false to assume it will come close to meeting the urgent needs of ZPWMA. Elephant hunting is already happening in Zimbabwe, so this action by the Trump administration would have only incrementally increased hunting revenue.”Primatologist Jane Goodall added that “very little money [from trophy hunting] is actually used for conservation, and that the safari companies organizing these murders have their own staff, so that typically the local communities receive very little compensation. To kill endangered animals is not a good idea, and we must remember that each elephant is a highly intelligent social individual whose life matters.”The move to lift the ban also sparked criticism from some Trump supporters. “I don’t understand how this move by @realDonaldTrump Admin will not INCREASE the gruesome poaching of elephants,” Laura Ingraham, Fox News host tweeted.I don’t understand how this move by @realDonaldTrump Admin will not INCREASE the gruesome poaching of elephants. Stay tuned. https://t.co/KqizmlgaGg— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) November 16, 2017British television host Piers Morgan added: “This appalling decision doesn’t make America great again; it makes America cruel again.”Ed Royce, a member of the Republican Party and the Chairman of the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs also criticized the decision, calling it the “wrong move at the wrong time”.Zimbabwe is currently undergoing a political upheaval, with Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s 93-year-old President being sacked from the ruling party last week and the military taking over.African elephants by Rhett A. Butler / MongabayLatest surveys have estimated that Zimbabwe has about 80,000 elephants. While this is a large population relative to other African countries, elephant numbers in Zimbabwe have declined by 11 percent since 2005, the surveys found. In northwestern Zimbabwe, populations have fallen by 74 percent.Elephant population in Zambia, estimated to be around 20,000, has also suffered an 11 percent decline during the past decade. The decline has been especially drastic in some parks like Sioma Ngwezi National Park in southwest Zambia, where poaching has reduced elephant numbers from 1,089 in 2004 to 48 in 2015. Animals, Anti-poaching, Biodiversity, Conservation, Elephants, Endangered Species, Environment, Environmental Policy, Environmental Politics, Forests, Hunting, Mammals, Poaching, Trophy Hunting, Wildlife, Wildlife Trade, Wildlife Trafficking Last week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allowed elephant trophies from Zimbabwe and Zambia to be imported to the U.S., lifting a previous ban under former President Barack Obama.This move sparked criticism not only from conservationists and animal rights activists, but also from some President Trump supporters.Following the widespread criticism, Trump tweeted that he would announce his decision on trophy imports next week. Last Tuesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lifted a ban on importing elephant trophies from Zimbabwe imposed under President Barack Obama in 2014. At a meeting of government officials and professional hunting associations in Tanzania, the U.S. federal agency announced that elephants that were legally hunted in Zimbabwe and Zambia between January 21, 2016, and December 31, 2018, could now be imported into the United States.The agency later issued a notice saying it had “made a finding” that the hunting of trophy African elephants in Zimbabwe during this period “will enhance the survival” of the threatened animals. The notice does not mention Zambia.On Friday, however, U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted that he was putting the big game trophy decision on hold until he had reviewed all “conservation facts”. He also said that his decision on the trophy imports will be announced next week.Put big game trophy decision on hold until such time as I review all conservation facts. Under study for years. Will update soon with Secretary Zinke. Thank you!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 18, 2017 Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredlast_img