US 60 minutes on Game farms

I saw this as well, and I too found it interesting. The question is, do you think it's acceptable or not?

I knew that these ranches were out there, but had not idea about the scale - and it's certainly a surprise to hear that there are thousands of Scimitar-horned oryx on these properties in Texas.

If I'm being honest, I'm torn. I'm not a fan of hunting in general, but the reality is it does exist, and will likely continue somewhere even if it's shut down in Texas. I think I'd find this more acceptable if there were some sort of reciprocity agreement with zoos. Perhaps these exist, but they didn't mention it in the story. Say, 1/2 or 1/3 of the endangered species that are born on the ranches are pulled and taken from the property and entered into an approved AZA breeding facility, which would hopefully increase genetic diversity.

Maybe that's not ideal, but certainly more palatable and if these ranch owners are sincere in their belief that they are keeping the species alive and well, they could spare the lives of some.
 
Terp924 said:
...if these ranch owners are sincere in their belief that they are keeping the species alive and well, they could spare the lives of some.
Click to expand...

Did you watch the video? The ARE sparing the lives of not just some, but the majority. The rancher in the interview specifically said they allow no more than ten percent of the herd to be hunted.

As for sending some to AZA zoos, the sad truth is the AZA does not want them.

And the lady from the (extremist) animal rights group is so out of touch with reality it is almost laughable - except that she is winning her case, which is no laughing matter at all. That video is the best and most honest treatment of this subject I have seen.
 
I also think game farms are a good thing, especially for their ability to make it possible to keep sufficient animals for genetic diversity in the population. Here in Australia in particular we have fewer zoos, and quarantine means swapping animals with overseas zoos is not possible in many cases. Our zoos seem to often phase out species due to insufficient numbers to keep the population sustainable.

Look at what happened to our kudu, the manager of the zoo decided they were unviable so castrated the last male. Scimitar-horned oryx in Australia have already been saved by a game farm in the NT.

The only way Australia can keep sustainable populations of large exotics is through private herds, and the only way this would be affordable is game farms.
 
Just curious if game farm has the same meaning in Australia as it does in the United States. Here it specifically refers to animal facilities that keep trained exotic animals for use in movie production or formal photography sessions.
 
"game farm" in Monty's context means a ranch or similar where wild animals (eg deer or antelope) are kept for hunting, as in Texas
 
Arizona Docent said:
Did you watch the video?
Click to expand...

I did watch the video. As I said, I'm not even sure which side of this I come down on this yet, and was simply looking to extend the discussion. Obviously you feel very strongly about it, but you can spare me the condescending tone. It's clearly not a cut and dry issue in the eyes of many, and perhaps I didn't fully get my own concerns across effectively. What I'm suggesting is perhaps the ideal solution here in the U.S. (and maybe in Australia) falls somewhere between the proposed legislation and the status quo.

What they said in the story is that they take no more than 10% of a species annually. An oryx lives for 20 years or so, so I suppose it really depends on how fast these animals are actually reproducing before one can determine their real chances.

My primary point being, if there is no real effort to enter these animals into SSP or release some back into the wild at some point, they really only serve one purpose. I'd really be interested in understanding why an AZA facility would not want to accept these animals, if that's something you would be willing to pass along.

Perhaps if that's not a solution, another option would be for these ranches to take a portion of their profits and directly support reputable conservation organizations or AZA facilities where captive breeding programs for these species are in place. I don't believe this was covered on 60 minutes, nor do I see anything of the sort on the Exotic Wildlife Association web site.

As a layperson on this issue, I see the 10% hunting cap as simply a limit these ranches impose to ensure their long term profits remain intact, which in and of itself makes perfect sense to me. While I would agree that the animal rights group is on one extreme, I also think it's a stretch to think the Exotic Wildlife Association (or the ranchers they lobby for), have significant interest in conservation of these species beyond profit. Both sides have much to gain given the massive exposure received from appearing on 60 minutes.

The EFW does not cite any conservation partners on their website that aren't other hunting organizations, among them is the NRA. I take that with a grain of salt as I doubt there are many that would publicly partner with them, even if they were in total agreement with the practices. Their Mission Statement says nothing in my view in terms of meaningful wildlife conservation, only conserving their ability to hunt wildlife.

There are of course many parks across Africa where hunting is promoted. Hunting safaris are very expensive, and often the funds go to conservation efforts. Though I'm not fond of it on a personal level, I don't take issue with the hunting of non-endangered species as I understand the rationale behind it. Here in the U.S., I'm just struggling to reconcile the end justifying the means.
 
As a layperson on this issue, I see the 10% hunting cap as simply a limit these ranches impose to ensure their long term profits remain intact, which in and of itself makes perfect sense to me. While I would agree that the animal rights group is on one extreme, I also think it's a stretch to think the Exotic Wildlife Association (or the ranchers they lobby for), have significant interest in conservation of these species beyond profit. Both sides have much to gain given the massive exposure received from appearing on 60 minutes.

The EFW does not cite any conservation partners on their website that aren't other hunting organizations, among them is the NRA. I take that with a grain of salt as I doubt there are many that would publicly partner with them, even if they were in total agreement with the practices. Their Mission Statement says nothing in my view in terms of meaningful wildlife conservation, only conserving their ability to hunt wildlife.
Click to expand...

You can find these links on the EWA website:
Second Ark Foundation
http://myewa.org/forms/Sandscript EWA Article.pdf
 
I found the "60 Minutes" story rather unsatisfying. I agree that the animal rights lady was somewhat extreme and her viewpoint wasn't very useful for conservation. I would much rather that there be large herds of scimitar-horned oryx roaming through Texas ranches with some occasionally getting blown away than the species disappear entirely, but it would be very nice if there were an accompanying effort by the Texas ranchers to re-establish the species in the wild. Maybe there is, but this angle was not covered in the story if it is happening.
 
Thanks gerenuk, this is good to know - I'm sorry I missed it. I see the link regarding the Friends of the Sahara contribution in their news and events section, and it's encouraging to see. Can't find the link with the other one, but I'm sure it's there. It would be awesome if they drew more attention to these.

All I'm saying is that more efforts like this would probably go a long way in validating the argument against the proposed legislation. With 5,000+ ranches one would hope that cumulatively there are quite a few more contributions going on beyond these two small projects, and I suspect there are.
 
The main reason the AZA is not interested in taking animals, I think (this is largely an educated guess), is they just do not have the space. I am sure that on occasion they may receive a new animal from one of the ranches, but overall I think they have a hard time just placing the animals they produce themselves.

Sorry if I came across as condescending; certainly not my intent to be caustic or offensive.

Also, regarding AZA, the trend is to freely trade animals and not buy or sell. I assume (again a guess) that to procure one from a private ranch, they would have to buy it.
 
No worries, probably a bit overly-sensitive on my end. It's a story I find very interesting, and after watching it I poked around the Internet a little to see if I could find any reliable article/data on kill rates to no avail, so I was happy to see someone posted it here for discussion.

"I am sure that on occasion they may receive a new animal from one of the ranches..."

If so, I think this could go a long way in supporting their case - just haven't been able to find any specific examples. I too would think it must happen, it's just odd it wasn't raised during the 60 minutes piece.

Maybe there's some concern about effectively being taxed, as any forced donation would essentially be just that. At $4500 a pop though, I think they could build more than a few fences in Niger, and I hope they are.
 
Terp924 said:
"I am sure that on occasion they may receive a new animal from one of the ranches..."

If so, I think this could go a long way in supporting their case - just haven't been able to find any specific examples. I too would think it must happen, it's just odd it wasn't raised during the 60 minutes piece.
Click to expand...

Not exactly endangered, but not too long ago the LA Zoo received (I don't know if they were bought or traded) one or two Steenbok from one of these ranches, which have successfully bred now. The zoo also sold a male Southern Gerenuk to Safari Enterprises not too long.

Sources: http://lazoo.org/about/commission/minutes/May2011Minutes.pdf
http://lazoo.org/about/commission/minutes/January2011Minutes.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top