11 ms·

In Zimbabwe, We Don’t Cry for Lions

243 points by zabramow 11y ago

kristjankalm 11y ago
Anthropocentrism at its purest. Reminds me of someone on BBC talking about "shark infested waters of South Africa".
vegabook 11y ago
Translation: "you imperialist westerners are out of touch, soft, and basically, anti-Africa (a stop short of 'racist'). How can you love a dangerous creature more than all us poor Africans"? Because there are 7 billion of us on the planet and only 30k lions left. We have had it really good (including Zimbabwe in terms of population growth) for 150 years, yet we have decimated our kindred animals using excuses like "conservation" or "danger". This article takes an instinct that was relevant 300 years ago and shamelessly punts it into our modern age, circumstances having changed enormously, in order ultimately to push another agenda.
- XorNot 11y ago
  Still not really the issue though. People care plenty for Africans. But if he's got a new take on how we can deal with decades of government corruption without getting a whole lot more Africans killed in the process, everyone, everywhere, is all ears.
wehadfun 11y ago
Honestly Zimbabwe has so many problems a lion dying is not a big issue. Hell Zimbabwe children were being tied up and set on fire a few months ago in South Africa[0]. [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyX4aOd_2BY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyX4aOd_2BY
- JonoBB 11y ago
  And this is why South Africa will become another basket case, just like its neighbour Zimbabwe :(
- flinty 11y ago
  fk, that is sickening :(.
- jasonlotito 11y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation But you're right, it's not a big issue. There are other issues, which is why the US does more than just have citizens post to Facebook about a lion. http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe
  - wehadfun 11y ago
    Yea about that aid: http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/jul/15/aid-africa-west-looting-continent http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/jul/15/ai...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jonknee 11y ago
... Well except that Zimbabwe is trying to extradite the dentist for poaching. The lion was in a national park that brings in significant tourism dollars for the state, they quite literally were crying for this lion.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  > Well except that Zimbabwe is trying to extradite the dentist for poaching. FYI the author talked about this in the article as he also mentioned their president had a baby elephant slaughtered for his birthday. > The lion was in a national park that brings in significant tourism dollars for the state, they quite literally were crying for this lion. While I agree that it seems like the author is missing some perspective from the park / tourism side of things he did offer a different perspective I haven't read about. I'm sure someone from their parks service would have yet another perspective. Still, it's good to hear about these types of issues from other perspectives for I fear of drowning in an echo-chamber that is American news.
  - chillingeffect 11y ago
    > their president had a baby elephant slaughtered for his birthday. This really highlights asymmetric power relations in the issue: It's easy to gang up online against a wealthy, white, male dentist. Mobbing Zimbabwe's president, on the other hand...
charlesray 11y ago
>Don’t tell us what to do with our animals when you allowed your own mountain lions to be hunted to near extinction in the eastern United States. Don’t bemoan the clear-cutting of our forests when you turned yours into concrete jungles. So don't learn from our mistakes, basically? This is among the most ignorant things I have ever read. Terrible article from a person with a terrible mentality.
- badmadrad 11y ago
  Its a different perspective from an actual African. Who are you to say he is more ignorant than you are? Ultimately, the human experience is about survival. And that experience will vary and form your perspective.
  - charlesray 11y ago
    I'm not saying he's more or less ignorant than I am. I'm simply saying that he is clearly and objectively an ignorant person. One of the steps we took to stop lion hunting was to have airlines ban the transportation of lion caracasses. That's a pretty easy thing to do. Do you think there's anything similar we could to do to improve the human rights situation in Zimbabwe? Can Delta refuse to transport Mugabe? Will that help? It simply IS ignorance at the root of his childish complaints. It's ignorance to the fact that one problem - lions - is of a vastly smaller scale than another problem - human rights issues in Zimbawabe - and thus the solutions to said problem are far, far easier to apply. In short, we want to help where we actually CAN help. But decades of failed US intervention have proven one thing time and time again: our help never sticks until you start helping yourself.
- DarkTree 11y ago
  It's really just the other side of the coin. I'm sure the truth is somewhere grounded a little towards the middle.
- giarc 11y ago
  I think they are saying "Solve your own problems, don't meddle in ours."
chipgap98 11y ago
If people are hitting the paywall the gist of the article is that lions are dangerous animals. People living in rural village are terrorized by lions and it has a serious impact on their way of life. Zimbabweans have a lot of respect for wild animals but aren't opposed to them being hunted. America once again stirred up a social media frenzy when they don't understand the issue at all.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  I take issue with the thought of conservation only being necessary for cute, cuddly animals. There are significant benefits of maintaining biodiversity in the various biomes.
  - primroot 11y ago
    I agree. Especially when those "cute" animals have long ceased to have any significant role in their ecosystem due to their reduced numbers. I think conservation efforts should primarily focus on the ecosystem not single species. In fact it is not uncommon for environmentalist organizations to follow this approach, to the apparent detriment of the ability to stir up any interest among the wider public. Biological corridors? Mangrove forests? Too many humans take this as faceless abstract technical entities, even when their face is more often than not also a human face.
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      Completely agree with your entire comment.
  - celticninja 11y ago
    You just need to look at wildlife re-introduction to see this is the case. Return wolves to an area (yellowstone) and Elk populations that were ruining new forest growth starts to come under control. The new growth encourages beavers to return to an ara, beavers improve wayerways, which improves fish stocks. Wolf killed elk also improve things for eagles, bears, coyotes and other scavengers.
- 11y ago
gadders 11y ago
Finally some sanity.
jasonlotito 11y ago
> We Zimbabweans are left shaking our heads, wondering why Americans care more about African animals than about African people. http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe
- griffinmahon 11y ago
  You could say though that USAID is not Americans, per se, but the American government caring about African people, and anyway it could also be raised that in relative terms not that much goes to foreign aid, and also that not all of it is employed solely for humanitarian reasons. Btw, I appreciated your Wiki link above.
  - jasonlotito 11y ago
    > You could say though that USAID is not Americans, per se, but the American government caring about African people, I agree, and I thought of that before posting it, but the reality is, I assume I'm sending aid to Africa already. I imagine most American's assume that is the case as well. We may not know about USAID specifically, but we assume we are sending it. So, it's not something we need to get worked up over. Effectively, it's taken care of.
- zerr 11y ago
  Yes, but it's about sentiment in journalism and "facebook masses", and not only in America...
- leothekim 11y ago
  I duplicated your comment, making an opposite point. There's also http://www.pepfar.gov http://www.pepfar.gov, one of Bush's (43) positive legacies. Unfortunately, I'm fairly certain that the average American does not think or care much about USAID or PEPFAR.
caio1982 11y ago
It's a pity there is so much confusion between 1) how foreigners reacted to the incident, 2) the problem of endangered species and violated habitats and 3) the poor situation of the locals. It seems nearly impossible to have a rational conversation about a damn lion while these three things aren't considered separately first. Yeah, I've tried to read the article's comments, my bad...
ub 11y ago
I find all these articles that try to compare and measure sympathy and emotion as pointless. People are comparing the outpouring of grief for Cecil to apathy towards human killings and inhuman treatment of animals in the meat industry. A person can be severely depressed if they lose a dog, and another can show no emotion when they lose a parent. You can't compare human emotion because it's not always rational. In this specific case though, I would also argue given the declining numbers of lions, the anger is justified.
- primroot 11y ago
  I tend to think that human emotion was not rational by definition (and by not rational I mean uncorrelated not negatively correlated). Of course "not rational" is not synonymous of bad or superfluous.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
leothekim 11y ago
"We Zimbabweans are left shaking our heads, wondering why Americans care more about African animals than about African people." That's on point.
- leothekim 11y ago
  Also worth mentioning this comment, which I unwittingly duplicated: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10009832 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10009832
- mhurron 11y ago
  > That's on point. Aid provided to Zimbabwe is not reaching the people because of Zimbabwe's government, not because it's not being sent.
  - leothekim 11y ago
    True, and someone commented this: http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe There's also PEPFAR which is notable for how many lives it has saved for Africans with HIV. Still, I'm pretty sure that the average American neither knows nor cares about either program and wouldn't raise a finger if either went away. But they care a shitload about the lion.
    - mhurron 11y ago
      > But they care a shitload about the lion. If we're going to use 'Average American' as a measure, they don't give any more shits about lions, or any other animal, than the Zimbabweans do.
      - leothekim 11y ago
        Apparently they care enough s.t. a native Zimbabwean went out of his way to write an op-ed complaining about it, and the good people at the NY Times obliged themselves to publish it.
- badmadrad 11y ago
lentil_soup 11y ago
It is way different having to kill a lion that is making life in your village miserable to having this foreigner come in and do it for "fun" disregarding the laws of your country. One thing doesn't excuse the other. Having said that, he is right on " ... don’t offer me condolences about Cecil unless you’re also willing to offer me condolences for villagers killed ..."
- Zikes 11y ago
  I don't think there are many people who are upset about Cecil's killing that would not also mourn someone killed by a lion. The author's insinuation that we don't care about something we were never given the opportunity to care about is the worst kind of moral fallacy, and is entirely unfair.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    To be truthful, we've laughed about idiots killed by lions, when those idiots ignored fences and signs in a zoo. So its entirely situational.
  - lentil_soup 11y ago
    True, you are right. But I disagree on "we were never given the opportunity to care about", horrible things have happened in Africa in the last few months that haven't received the same kind of interest from the public. That of course doesn't mean not to be upset about the lion, that I agree would be a fallacy.
trhway 11y ago
>Don’t tell us what to do with our animals the animals aren't yours or anybody else's. They belong to that planet which we just happen to share. Human race, having achieved the ability to destroy the planet's eco-sphere, thus got a duty of steward of the eco-sphere which it has been carrying poorly so far. Anyway, killing big game this days is a serious mental sickness.
- acjacobson 11y ago
  Which is why it is a bit problematic that you can still legally hunt mountain lions in several states (bears & wolves too). I think part of his point is that it is a bit disingenuous for us to criticize this kind of hunting in Zimbabwe when it is allowed in the US.
- DamnYuppie 11y ago
  How is hunting a serious mental sickness? Lest you forget your ancestors were very capable hunters, else you would not be here.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Take any group of cub scouts to the park, they see a duck, they reach for a rock. Its built-in. We are hunters.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      That behavior not nearly as universal as you make it sound.
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        Wishful thinking? Give your own examples...
    - makmanalp 11y ago
      Or maybe, just maybe, that's the kind of stuff cub scouts are taught, or the kind of thing that they learn from their elders and role models?
uniformlyrandom 11y ago
That is some very basic trolling. Not sure why HN crowd is biting, or why this article is on HN at all.
musesum 11y ago
Sport hunting changes lion social behavior, as per: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320710003459 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320710... I don't have an Elsevier account, so only read the abstract, which states that lions are seeking denser cover. Some conjecture: Do Zimbabwe villagers live in denser cover? If so, maybe sport hunting increase the threat by forcing lions closer to villagers? That would add a bit of irony to the situation.
hiou 11y ago
So all people in Zimbabwe do not think exactly the same? And might even have differences of opinion? Mind blown... Not really sure how Cecil the Lion fits into HN, oh well.
mjfl 11y ago
It is amazing how everyone can jump on this wave of political bandwagon, including the government in Zimbabwe, without really acknowledging the irony that much more terrible things have happened in Zimbabwe in the past 20 years without nearly the same outcry. Massive hyperinflation, people starving to death, and we suddenly have tears in the West over "Cecile the lion". The corrupt government of Zimbabwe is quick to wipe away our tears and assure us that this will never happen again, all the while continuing to neglect their human citizens. I can agree that big game hunting is stupid and wasteful, but killing a lion simply isn't that big of a deal, not in the grand scheme of things, and not when we rely every day on the deaths of millions of cattle to provide us food. That's just cognitive dissonance. If anything, the doctor was paying a high price for a stupid hobby, which ultimately benefits the local people of Zimbabwe. How many people in Zimbabwe can be fed for $25,000, the price of hunting a male lion?
- jjtheblunt 11y ago
  It's not at all amazing: it is because Cecil's story is representative of just how flagrantly fucked up a situation exists, and Cecil's story is, of the countless such involving people and culture and animals, so very easy to tell.
- vegabook 11y ago
  The cognitive dissonance you cite disappears completely if we accept the uncomfortable elephant in the room: we value the remaining animals far more than we value human life. And isn't that normal when there are 7 billion of us and 30 000 of them?
  - skylan_q 11y ago
    I'd say it isn't. How many is the right number of either of those?
    - vegabook 11y ago
      The right number is the one which nature will support, and sadly, that probably means we'll push out the wildlife entirely. My point was that there is a contradiction between a) our stated desire to protect remaining wildlife, and b) our failure to master our own instincts. Our strongest instinct is survival, closely followed by resource appropriation. Both are the enemy of wildlife, yet we love wildlife. To remove the contradiction we'd have to dominate our survival instinct and reduce our own population, with all the awful moral and ethical consequences (for humans) that that would entail.
chasing 11y ago
What's the author's point? That we should wantonly kill lions? Let's just eradicate 'em all? He should sound much happier, then. Because we're on our way: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/african-lions-face-extinction-by-2050-could-gain-endangered-species-act-protection/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/afr...
skylan_q 11y ago
People are coming to the defence of man-eating lions in a place where lions eat people. How are there 7 billion of us when we hate ourselves and each other so much?
dragonsh 11y ago
Humans are intelligent creatures and villagers killed are a result of encroaching the animals rightful land. There are no condolescence for those deaths caused by one's own mistake. Get out of the animals territory and fight for your survival with those other humans not with poor animals. There are only 3000 tigers left in the wild if a Bengal tiger kills a villager going inside their territory of sundar ban it's the fault of that human not tiger. Here at least American's are being right to care about 3000 tigers or lions instead of over 7 billion humans. This article shows the sick mentality of the people who thinks it's alright to encroach on other animals turf since it's easier. They are cowards not able to fight for survival with their own fellow human. There are no surrounding context in it. It's just talking about villagers encroaching lions rightful forest and pushing them to extinction.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  >Here at least American's are being right to care about 3000 tigers or lions instead of over 7 billion humans. Assuming the sale of 1 of those 7 billion could save N of those 3000, how big would N be before you support it? If need be, you don't need to pick the 1 at random but can select based on what ever criteria you desire.
justinhj 11y ago
I live near Vancouver in BC. We still have large mammal wildlife, grizzly bears, black bears, Cougars. They are killed by park rangers or police if they become comfortable in the human world. You can also pay to go on grizzly hunting trips further north in the province. We have just as far to go as we want Zimbabwe too. But just because it's the same here, and because there are worse things there, can't we just agree that culling these magnificent animals should be done by officials as the grim task it is, and not by rich for recreation? Lions that attack villagers do have to be killed sadly, but why not embrace Eco tourism instead of trophy hunting for the ones that are not a threat?
S_A_P 11y ago
The best way to turn me off of a cause is to see a bunch of people soapboxing on facebook/twitter. Regardless of whether or not I agree with Cecil the lion being hunted down, the internet mob is disgusting.
arafa 11y ago
I'll never forget our tour guide in Zimbabwe saying his last paycheck before dollarization was 4 quadrillion Zimbabwean dollars. For a tour guide. So yeah, they might have bigger problems than Cecil the Lion.
pistoriusp 11y ago
I've been trying for weeks to start an honest discussion on the Internet about a hunter's role in conservation. At almost every turn I get hit with the "he's a poacher" stick! Can we just forget about the dentist? He's not a poacher! Maybe he's just a bad person?! No one really knows. But he's not a poacher. /* If you want to see what a poacher does and if you don't want to sleep for a few days then just ask me for a video of a live Rhino, suffering, with half it's face chainsawed off for his horn... (Brings me half to tears to just describe the video!) */ He's not what's important here. People are loving the animals that they care about to death. They're so against someone killing them that they're hurting the hunting, and in turn, the conservation industry. One of the most beloved people on Earth, Nelson Mandela, hunted and described the benefits that hunting had on conversation: http://imgur.com/a/ZJ0QK http://imgur.com/a/ZJ0QK Nelson is cited for marketability, for the real numbers there are plenty of credible sources and institutions that'll provide the same information.
vonnik 11y ago
Most of Zimbabwe's problems are not America's fault, and quite frankly, there's not much we can do about them. But Cecil's corpse is our fault, because he was shot by an American dentist. People tend to care more when they feel implicated, and it's logical to care more when you can actually do something about it. It's easier to boycott the dentist than to hope for a coup that ousts Mugabe.
64bitbrain 11y ago
I grew up in small town in eastern part of India, where Tigers were rolling on the streets and wild elephants were more dangerous than any other animal. Just dont piss them off, that was told to anyone new in that area. My dad use to take me to elephant(trained off course) rides into the jungle(the real jungle) to watch tigers and all other wild animals. I started to enjoy it more and more. My uncle was a forest ranger and had a tiger cub, so I played with him every weekend or whenever I get a chance to visit him. One day I came to know a tiger was shot dead by "some guy" as kid I felt really bad, I was like "why kill a tiger for no reason?" I was more surprised when the local people were really sad about this. Like, they have develop some kind of affection to this animals, no matter how deadly they can be. An unspoken bond between the people and the wild animals. Off course the government was not going to investigate much about it, because of local corrupt officials. Officials were more concerned about food, jobs, education and medical facilities. Which took more highlight than the killing a tiger, which for majority of people in that locality was a big deal.
devy 11y ago
Sure, there may have been much worse things happened in Zimbabwe than a beloved wildlife Cecil, but the fact that this event raises awareness about wildlife conservation is a BIG DEAL! [1] [1]: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/cecil-supporters-donations/400436/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/cec... PS: I was wondering if Palmer's PR team paied for this NYT article.
mixmastamyk 11y ago
Though I don't care much about the subject in general, I'm already tired of this backlash against the backlash. :/ However yes, we can be angry about the Cecil incident. It went viral for whatever reason, other incidents didn't. That's the nature of social media, you'll have to get used to it. No, we don't have to "fix" Zimbabwe or the world before being angry at one needless death, thanks. The author's point about lions scaring villagers when he was young is interesting yet not a justification, these lions are now in a reserve and the species is now vulnerable, if not soon to be endangered. Of course behind the words there is always the lingering self-serving idea that people are so much more important than our cousins in the animal kingdom. Well, guess what at 7 billion vs. 25k lions, which population could use a little thinning?
pvaldes 11y ago
No problem, you will cry for lions in the future, probably. "Using the calculations of Hayward et al. (2007), biomass density of preferred lion prey in Gonarezhou national park was calculated... the protected area could support enough preys for between 115 and 357 lions. ... the 2014 census found 33 lions in the protected area. Lions where positive only in the 5% of the points analyzed in the census. For the Tuli Safari Area the scientific model predict a population of about 40 lions and the 2014 census found... zero lions Source: "Surveys of lions Panthera leo in protected areas in Zimbabwe yield disturbing results: what is driving the population collapse?" Groom et al. 2014. Models also predict that the park could support a population of Hyaena of 354 animals... 2014 census found between 400-490 hyaena in the national park instead. This is hardly a surprise because is the same ecological rule for the whole freaking planet earth: Mesocarnivore liberation. Same that leads to the american coyote, and the english fox and the jackals now expanding to the west and reconquering Europe. You are bassically destroying the big fauna in cascade. A really expensive mistake. > How many people in Zimbabwe can be fed for $25,000, the price of hunting a male lion? This will depend on how many money and goats they have still after figthing the strange new hyaenas plague. And don't forget the bovine tuberculosis also. Ok I have one idea, If we wipped the local lion pride we could kill also those 50 new hyaenas!. (some months later) end of the hyaena problem, hum, how this new 500 jackals appeared?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
theafrican 11y ago
The frankly appalling discussion going on over at the nyt's comments section with first world environmentalists saying the author and the rest of that third world people should just "move to the city" without even the slightness sign of empathy towards people who make less in a year than what many nyt readers make in a day ironically reminds me of the attitude many far-right US nationals have regarding immigration. Basically most of them simply ignore the realities of the immigration process and honestly believe that people can just walk to the nearest US embassy and request a greencard and that the reason there are so many illegals its simply because they wont do that. Of course even a glimpse at the US visa system shows that there is no such option, that many visas are just temporary and tied to employment or studies that will eventually end, and honestly the only real option left is to just marry a US citizen, an option which is already becoming more and more difficult. The far-right is unwilling to understand this and how if their grandfathers in the 20th century had been faced with these strict immigration rules they would been forced to return home and stay there when in reality many came here unannounced and uninvited, just as illegals do today. Back to the lion issue, the problem with this line of thinking that rejects the idea that opinions from outside the US hold any value nor should be considered at all is that it doesn't solves the problem. Hunting in Zimbabwe, a dirt-poor country with a collapsed economy, its actually the only way some people have to make a living. US environmentalists much like the far-right don't share that problem with the other side and thus can afford the luxury of disregarding their suffering and even ask the foreigners for further sacrifices so they don't have to admit they were dead wrong.

243 points by zabramow 11y ago

Anthropocentrism at its purest. Reminds me of someone on BBC talking about "shark infested waters of South Africa".

Translation: "you imperialist westerners are out of touch, soft, and basically, anti-Africa (a stop short of 'racist'). How can you love a dangerous creature more than all us poor Africans"? Because there are 7 billion of us on the planet and only 30k lions left. We have had it really good (including Zimbabwe in terms of population growth) for 150 years, yet we have decimated our kindred animals using excuses like "conservation" or "danger". This article takes an instinct that was relevant 300 years ago and shamelessly punts it into our modern age, circumstances having changed enormously, in order ultimately to push another agenda.

XorNot 11y ago
Still not really the issue though. People care plenty for Africans. But if he's got a new take on how we can deal with decades of government corruption without getting a whole lot more Africans killed in the process, everyone, everywhere, is all ears.

wehadfun 11y ago

Honestly Zimbabwe has so many problems a lion dying is not a big issue. Hell Zimbabwe children were being tied up and set on fire a few months ago in South Africa[0]. [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyX4aOd_2BY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyX4aOd_2BY

JonoBB 11y ago
And this is why South Africa will become another basket case, just like its neighbour Zimbabwe :(
flinty 11y ago
fk, that is sickening :(.
jasonlotito 11y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation But you're right, it's not a big issue. There are other issues, which is why the US does more than just have citizens post to Facebook about a lion. http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe
- wehadfun 11y ago
  Yea about that aid: http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/jul/15/aid-africa-west-looting-continent http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/jul/15/ai...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

jonknee 11y ago

... Well except that Zimbabwe is trying to extradite the dentist for poaching. The lion was in a national park that brings in significant tourism dollars for the state, they quite literally were crying for this lion.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago
> Well except that Zimbabwe is trying to extradite the dentist for poaching. FYI the author talked about this in the article as he also mentioned their president had a baby elephant slaughtered for his birthday. > The lion was in a national park that brings in significant tourism dollars for the state, they quite literally were crying for this lion. While I agree that it seems like the author is missing some perspective from the park / tourism side of things he did offer a different perspective I haven't read about. I'm sure someone from their parks service would have yet another perspective. Still, it's good to hear about these types of issues from other perspectives for I fear of drowning in an echo-chamber that is American news.
- chillingeffect 11y ago
  > their president had a baby elephant slaughtered for his birthday. This really highlights asymmetric power relations in the issue: It's easy to gang up online against a wealthy, white, male dentist. Mobbing Zimbabwe's president, on the other hand...

charlesray 11y ago

>Don’t tell us what to do with our animals when you allowed your own mountain lions to be hunted to near extinction in the eastern United States. Don’t bemoan the clear-cutting of our forests when you turned yours into concrete jungles. So don't learn from our mistakes, basically? This is among the most ignorant things I have ever read. Terrible article from a person with a terrible mentality.

badmadrad 11y ago
Its a different perspective from an actual African. Who are you to say he is more ignorant than you are? Ultimately, the human experience is about survival. And that experience will vary and form your perspective.
- charlesray 11y ago
  I'm not saying he's more or less ignorant than I am. I'm simply saying that he is clearly and objectively an ignorant person. One of the steps we took to stop lion hunting was to have airlines ban the transportation of lion caracasses. That's a pretty easy thing to do. Do you think there's anything similar we could to do to improve the human rights situation in Zimbabwe? Can Delta refuse to transport Mugabe? Will that help? It simply IS ignorance at the root of his childish complaints. It's ignorance to the fact that one problem - lions - is of a vastly smaller scale than another problem - human rights issues in Zimbawabe - and thus the solutions to said problem are far, far easier to apply. In short, we want to help where we actually CAN help. But decades of failed US intervention have proven one thing time and time again: our help never sticks until you start helping yourself.
DarkTree 11y ago
It's really just the other side of the coin. I'm sure the truth is somewhere grounded a little towards the middle.
giarc 11y ago
I think they are saying "Solve your own problems, don't meddle in ours."

chipgap98 11y ago

If people are hitting the paywall the gist of the article is that lions are dangerous animals. People living in rural village are terrorized by lions and it has a serious impact on their way of life. Zimbabweans have a lot of respect for wild animals but aren't opposed to them being hunted. America once again stirred up a social media frenzy when they don't understand the issue at all.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
I take issue with the thought of conservation only being necessary for cute, cuddly animals. There are significant benefits of maintaining biodiversity in the various biomes.
- primroot 11y ago
  I agree. Especially when those "cute" animals have long ceased to have any significant role in their ecosystem due to their reduced numbers. I think conservation efforts should primarily focus on the ecosystem not single species. In fact it is not uncommon for environmentalist organizations to follow this approach, to the apparent detriment of the ability to stir up any interest among the wider public. Biological corridors? Mangrove forests? Too many humans take this as faceless abstract technical entities, even when their face is more often than not also a human face.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    Completely agree with your entire comment.
- celticninja 11y ago
  You just need to look at wildlife re-introduction to see this is the case. Return wolves to an area (yellowstone) and Elk populations that were ruining new forest growth starts to come under control. The new growth encourages beavers to return to an ara, beavers improve wayerways, which improves fish stocks. Wolf killed elk also improve things for eagles, bears, coyotes and other scavengers.
11y ago

gadders 11y ago

Finally some sanity.

jasonlotito 11y ago

> We Zimbabweans are left shaking our heads, wondering why Americans care more about African animals than about African people. http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe

griffinmahon 11y ago
You could say though that USAID is not Americans, per se, but the American government caring about African people, and anyway it could also be raised that in relative terms not that much goes to foreign aid, and also that not all of it is employed solely for humanitarian reasons. Btw, I appreciated your Wiki link above.
- jasonlotito 11y ago
  > You could say though that USAID is not Americans, per se, but the American government caring about African people, I agree, and I thought of that before posting it, but the reality is, I assume I'm sending aid to Africa already. I imagine most American's assume that is the case as well. We may not know about USAID specifically, but we assume we are sending it. So, it's not something we need to get worked up over. Effectively, it's taken care of.
zerr 11y ago
Yes, but it's about sentiment in journalism and "facebook masses", and not only in America...
leothekim 11y ago
I duplicated your comment, making an opposite point. There's also http://www.pepfar.gov http://www.pepfar.gov, one of Bush's (43) positive legacies. Unfortunately, I'm fairly certain that the average American does not think or care much about USAID or PEPFAR.

caio1982 11y ago

It's a pity there is so much confusion between 1) how foreigners reacted to the incident, 2) the problem of endangered species and violated habitats and 3) the poor situation of the locals. It seems nearly impossible to have a rational conversation about a damn lion while these three things aren't considered separately first. Yeah, I've tried to read the article's comments, my bad...

ub 11y ago

I find all these articles that try to compare and measure sympathy and emotion as pointless. People are comparing the outpouring of grief for Cecil to apathy towards human killings and inhuman treatment of animals in the meat industry. A person can be severely depressed if they lose a dog, and another can show no emotion when they lose a parent. You can't compare human emotion because it's not always rational. In this specific case though, I would also argue given the declining numbers of lions, the anger is justified.

primroot 11y ago
I tend to think that human emotion was not rational by definition (and by not rational I mean uncorrelated not negatively correlated). Of course "not rational" is not synonymous of bad or superfluous.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

leothekim 11y ago

"We Zimbabweans are left shaking our heads, wondering why Americans care more about African animals than about African people." That's on point.

leothekim 11y ago
Also worth mentioning this comment, which I unwittingly duplicated: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10009832 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10009832
mhurron 11y ago
> That's on point. Aid provided to Zimbabwe is not reaching the people because of Zimbabwe's government, not because it's not being sent.
- leothekim 11y ago
  True, and someone commented this: http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe http://www.usaid.gov/zimbabwe There's also PEPFAR which is notable for how many lives it has saved for Africans with HIV. Still, I'm pretty sure that the average American neither knows nor cares about either program and wouldn't raise a finger if either went away. But they care a shitload about the lion.
  - mhurron 11y ago
    > But they care a shitload about the lion. If we're going to use 'Average American' as a measure, they don't give any more shits about lions, or any other animal, than the Zimbabweans do.
    - leothekim 11y ago
      Apparently they care enough s.t. a native Zimbabwean went out of his way to write an op-ed complaining about it, and the good people at the NY Times obliged themselves to publish it.
badmadrad 11y ago

lentil_soup 11y ago

It is way different having to kill a lion that is making life in your village miserable to having this foreigner come in and do it for "fun" disregarding the laws of your country. One thing doesn't excuse the other. Having said that, he is right on " ... don’t offer me condolences about Cecil unless you’re also willing to offer me condolences for villagers killed ..."

Zikes 11y ago
I don't think there are many people who are upset about Cecil's killing that would not also mourn someone killed by a lion. The author's insinuation that we don't care about something we were never given the opportunity to care about is the worst kind of moral fallacy, and is entirely unfair.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  To be truthful, we've laughed about idiots killed by lions, when those idiots ignored fences and signs in a zoo. So its entirely situational.
- lentil_soup 11y ago
  True, you are right. But I disagree on "we were never given the opportunity to care about", horrible things have happened in Africa in the last few months that haven't received the same kind of interest from the public. That of course doesn't mean not to be upset about the lion, that I agree would be a fallacy.

trhway 11y ago

>Don’t tell us what to do with our animals the animals aren't yours or anybody else's. They belong to that planet which we just happen to share. Human race, having achieved the ability to destroy the planet's eco-sphere, thus got a duty of steward of the eco-sphere which it has been carrying poorly so far. Anyway, killing big game this days is a serious mental sickness.

acjacobson 11y ago
Which is why it is a bit problematic that you can still legally hunt mountain lions in several states (bears & wolves too). I think part of his point is that it is a bit disingenuous for us to criticize this kind of hunting in Zimbabwe when it is allowed in the US.
DamnYuppie 11y ago
How is hunting a serious mental sickness? Lest you forget your ancestors were very capable hunters, else you would not be here.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Take any group of cub scouts to the park, they see a duck, they reach for a rock. Its built-in. We are hunters.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    That behavior not nearly as universal as you make it sound.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Wishful thinking? Give your own examples...
  - makmanalp 11y ago
    Or maybe, just maybe, that's the kind of stuff cub scouts are taught, or the kind of thing that they learn from their elders and role models?

uniformlyrandom 11y ago

That is some very basic trolling. Not sure why HN crowd is biting, or why this article is on HN at all.

musesum 11y ago

Sport hunting changes lion social behavior, as per: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320710003459 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320710... I don't have an Elsevier account, so only read the abstract, which states that lions are seeking denser cover. Some conjecture: Do Zimbabwe villagers live in denser cover? If so, maybe sport hunting increase the threat by forcing lions closer to villagers? That would add a bit of irony to the situation.

hiou 11y ago

So all people in Zimbabwe do not think exactly the same? And might even have differences of opinion? Mind blown... Not really sure how Cecil the Lion fits into HN, oh well.

mjfl 11y ago

It is amazing how everyone can jump on this wave of political bandwagon, including the government in Zimbabwe, without really acknowledging the irony that much more terrible things have happened in Zimbabwe in the past 20 years without nearly the same outcry. Massive hyperinflation, people starving to death, and we suddenly have tears in the West over "Cecile the lion". The corrupt government of Zimbabwe is quick to wipe away our tears and assure us that this will never happen again, all the while continuing to neglect their human citizens. I can agree that big game hunting is stupid and wasteful, but killing a lion simply isn't that big of a deal, not in the grand scheme of things, and not when we rely every day on the deaths of millions of cattle to provide us food. That's just cognitive dissonance. If anything, the doctor was paying a high price for a stupid hobby, which ultimately benefits the local people of Zimbabwe. How many people in Zimbabwe can be fed for $25,000, the price of hunting a male lion?

jjtheblunt 11y ago
It's not at all amazing: it is because Cecil's story is representative of just how flagrantly fucked up a situation exists, and Cecil's story is, of the countless such involving people and culture and animals, so very easy to tell.
vegabook 11y ago
The cognitive dissonance you cite disappears completely if we accept the uncomfortable elephant in the room: we value the remaining animals far more than we value human life. And isn't that normal when there are 7 billion of us and 30 000 of them?
- skylan_q 11y ago
  I'd say it isn't. How many is the right number of either of those?
  - vegabook 11y ago
    The right number is the one which nature will support, and sadly, that probably means we'll push out the wildlife entirely. My point was that there is a contradiction between a) our stated desire to protect remaining wildlife, and b) our failure to master our own instincts. Our strongest instinct is survival, closely followed by resource appropriation. Both are the enemy of wildlife, yet we love wildlife. To remove the contradiction we'd have to dominate our survival instinct and reduce our own population, with all the awful moral and ethical consequences (for humans) that that would entail.

chasing 11y ago

What's the author's point? That we should wantonly kill lions? Let's just eradicate 'em all? He should sound much happier, then. Because we're on our way: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/african-lions-face-extinction-by-2050-could-gain-endangered-species-act-protection/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/afr...

skylan_q 11y ago

People are coming to the defence of man-eating lions in a place where lions eat people. How are there 7 billion of us when we hate ourselves and each other so much?

dragonsh 11y ago

Humans are intelligent creatures and villagers killed are a result of encroaching the animals rightful land. There are no condolescence for those deaths caused by one's own mistake. Get out of the animals territory and fight for your survival with those other humans not with poor animals. There are only 3000 tigers left in the wild if a Bengal tiger kills a villager going inside their territory of sundar ban it's the fault of that human not tiger. Here at least American's are being right to care about 3000 tigers or lions instead of over 7 billion humans. This article shows the sick mentality of the people who thinks it's alright to encroach on other animals turf since it's easier. They are cowards not able to fight for survival with their own fellow human. There are no surrounding context in it. It's just talking about villagers encroaching lions rightful forest and pushing them to extinction.

Lawtonfogle 11y ago
>Here at least American's are being right to care about 3000 tigers or lions instead of over 7 billion humans. Assuming the sale of 1 of those 7 billion could save N of those 3000, how big would N be before you support it? If need be, you don't need to pick the 1 at random but can select based on what ever criteria you desire.

justinhj 11y ago

I live near Vancouver in BC. We still have large mammal wildlife, grizzly bears, black bears, Cougars. They are killed by park rangers or police if they become comfortable in the human world. You can also pay to go on grizzly hunting trips further north in the province. We have just as far to go as we want Zimbabwe too. But just because it's the same here, and because there are worse things there, can't we just agree that culling these magnificent animals should be done by officials as the grim task it is, and not by rich for recreation? Lions that attack villagers do have to be killed sadly, but why not embrace Eco tourism instead of trophy hunting for the ones that are not a threat?

S_A_P 11y ago

The best way to turn me off of a cause is to see a bunch of people soapboxing on facebook/twitter. Regardless of whether or not I agree with Cecil the lion being hunted down, the internet mob is disgusting.

arafa 11y ago

I'll never forget our tour guide in Zimbabwe saying his last paycheck before dollarization was 4 quadrillion Zimbabwean dollars. For a tour guide. So yeah, they might have bigger problems than Cecil the Lion.

pistoriusp 11y ago

I've been trying for weeks to start an honest discussion on the Internet about a hunter's role in conservation. At almost every turn I get hit with the "he's a poacher" stick! Can we just forget about the dentist? He's not a poacher! Maybe he's just a bad person?! No one really knows. But he's not a poacher. /* If you want to see what a poacher does and if you don't want to sleep for a few days then just ask me for a video of a live Rhino, suffering, with half it's face chainsawed off for his horn... (Brings me half to tears to just describe the video!) */ He's not what's important here. People are loving the animals that they care about to death. They're so against someone killing them that they're hurting the hunting, and in turn, the conservation industry. One of the most beloved people on Earth, Nelson Mandela, hunted and described the benefits that hunting had on conversation: http://imgur.com/a/ZJ0QK http://imgur.com/a/ZJ0QK Nelson is cited for marketability, for the real numbers there are plenty of credible sources and institutions that'll provide the same information.

vonnik 11y ago

Most of Zimbabwe's problems are not America's fault, and quite frankly, there's not much we can do about them. But Cecil's corpse is our fault, because he was shot by an American dentist. People tend to care more when they feel implicated, and it's logical to care more when you can actually do something about it. It's easier to boycott the dentist than to hope for a coup that ousts Mugabe.

64bitbrain 11y ago

I grew up in small town in eastern part of India, where Tigers were rolling on the streets and wild elephants were more dangerous than any other animal. Just dont piss them off, that was told to anyone new in that area. My dad use to take me to elephant(trained off course) rides into the jungle(the real jungle) to watch tigers and all other wild animals. I started to enjoy it more and more. My uncle was a forest ranger and had a tiger cub, so I played with him every weekend or whenever I get a chance to visit him. One day I came to know a tiger was shot dead by "some guy" as kid I felt really bad, I was like "why kill a tiger for no reason?" I was more surprised when the local people were really sad about this. Like, they have develop some kind of affection to this animals, no matter how deadly they can be. An unspoken bond between the people and the wild animals. Off course the government was not going to investigate much about it, because of local corrupt officials. Officials were more concerned about food, jobs, education and medical facilities. Which took more highlight than the killing a tiger, which for majority of people in that locality was a big deal.

devy 11y ago

Sure, there may have been much worse things happened in Zimbabwe than a beloved wildlife Cecil, but the fact that this event raises awareness about wildlife conservation is a BIG DEAL! [1] [1]: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/cecil-supporters-donations/400436/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/cec... PS: I was wondering if Palmer's PR team paied for this NYT article.

mixmastamyk 11y ago

Though I don't care much about the subject in general, I'm already tired of this backlash against the backlash. :/ However yes, we can be angry about the Cecil incident. It went viral for whatever reason, other incidents didn't. That's the nature of social media, you'll have to get used to it. No, we don't have to "fix" Zimbabwe or the world before being angry at one needless death, thanks. The author's point about lions scaring villagers when he was young is interesting yet not a justification, these lions are now in a reserve and the species is now vulnerable, if not soon to be endangered. Of course behind the words there is always the lingering self-serving idea that people are so much more important than our cousins in the animal kingdom. Well, guess what at 7 billion vs. 25k lions, which population could use a little thinning?

pvaldes 11y ago

No problem, you will cry for lions in the future, probably. "Using the calculations of Hayward et al. (2007), biomass density of preferred lion prey in Gonarezhou national park was calculated... the protected area could support enough preys for between 115 and 357 lions. ... the 2014 census found 33 lions in the protected area. Lions where positive only in the 5% of the points analyzed in the census. For the Tuli Safari Area the scientific model predict a population of about 40 lions and the 2014 census found... zero lions Source: "Surveys of lions Panthera leo in protected areas in Zimbabwe yield disturbing results: what is driving the population collapse?" Groom et al. 2014. Models also predict that the park could support a population of Hyaena of 354 animals... 2014 census found between 400-490 hyaena in the national park instead. This is hardly a surprise because is the same ecological rule for the whole freaking planet earth: Mesocarnivore liberation. Same that leads to the american coyote, and the english fox and the jackals now expanding to the west and reconquering Europe. You are bassically destroying the big fauna in cascade. A really expensive mistake. > How many people in Zimbabwe can be fed for $25,000, the price of hunting a male lion? This will depend on how many money and goats they have still after figthing the strange new hyaenas plague. And don't forget the bovine tuberculosis also. Ok I have one idea, If we wipped the local lion pride we could kill also those 50 new hyaenas!. (some months later) end of the hyaena problem, hum, how this new 500 jackals appeared?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

theafrican 11y ago

The frankly appalling discussion going on over at the nyt's comments section with first world environmentalists saying the author and the rest of that third world people should just "move to the city" without even the slightness sign of empathy towards people who make less in a year than what many nyt readers make in a day ironically reminds me of the attitude many far-right US nationals have regarding immigration. Basically most of them simply ignore the realities of the immigration process and honestly believe that people can just walk to the nearest US embassy and request a greencard and that the reason there are so many illegals its simply because they wont do that. Of course even a glimpse at the US visa system shows that there is no such option, that many visas are just temporary and tied to employment or studies that will eventually end, and honestly the only real option left is to just marry a US citizen, an option which is already becoming more and more difficult. The far-right is unwilling to understand this and how if their grandfathers in the 20th century had been faced with these strict immigration rules they would been forced to return home and stay there when in reality many came here unannounced and uninvited, just as illegals do today. Back to the lion issue, the problem with this line of thinking that rejects the idea that opinions from outside the US hold any value nor should be considered at all is that it doesn't solves the problem. Hunting in Zimbabwe, a dirt-poor country with a collapsed economy, its actually the only way some people have to make a living. US environmentalists much like the far-right don't share that problem with the other side and thus can afford the luxury of disregarding their suffering and even ask the foreigners for further sacrifices so they don't have to admit they were dead wrong.