<snip>tagsoup wrote: Thu Dec 26, 2019 5:19 pm I missed the part where anyone said his hunt was "illegal", couldn't find it. It sounded not much different than how many hunts are conducted in foreign countries. A license is only issued for a successful hunt. They are controlling for the number and sex of species taken and for very specific bachelor groups. They might even have had a specific animal in mind. A license is needed for all of the permits to ship the hide and horns back to the US. The auction was from the non political side of the NRA and might well of cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Thank you, Tagsoup. I figured there was more to this but didn't feel like digging into it. That family does plenty to be p!$$ed off with them without needing to resort to yellow journalism. It's a bit like how anti-hunting groups paint hunting fees as "rich people bribing the government". Or anti-gun folk declaring of a firearm in a jurisdiction that doesn't require registration, "He had an unregistered firearm!"The pro publica article was professionally reported, but it sounded as if they were continually fishing for negative things to say or an instance where Trump had done something wrong, and they found nothing. In tone Pro Publica set back the conservation of Argali if by nothing else than by framing it as something bad that was done. They had the opportunity to promote the conservation of this and other threatened species and they wiffed.
To address the original point about people being evil enough to release hogs for hunting, you don't need to picture "rich man's sport". Just picture any other PWT cooking meth or dumping their sludge into groundwater to save a buck because it's the quickest buck they can make without regard to their neighbors or community.