It’s not as if he shot the Elephant Man

By on March 31st, 2011 In Hype!

This may surprise you, but pro-gun control, anti-war activist, peace loving hippie man Len Gutman does not think Bob Parsons did anything wrong when he shot an elephant in Zimbabwe the other day. I would never do it, but not only is it perfectly legal it’s an important part of the herd management program in Zimbabwe. And guess what? That elephant will feed a whole village that otherwise would not get much protein. Africa’s elephants are not endangered; in fact, many areas are overpopulated. If elephants are not hunted to keep their populations in line they will destroy the forests that provide food and shelter for other wildlife.

I have never hunted, but I did handle public relations for the International Sportsmen’s Expo for a few years and I learned a lot about hunting. For example, elephant hunting in African countries like Zimbabwe is strictly regulated and part of wildlife management programs that are vital to the protection of both humans and animals. There are quotas and, in fact, elephant populations are growing in Africa. Additionally, the costs associated to go on these elephant hunts are enormous so Mr. Parsons likely paid tens of thousands of dollars for the right to go on the hunt — money that has become a critical component to the economies of these countries. And, as I mentioned above, most of the elephants become food for an entire village once they are killed. It may not be your taste, but hey, some folks consider cow meat to be disgusting. To each his own.

Why do so many people think it’s wrong to hunt one animal but not another? We eat salmon but would never eat dolphin — too cute huh? Well, surprise surprise…some cultures do eat dolphin. And monkeys. And insects. Hey, I don’t eat meat beyond a little seafood here and there, but that’s my choice. I don’t begrudge you your hamburger.

Parsons does indeed have an image to uphold and hunting an elephant is not out of character. I’d have more sympathy for you if you boycotted Go Daddy because of its sexist advertising campaigns. You shouldn’t be surprised Parsons shot an elephant — you should be surprised he didn’t shoot one sooner.

If you’re not convinced on the merits of hunting, check out the Politically Incorrect Guide to Hunting by Frank Miniter. You’ll learn a few things, like:

  • Hunters do more for conservation than environmentalists
  • Professional hunters keep our airport runways safe
  • Hunters have saved deer, elk, bear and waterfowl from extinction
  • Hunters are major suppliers of meat to feed the homeless

Hunting may not be your cup of tea — it ain’t mine — but it’s part of who we are as a species.

Comments

Ryan Narramore Says:
March 31st, 2011 at 8:09 pm

I’m not sure Bob should be criticized for it, but I don’t think people are doing anything wrong by dropping Go Daddy for their website needs. If it goes against your values, don’t support the company. But don’t think for a second that it’s going to impact the company in the slightest – Go Daddy is bigger than its next eight competitors combined. As for me, this week was one I was relieved to not be working in Go Daddy’s PR department anymore!

sally clasen Says:
March 31st, 2011 at 8:30 pm

I interviewed Bob Parsons a few years ago. He doesn’t give an elephant’s tusk about what PETA or anyone else thinks about his behavior or company. And, I agree Len, some of the same people up in “arms” (yeah, I said that) over the killing probably wear leather shoes and have no problem eating meat of a different coat. I’m going to go listen to some Ted Nugent!

Israel Travel Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 2:36 am

“tens of thousands of dollars” – to kill an elephant that will sustain the villagers only for a week.

LOGIC is running out, I’m afraid.

Charlotte Shaff Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 6:12 am

I loved this post, Len. I agree with everything you said. And, I love Sally’s comment too “..some of the same people up in “arms” (yeah, I said that) over the killing probably wear leather shoes and have no problem eating meat of a different coat. I’m going to go listen to some Ted Nugent!”

Wandering Justin Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 10:34 am

Len, your bullet points are not facts: They are one-sided talking points. The first of them is particularly grating. Guess what? People who act to benefit the environment are environmentalists – yes, even hunters. How did the person who dredged up that “fact” decide what makes a person an environmentalist? Wears Birkenstocks? Likes tofu? Doesn’t wash?

Hunting definitely has merits. You just did a poor job of proving it.

Len Gutman Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 10:42 am

I beg to differ Justin. I got those facts directly from a book…I didn’t make them up. I am definitely an environmentalist — I am a member of NRDC and use my vote and voice to fight for the environment. I think Mr. Miniter’s point is that most hunters by the nature of the act of hunting are literally taking part in things like herd management, wetland protection and such. I have a whole book of facts if you’d like…

Wandering Justin Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 11:34 am

Let’s examine one of the “facts,” Len:

1. Hunters are a major supplier of meat to the homeless.

Great. How many hunters supply meat to the homeless? What percentage of the hunting population is that? How many pounds of meat do hunters supply? What percentage of the homeless population’s caloric intake does that constitute? How does that compare to all the canned food drives and other donations? All this leads to answering the question of whether hunters’ meat contributions really that “major”?

This, Len, is the difference between meaningful facts and talking points – even those that managed to get printed in ink.

Wandering Justin Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 1:49 pm

And sorry for making one of those sentences really unintelligible!

I forgot to mention earlier – you are right on the general premise (GoDaddy). And I agree with Ryan that this would’ve been a rough week for a GoDaddy publicist!

PBurns Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 2:54 pm

Here’s the scoop on elephants and population overshoot from someone who is a demographer, who was born in Zimbabwe, who used to work for National Audubon, and who is a hook-and-bullet conservationist.

Real science at the links, good pictures, and an interesting history too >> http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/03/peter-beard-on-elephant-and-human-over.html

Jim Veihdeffer Says:
April 1st, 2011 at 9:01 pm

I have to go with Wandering on one point: Len’s bullet point on “hunters vs environmentalists” makes a false dichotomy, thus it is not so much a fact as a polemical talking point. Where Len got the item is not important–whether he cooked it up himself (yes, i said cooked) or got it “directly from a book” (as though that might make it less manipulative).

As with other commenters, Len, I think this is an excellent posting. I just think you fell into the trap of mistaking a bit of rhetorical sleight of hand for a real argument.

Allison Says:
April 3rd, 2011 at 11:41 pm

I’m really glad that this side of the story has been brough to light — and by someone who isn’t necessarily on Bob’s side! Too often do people take something for face value and never look into why something happened or what it may be good for.

Seriously Len? Says:
April 4th, 2011 at 5:18 pm

Chapter 1 of Len’s suggested reading, “Hunting: When Killing is Right,” would undoubtedly captivate the interest of any sane person.

And of course, any parent who agrees with Chapter 13, “Hunting Is Good For Kids,” is certainly an influence I want my kids around…

“Hunting is not a sport. In a sport, both sides should know they’re in the game.” –Paul Rodriguez

Len Says:
April 5th, 2011 at 11:13 am

Dear Seriously Len,

hard to take you seriously when you’re hiding behind an alias. Seriously? You can’t be critical of me with your real name? Sorry you disagree…I don’t hunt nor would I…but human beings have been hunting since the beginning of time. My point is still that Mr. parsons did nothing wrong. I’ll stick by that…openly.

Len

Elizabeth Hillestad Says:
April 5th, 2011 at 1:54 pm

I doubt this is tough for Go Daddy publicist at all… I was their VP of Comm several years ago. The PR message is the same as Bob says on his blog, and he doesn’t care what anybody has to say about it. He thanks supporters and tells detractors to suck wind. It’s all about the buzz.

So is all PR good PR? Has this really turned out to be bad PR? I bet net sales actually increase as long as the buzz continues.

Add your Comment


Want Your Picture Icon? Go to gravatar.com and set a picture up to your email address for free. It also works on thousands of other websites, too!