Deseret News | Reader comments: BYU rhino exhibit plan triggers roars

Reader comments
BYU rhino exhibit plan triggers roars

love animals | 7:02 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

do we know that the meat on this animal was NOT used, or donated to locals for consumption. If so, that would make the humae society's argument a moot point. I would hope that the meat was salvaged. While I do not oppose hunting, I do believe an animal shouldn't be harvested just for a trophy.

BYU Grad | 7:09 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Only 11K and now they are fine to kill and put on display?? I agree, we should not be killing it for display, but finacially supporting relocation and repopulation of the Southern White Rhino and other species of animals where numbers are low.

Baloney | 8:25 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

There's an article in National Geographic (august issue) that credits hunting as a very humane way of controlling animals that need to be controlled within their environment. The article about hunting
Rhino's in Africa clearly is a way of controlling animals that have over populated their region. Humane Society, Get out of your perfect world and realize that man can help control over populations of animals in a humane way. 2 out of the 3 hunters that hunted the Rhions were either gored or killed. The Rhinos didn't treat the people humanely.

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 9:00 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Why doesn't the humane society use their money to translocate the rhinos instead of using it to kill dogs and cats if they are so concerned?

Bottom line | 9:47 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

If the Rhino was obtained legally and the local population found it was necessary to thin the herd, so to speak, then so be it. There was nothing un-ethical done here or illegal. If that particular Rhino was horribly endangered, a tag would never have been issued. So get over it, people! I can't wait to see the beast and take my kids to view firsthand the size and girth of such a magnificent animal.
I'm not a hunter and I've never killed an animal, but I'll fight for every hunter's right to legally kill any animal that the government allows.

Anonymous | 10:04 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Really it's kinda funny to be making a stink at this point. The amimal is already dead. now is the time to be supporting the display so that the animal did not die in vain.

Nobody | 10:04 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

"The rhinos didn't treat the people humanely" - are you aware of how nonsensical that statement really is? Any creature facing death or harm to itself or its family will defend itself. Do you expect pacifist wild animals that lie down to let you slaughter them for your "educational" exhibit in some museum? If hunters were coming for your children, or even your pet dog, would you defend them with all the force available to you? Yes. The time is long past when we can think of the animals of the world as just meat on legs. These are thoughtful intelligent creatures that form family bonds, love their young, and want to live as much as any human does, and they want their social network members [offspring, parents] to live just as much as any human wants their loved ones to live. Wake up and see reality people - we are not the only species worthy of life and respect - I'm not sure we even are worthy of respect. What other creature would kill another kind just for a trophy, a display piece? None.

Hunting Saved the Rhino | 10:05 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

BYU Grad, the only reason there are any rhinos left in Africa is because there were wealthy white Bwanas willing to pay thousands of dollars to hunt them. The money has supported relocation and conservation efforts for all wildlife.

In addition, because much of the local population financially benefits from trophy hunting, they have an incentive to protect the wildlife.

Which is why in Southern Africa most big-game species are thriving, while in East Africa -- where the governments largely outlawed hunting -- most are in decline. The wildlife has no financial value to the local populations and thus they are treated as worthless pests.

black rhino | 10:13 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Good job to BYU for covering all of their bases when it comes to displaying this white rhino. I think it will be very educational and that there will be so much to learn from it. I know Larry St. Claire, he was my bishop when I attended BYU and he is a great man and very passionate about his work. The Humane Society made a mistake when they thought that he would just back down from this. Don't let these PC bullies get away with these scare tactics, Larry!

Dutchman | 10:43 a.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Joe Glenn called for a guaranteed win and lost. BYU displays a trophy hunted rhino. Do you think Kyle Whittinham can use this as motivation for his players to beat BYU on Saturday? Afterall, it is the killing of an innocent animal. BYU should be above such things.

Klimber510 | 12:06 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Even if the Humane Society proposed something that made sense, it would be difficult for me to get on board with them because of the extreme positions they take. Like environmentalists, it's all or nothing with them.

iamsad | 12:06 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

kill, kill, kill the animals, ain't it fun.

PC Crowd | 12:16 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Good for BYU! If you have never been to the Monte L Bean museum you are missing a real treat. Their display is a grandiose and panoramic view of the miracle of creation. It is hard to leave unimpressed...

How sad to see an organization like the Humane Society be so petty. They could actually do some good, but they often squander their moral capital on this type of drivel and wander off to irrelevance.

Chill | 1:29 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

What is the big deal?
I like the Monte L Beam museum!

Jabes | 3:11 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

Why is the display only lasting for 2 months -- until Jan 31? If it were to be part of a permanent exhibit, it would make more sense that they went to the trouble and expense to obtain a specimen, but for two months? That seems very wasteful -- both wasting money and wasting the animal's life.

Rich | 4:23 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

I support hunting when it is done ethically, legally and safely and under a management plan overseen by competent biologists. Like many people I initially opposed hunting if the animal's meat was not to be used, but I've since modified my position. When there is an overpopulation of animals, it is our duty as stewards of the land to see that the population is trimmed in order to protect the animal population as a whole as well as to protect the environment. And if there is a surplus that can be harvested without harming the population as a whole or the environment, then I'm also OK with hunting that surplus. And that's true even if the meat is inedible or not very palatable, which is the case with certain animals. In Canada, for example, black bears taken in the spring often make poor table fare, so the hunters often donate them to owners of sled dogs, which thrive on bruin meat. Even if they left the meat in the field, nature would use it, and the nutrients would return to the earth.

Steve | 5:19 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

First off let me say that I'm a BYU grad and I've done quite a bit of hunting in my day, but I completely disagree with BYU decision to take a white rhino for the Monte L. Bean museum. I also believe that the hunting/conservation efforts that have worked well in the U.S. with elk, deer and sheep etc. (to which I contribute) don't translate well to a species like the white rhino which only has 11,000 individuals. Particularly, because the primary threat to this animal is poaching and corrupt government oversight. White rhinos simply don't need traditional population management through hunting and BYU shouldn't be in the business of buying hunting license fees. I am disappointed that BYU didn't go about obtaining a rhino hide through other means, (for example purchasing Rhino that died naturally). According to a SL Trib article, this decision was apparently made because BYU didn't want to spend the money to buy a rhino hide on the market. Finally, Mr. St. Clair's justification that "it is legal" doesn't mean it was a good decision. I for one will withhold my yearly donations to BYU to voice my displeasure.

wills hill | 9:00 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

lets see. There are three billion of us and ten thousand of them. Doesn't sound like a lot of them to me. That's like, oh, Brigham City, versus the whole world. Us three billion get to manage those ten thousand? Oh right. For hunters. Cause capitalism is so wise. It does appear to be true. If it weren't for hunters everything would be dead because they love to kill endangered species so much that they give big money to save them. Ain't life strange. Does a population of ten thousand have any meaningful difference from none? Just enough to kill a few?

Re: Rich | 11:19 p.m. Nov. 20, 2007

I agree with you that a management plan overseen by biologists is necessary for good game management, but this is entirely different than managing the 60,000 elk in Utah. Furthermore, our record as "stewards of the land" isn't very good, particularly in Africa. I don't know about you, but 11,000 doesn't sound like a surplus that needs to be trimmed in order to protect the animal population or the environment. The fact that other parks are seeking rhinos for relocation suggests the land can support a larger population. I think this has a lot more to do with money than proper game management.

Yvonne | 3:52 a.m. Nov. 21, 2007

I agree with hunting in the main, to control the number of pests, to control excess numbers of population and for food. I consider it extremely unethical for BYU to hire a hunter to kill a member of an endangered species simply as an exhibit. Would not the visual aspects of a White Rhino have been just as apparent on a cycling movie film of them in a natural setting? I am LDS and am ashamed of the behaviour of the management of our flagship educational establishment. Poor Pres Brigham Young, this acton is in direct oposition to everything he taught. No doubt he is regretting having given his name to such an unworthy establishment.

Anonymous | 3:48 p.m. Dec. 9, 2007

The Bean Museum didn't pay for the rhino to be hunted. Nor did they ask the hunter to go get it for them. He payed the $40K himself to get the permit and asked that BYU would take the hide and use it in a display at the museum. The meat, organs, etc. were kept in South Africa for the use of the natives there. You critical people should find out the facts before you jump to conclusions and find fault in others.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.