Costa Rica passes law banning hunting as a sport
Source: Reuters
Costa Rica passes law banning hunting as a sport
Reuters
11:43 p.m. EST, December 10, 2012
SAN JOSE (Reuters) - Costa Rica on Monday became the first Latin American country to ban hunting as a sport, following an unanimous and final vote from Congress.
Lawmakers had provisionally approved a reform to its Wildlife Conservation law back in October. With a population of 4.5 million people, Costa Rica is one of the world's most biodiverse nations.
The Central American country is already known for its environmental mindset, with some 25 percent of its land protected as national parks or reserves.
Under the new law, those caught hunting can face up to four months in prison or fines of up to $3,000.
Smaller penalties for people who steal wild animals or keep them as pets were also included in the reform. Jaguars, pumas and sea turtles are among Costa Rica's most treasured species.
Read more: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/nationworld/sns-rt-us-costarica-huntingbre8ba04p-20121210,0,1360063.story
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Paulie
(8,462 posts)Fishing considered hunting? Hunting for wild mushrooms? It mentions jaguars, pumas, parrots and sea turtles, are those the only ones protected? Guess one actual paragraph explaining would have been too hard.
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)And fishing is not hunting. You do not go "hunting fish" or "hunting mushrooms".
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_hunting
The article doesn't quote the law so it's a low information article. Which is why I asked.
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)gills in relief.
I don't need Wikipedia to draw the conclusion that the article refers to hunting ANIMALS as sport.
Duppers
(28,118 posts)Last edited Wed Dec 12, 2012, 04:09 AM - Edit history (2)
Are you really such a severe literalist or just a jerk mocking this humanitarian gesture of the Costa Rica govt.?
edited for a missed autocorrect spelling.
Paulie
(8,462 posts)But fine call me a jerk for asking a question.
The article didn't quote the law. So I'm a literalist for something unknown.
Way to represent DU, bravo. Hope your knee is ok.
pitbullgirl1965
(564 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,444 posts)Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
devilgrrl This message was self-deleted by its author.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)Googling turns up several articles about this but most are copy-pastes of each other.
But what it appears that this law is targeting is "sport" hunting, or shooting animals just for the sake of shooting them or getting a "trophy".
I fully support this.
I fully support hunting, but on the condition that you eat what you shoot, as my father taught me. There is nothing wrong for hunting for food. If you eat meat, hunting is probably the most humane way to go about it. It is light-years ahead in terms of cruelty to the animals when compared to processed meat. It is also more ecologically friendly. There are no antibiotics or other drugs being intentionally injected into the animals that you hunt for food.
But I am against "sport" or "trophy" hunting where the idea is to just kill for the thrill of killing. Even these "safari hunts" where the hunters kill "big game" and then donate the meat to local tribes I find abhorrent. Yes, it's great that people are getting the meat from the hunt so that at least the animal is not going to waste, but for the several-to-tens of thousands of dollars you spent on your trophy hunt you could have fed the tribe for a year or sent them to school. I am not assuaged that there is some slight benefit to someone killing for fun.
samsingh
(17,595 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)randomtagger
(125 posts)This has gone way too far.
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)obamanut2012
(26,068 posts)People who hunt for food only, and not as sport, are a different category.
But, I don't think the poster is wrong. A civilized society is against blood sports.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)RebelOne
(30,947 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)RebelOne
(30,947 posts)We have Costa Rica beat by quite a few thousand -- 12,522 to be exact.