To me a safari, today, is not hunting. I’d think if hunting was a part of it then you’d say, “hunting safari.” I do not know if there are any standards to this though.
And, while most safaris are just to view the wildlife there is still a robust hunting business there too. It may be smaller but costs more and is a lucrative source of income for those countries. It should not be ignored as too small to consider.
I have a photo of this very thing. Makes me laugh every time I look at it. His trunk was sticking out to give us a sniff. We got mock charged once after the driver got too close. A young bull trying out his courage.
Yep. Eco tours are needed. and yeah, most people want a little danger on a safari otherwise you’d just go to a zoo.
Yep, that today is either a photo or eco safari. They still do hunting safaris- which can be fine if they are shooting excess animals and the meat is being used by the natives.
What about the buffalo herds in America 200 years ago? We “culled” them till they disappeared, and it’s probably a good thing. No more massive herds demolishing everything for miles; just small groups of a dozen or two, located where they don’t bother humans.
No, but it’s pretty much synonymous with it, much like tsunami is pretty tied to Asia. If someone says ‘safari’, I’m pretty sure nobody thinks of Alabama.
The company we used in Botswana was called “Wilderness Safaris”, so yeah.
Oh, certainly. I completely agree - that’s why I noted that being poor is one of the factors that makes life dangerous. And of course, being poor in a remote Indonesian village is likely to be more dangerous (or rather, more life-span limiting, statistically speaking) than being poor in most American locations.