Trophy Hunters?

The debate about trophy hunters continues (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/14/millions-of-animal-trophies-exported-across-borders-figures-show). It certainly is big business, as some people can (and will) pay a lot of money to shoot impressive species or simply to acquire a token of apparently having done so. Some people have argued that a regulated trophy trade can have conservation benefits by a) making 'local' people more appreciative of the financial benefits of tolerating the presence of particular animals; b) the money for the permits being used to pay for fences, rangers and other essentials needed for protected parks and c) removal of old or problematic animals from areas. Personally, I think that tolerating trophies (particularly of endangered species) sends out the wrong messages. Even well-regulated shooting encourages 'chancers' to circumvent the regulations (especially when financial rewards can be great). It can also be difficult (as in the case of ivory) to establish whether the material was taken legally or illegally. Endangered animals don't need it.