More handpicked essays just for you.
Persuasive arguments for trophy hunting
Does hunting help or hurt the environment
Does hunting help or hurt the environment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Anti-hunters are opposed to the explicit acts of hunters in Africa because of the environmental degradation it can lead to. What I want to be of focus, though, is that controversy over the act of hunting is not solely in line with hunting endangered African mammals. The results of all kinds of hunts and the drives hunters have to pursue these hunts differ because of the uniqueness of the goods the hunters seek in their adventures. What non-hunters and anti-hunters easily overlook is the anthropocentric values that the hunter seeks to fulfill and achieve, and how it expresses an interaction with nature.
I first want to describe the problems people have against African hunts that result in the hunters’ identity of a trophy hunter. Then, I will uncover the mysteries on why it is hunters conduct hunts, such as in Africa, on an ethical basis by applying an explanation for their dominionistic values. Finally, by understanding the diverse angles of a hunt that reveal access to the goods that drive the hunter, the reader should come to a conclusion that there is no capacity to depict different kinds of hunters. There is no proper concept of trophy hunting, sport hunting, subsistence hunting.
Hunters across the world are in range of an opportunity to hunt a trophy animal.
…show more content…
What characterizes a sport hunter in comparison to a subsistent hunter? Brian Luke writes about an analysis of what is called “The Sportsmen’s Code” that indicates the primary rules that sport hunters have to follow. The given rules are “Safety first, obey the law, give fair chase, harvest the game, aim for quick kills and retrieve the wounded”. It seems fair to say that any hunter can and will abide by these rules, and not just sport hunters. Although rules such as “aim for quick kills” may not be instructed by the Department of Natural Resources (which everyone MUST abide by), most hunters will follow this ethic to participate in the most successful
Hunting for sport is legal, and should remain that way. Many arguments against hunting for sport claim it is a “violent form of recreation” and “we have no right to take an animals life” for example, an opposing viewpoints article “Sport Hunting is an Unnecessary Form of Cruelty to Animals” says just that. HoweverI argue that we are part of this planet, as well as it’s ecosystem. We are (in ways) predators. An article on sport hunting, “Hunting for Sport” compares “hunters and the hunted” to a mountain lion and a deer. Is the lion at fault for hunting the deer? No. The mountain lion’s duty is to play the role as predator as well as keeping it’s prey’s population away from its ecosystems capacity. The ecosystem can no longer always support and control all animals populations.
For many people, hunting is just a sport, but for some it is a way of life. In Rick Bass’s “Why I Hunt” he explains how he got to where he lives now and what he thinks of the sport of hunting. There are many things in the essay that I could not agree more with, and others that I strongly disagree. Overall this essay provides a clear depiction of what goes through the mind of a hunter in the battle of wits between them and the animal.
In his article The Modern Hunter-Gatherer, Michael Pollan recounts the events that took place during his first hunting trip. Both during and after the hunt, Pollan struggles with an array of emotions that he conveys directly with his audience. From this struggle, a moral complication is formed regarding the direct relationship of death between humans and animals. By not giving a direct answer regarding the question he introduces of whether animals and humans experience death in the same way, Pollan leaves his text open to interpretation which ultimately forces his audience to view hunting through a more challenging, introspective lens.
Most sources spoke about the reason for trophy hunting is mostly towards conservation. In the article, Sustainable use and incentive-driven conservation: realigning human and conservation interests, by Nigel Leader-Williams and Jon M. Hutton, stated, “As a result, successful conservation is forced to rely heavily on the incentives generated by use and, for a whole raft of reasons often including a lack of accessibility, infrastructure and charismatic species, by extractive use in particular (Leader-Williams, 2000).” But what you don’t notice is that killing endangered species to “conserve” is not the only way to conserve. According to the article, Hunting – the murderous business, “Wildlife management, population control and wildlife conservation are euphemisms for killing – hunting, trapping and fishing for fun. A percentage of the wild animal population is specifically mandated to be killed. Hunters want us to believe that killing animals equals population control equals conservation, when in fact hunting causes overpopulation of deer, the hunters’ preferred victim species, destroys animal families, and leads to ecological disruption as well as skewed population dynamics.” This
The drive to colonize the continent of Africa in the 19th centuries brought the European imperial powers against difficulties which had never been encountered before. One such difficulty is that of the local wildlife in Africa, such as lions or other big game animals. In The Man-Eaters of Tsavo, by Colonel John Patterson, a railway bridge project in East Africa is terrorized by a pair of man-eating lions. This completely true story shows the great difficulty in colonizing Africa by demonstrating the somewhat harsh environment of Africa.
Since the European colonization of eastern Africa, big game hunting, also know as "trophy hunting", has been a very controversial topic. During the early days of trophy hunting, dwindling numbers of some of the world’s most unique and prized wildlife was not a problem like it is today. When a trophy hunting dentist from Minnesota paid $55,000 to kill a prized African lion, he unintentionally reignited the heated debate concerning big game hunting. Wildlife conservationists and hunters debate the impact of hunting on the economy and the environment. Legal hunting can be controlled without government intervention, and the expensive sport of trophy hunting could generate a large sum of money to support conservation efforts.
Peterson wrote this book to illustrate and inform others of how humans were killing and eating apes such as gorillas, chimpanzees, and bonobos for food in Central Africa. He further tries to understand what was happening in Central Africa by interviewing ape hunters. These interviews helped him realize that hunting was not about hunger, but a choice. Hunters working with snares in the Central African Republic, could make anywhere between $400 and $700 a year, which are comparable to the wages earned by the national parks guards (115). In other words, hunters were making a reasonable sum of money by hunting that they continued to do it. While traveling through Central Africa, Peterson also took the time to explore the meat markets and soon found that chimpanzee and gorilla meat were sold at higher prices than beef or pork, because they were considered luxury items. ...
Trophy hunting, or the activity in which people hunt wild animals, has also gained tremendous recognition over the years. Hunting animals usually has a very strong negative connotation; however, when hunting is done right, it brings numerous economic benefits.
Hunting is a very expensive sport to get into. From guns, to tree stands, to even hunting clothes, hunting can be costly. On average, hunters spend $1896.00 per year on hunting (LaBarbera 1). Equipment and expenditures alone in 2001 grossed $24,708,970,000 (for all types of hunting) and $10,673,990,535 of that was of deer hunting (LaBarbera 2). These expenditures then “ripple” through the economy generating three times more impact for the U.S. economy. For many communities, hunting dollars keep them afloat. This money made can also be pumped back into funding wildlife and conservation foundations. In good times and bad, hunters set their sights on spending more time in the fields and forests. Even when economic recession and uncertainty over homeland security have the nation and the economy recoiling, hunters continue to aim their leisure time and money toward shooting sports activities. For example, since 1991, when the nation was mired in a similar recession and war, retail sales have grown nearly 17% (adjusted for inflation). Many just do not realize the positive impacts generated by hunters. A recent report released by the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation highlights that Americans spend more on hunting equipment and dogs than they do for ski equipment. If that’s not enough, the $2.4 billion in federal income tax revenue generated by hunters
Flocken endorses that “...hunters are not like natural predators.They target the largest specimens; with the biggest tusks, manes, antlers, or horns.” In Defense of Animals International (IDA) argues that hunters concentrate on“game” populations and ignore “non-game” species that may lead to overpopulation and unequal ecosystems. Therefore, it affects their ecosystem, and the animals’ families. Overall, the evidence proves trophy hunting hurts the environment, specifically conservation. Therefore, the hunters’ idea that trophy hunting actually helps conservation by killing some predators to maintain balance, is merely
It’s a brisk November morning like any other day, but today isn’t any other day, today is the first day of firearm deer season. Shots are going off everywhere like world war three declared on deer. I’m wrapped in every hunting garment I own but winters cold embrace always finds its way in. My cheeks are rosy red and my breath was thick in the air. As I raise my shotgun and pull the trigger, my heart races and my hands shake. As I race after my prize, the sounds of leaves crunching beneath my feet are muffled by the ringing in my ears. I’m walking face to the ground like a hound on a trail and then my eyes caught it, my very first whitetail. I will never forget my first deer and the joy I felt sharing it with my family. Hunting is a passed down tradition for my family and friends. Throughout the world, millions of people participate in the spoils and adventure of the hunt. Hunting has been a pastime since the beginning of man. Hunting is one of those things either you like or you don’t like. It’s hard to explain the joys of hunting ,because it’s something one must experience for his self. Hunting does have laws and regulations you have to abide by. Are hunting regulations benefiting the hunter or the animal? This paper will discuss some of the regulations and laws, types of game, disadvantages of regulations, the pros of regulations, poachers, and ways to preserve wildlife and there habitat.
Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" is a very exciting story of a manhunt. This story made me think about the morality of hunting: Humans are the cleverest creatures on earth, but does it give them a license to kill the other animals and even human beings weaker than themselves? I give below a short summary of the story to set the scene and then I will explore the ethics involved in hunting as a sport.
From the perspective of economy, ecology, and environmental conservation, hunting is very important. Hunting is necessary to protect agriculture and the environment from animal pest or overpopulation. For example, wild boars tear up many farmers land causing many problems as well with the deer population growing eating away farmer’s resources. Also with the growth of white tail deer are damaging every landscape east of the Mississippi river. Unfortunately, the harm is very overlooked, and accepted as somehow “natural”. Over the last 30 years higher dear populations have made a more negative impact due to climate change. (“Is Hunting a Good Thing?”) Hunting was legalized in 1993 to help bring overabundant wild animal populations down. The legalization
One day when a poacher named Dontego heard an American conservationist talking about the illegal and wrongs of poaching. Most poachers felt guilty for killing all the elephants. Even though they did it for family,
The poor elephant seems in great distress as the surrounding scenery is not a suitable habitat for it. An elephant should be with the natural environment, but now it has been made "homeless” and thrown into the place with four walls, full of industrial waste. The vulnerability of animals has always been a striking means of capturing the viewer’s attention and sympathy. Despite having been banned by many countries, elephants are still hunted for economic purposes. For example, as shown in the picture, the elephant’s left tusk has been cut off.