Grizzly bears are one of the most magnificent species in Canada. However, its population had experienced a constant drop in the last few years because the combined pressure of some events, such as hunting, urbanization and habitat fragmentation. In British Columbia, grizzly “trophy hunting” have appeared to be the biggest cause of the depopulation for grizzly bear. So far, voices that call the hunting to stop and hope the procession of hunting have mounted. (bearsforever) Nevertheless, compared to the benefits brought by killing grizzly bears, protecting them from being hunted has been shown to be more profitable to either the nature or the human economic. Killing bears for trophy no longer fits with modern values of management and sustainability …show more content…
and grizzly hunting therefore should be prohibited. “If you must shoot an animal, at least have the respect to make use of its meat.” (bearsforever) Before a grizzly bear is killed, it has consumed thousands of salmon and uncountable berries, and after a trophy hunt, all of that turned into nothing more than just waste.
People who take part in the trophy hunt consider killing a grizzly bear as a challenge. It has diverged from the original purpose and concept of hunting. Usually, a hunter takes full advantage of his/her preys. For example, they eat up their preys’ meat not waste it, as suggested in the beginning. However, trophy hunters do nothing more than taking away the head, paws and skins of the grizzly bear. (responsibletravel) Moreover, killing grizzly bear with guns is not really a challenge. People pay money to join the trophy hunt to get a rifle and a guide so they can find a pre-prepared spot to pull the trigger. Most grizzly bear are killed without knowing what is going on. Sometimes they are killed when seeking salmon in the rivers. Sometimes they are killed after walking outside the caves where they just have their hibernation. Those trophy hunters were literally enjoying the pleasure of killing, and they concealed it by calling it a challenge, which is cruel, unethical and …show more content…
immoral. There have been profit made by collecting revenues from people who joined the trophy hunter. In a study in 2014 by CREST (The Center for Responsible Travel) and Stanford University, hunters from outside British Columbia have shot an average of 4 grizzlies and about 36 black bears in one year, which adds up to approximately half a million. However, the money spent by local hunters (live in British Columbia) on hunting is not worth mentioning, and one single local hunter can kill up to 55 bears a year in the Great Bear Forest. It is true that “each grizzly brings in roughly 25,000, part of which the guiding company pays out to the provincial government”, but the money were negligible compared to the revenue made by Bear-viewing in Canada. Unlike trophy hunt, which all absorbs profit only from Canada and part of the Unite States, Wildlife-viewing attracts people from around the world. So far, bear viewing have produced direct revenue that is 11 times bigger than the bear hunting in the Great Bear Forest. (responsibletravel) Based on the data, the economic potential of Bear-viewing has well outnumbered that of trophy hunt. In fact, Bear-viewing and Bear-hunting are two activities that contradict each other. There is no way that Bear-viewing can flourish with a large number of grizzlies being killed. In terms of economic development, programs and projects of Bear-viewing can be more concentrated on and strengthened by lessening the depopulation caused by the trophy hunt. Although B.C government claims that the trophy hunt is sustainable, it still is an unwise action to kill those grizzlies.
Until now, there is not a certain answer to how many grizzly bears are left in British Columbia. With approximation ranging from as low as 6,000 by individual biologists to as high as 15,000 by the B.C government, grizzly bear populations are therefore controversial. The reason why official estimates cannot be trusted is that the method used is suspicious since the government only applies a predictive model based on ground surveys conducted in only a limited number of areas. One of the independent scientists, Kyle Artelle, suggests that “more bears were being killed than government quotas allowed.” (thenarwhal) Serious situations, such as extinction, could occur on this species if trophy hunt in addition to other dire scenarios such as declining stocks of salmon along coasts and danger of road and railway accidents proceeds. Even though it is nearly impossible to eliminate all harmful causes of the depopulation for grizzly bear, the prohibition of trophy hunt can be easily taken into action to mitigate the negative trend. Additionally, grizzly bears are being an integral part of the ecosystem where they live. In case the grizzly bears die out, the ecosystem will become chaos. (pacificwild) For example, the speed of seed dispersal of many plants and berries will be reduced, the ocean-derived nutrients will cease to be transferred into inland to make
prosperous trees, and there might be an excessive amount of reproduction for salmons along the rivers, which has a potential to influence other ecosystems. As a result, trophy hunt should also be abolished according to scientific theories and purposes. Grizzly bear should also not be killed in terms of morality. As trophy hunt continues for the last decade, there is a loss of habitat for the grizzlies. In a scenario that the population of grizzly bear overgrows, it is acceptable to eliminate some of them to keep the balance. Otherwise, there is no point to kill them. The killings aimed to have fun under the guise of “challenge” should be absolutely neutralized. Moreover, grizzly bear is one of the species that can symbolize British Columbia, not surprisingly, even the entire Canada. Thus, depopulation caused by trophy hunt will make people in different countries doubt about the stewardship in Canada. Overall, trophy hunt of grizzly bear should be banned. Responsibility of protection for such some important members which help to form up a healthy, sustainable and prosperous British Columbia.
Grizzly bears live in a variety of environments .All of which includes dense forests, subalpine meadows, open plains and arctic tundra . In the past though, they could be found from Alaska to Mexico, and from California to Ohio. Though Nowadays there are efforts trying to make it so grizzly bears can make a comeback and the wild, and all of their efforts are proving to be working, there are 4 times as many grizzlies in the wild as there were in 1975, at
Nature, it is everywhere, everyone uses it. Quite often, however, people abuse it, such as with humans’ impact on grizzly bears. Grizzly bears are important to the environment because they have many useful purposes for the environment: “they provide an “umbrella” for the environment because they require such large home ranges.” (savethegreatbear.org/CAD/Grizzly.htm) The Grizzly Bear is extremely vulnerable to changes in its habitat and food cycle. This allows humans to detect small changes in the environment, just by watching this amazing species. The Government of Canada needs to try harder to stop the poaching of grizzly bears in Canada.
In July of 2015, national treasure of Zimbabwe, Cecil the Lion was maliciously killed by dentist Walter Palmer. The hunt caused an uproar from many animal activists. The media covered the hunt and the aftermath for many weeks. This heartless act has many questioning why big game hunting is legal. Multiple African countries allow big game hunting, but it is harming the ecosystem. Many innocent, endangered animals are killed. Big game hunting should be banned because it lowers populations, causes further problems, and animal populations are already dropping.
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
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.
The grizzly bear trophy hunt is an issue regarding the citizens of Canada who immorally hunt and kill grizzly bears for pride, thrill, and trophy. Many people question whether this is morally acceptable as hunters kill without a conscience. Grizzly bears are vital to Canada’s environment as they are essential to maintaining a healthy ecosystem. As keystone species, they regulate prey, disperse seeds of plants,and aerate soil to maintaining forest health. Due to the vulnerability and over-hunting of grizzly bears, Pacific Wild and many other non-profit organizations, are working to protect wildlife in British Columbia, especially the grizzly bear habitat.
The deer population has increased so much that in many areas, they suffer from chronic starvation. “Bucks only” laws passed years ago to help in re-establishing the dwindling deer herds now work against the deer by resulting in an overabundance of does. Even with the overabundance of does many hunters refuse to shoot a doe. They believe in the old saying, “It takes a doe to yield a buck.” This is entirely true but it ignores the basic law of nature that any piece of land, and the food and cover in it, can support only so much game. If the excess game is not harvested by hunters or killed by predators, nature will take over and exterminate enough animals as needed or more through disease and starvation. That’s why hunting is a much more humane means for a deer ...
The characteristics of the grizzly bear as a top predator also make it highly vulnerable to threats. Although it is an omnivore, because it relies heavily on salmon to make it through the winter, it is vulnerable to anything that impacts on salmon runs. It needs wide-ranging habitat and is slow to reproduce. As such, grizzly bears are considered not just a key species but also an ‘umbrella species’ because the protection of their habitats will result in an ‘umbrella of protection’ for a wide range of other species. The protected areas that have been set aside in the Great Bear Rainforest are not enough to sustain healthy populations of grizzly bear so it requires additional habitat set aside from logging. Trophy hunting of grizzly bears also continues to place their population at
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.
It is early in the morning with the majestic Elk bugles in the distance. The sun kisses the tops of the peaks with the most beautiful gold, and paints the clouds rose red. Men and women who enjoy the outdoors, whether it is hunting or just hiking, help make these types of moments possible. Hunting and the ecosystem is tied closely to conservation of land and animals. The articles on “Hunting and the ecosystem” written by the South Dakota Game Fish and Parks Department (SDGFP), and “Facts and statistics on wildlife conservation” written by Roger Holmes, director of the Fish and Wildlife, touch on how hunting is important to the environment to keep a good balance in the ecosystem.
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.
Years ago, killing animals for food was part of the average man’s everyday life. While, now a days, hunting is questioned by many across the world because it is commonly viewed as a recreational activity. Many residents have a problem with the dangers that come with hunting. Not to mention, as time goes on, society seems to feel differently about animals and how they should be treated. One of the biggest debates is the harvest of white tailed deer. All over the United States, white tailed deer thrive because of the few predators that feast upon them and the large forests and habitats that these deer can flourish in. However, as buildings and subdivisions pop up left and right decreasing the white tailed deer natural habitat, the debate grows stronger. The heart of the debate is centered around ethical issues, human and deer conflicts, safety, and the benefits hunting has on the economy.
The deer population has seen a dramatic increase since the late 1800s. Before that time, the deer census had been threatened. In the 1900s the deer population rebounded from about 20,000 to more than 1 million. This drastic increase can be attributed to changes in habitat, including reverting abandoned farm fields to forests, and migrations in human population to rural and suburban areas. Both of these progressions created open and forested habitats preferred by deer. In addition, landowners have excluded hunters out of many areas, subsequently, deer populations have increased. “Although the recovery of deer populations from only about 500,000 nationwide in the early 1900s to more than 15 million today is considered a wildlife management
The one way to keep bears and humans safe and living in the same environment is learning to understand them and being able to tolerate them. If people don’t do these things theses beautiful animals will begin to decrease in numbers. While there are a lot of black bears in Alaska, an estimated 100,000, hunters believe that you can just hunt and hunt and the population will decrease to average, but the plans of some hunters seems just over the top of making these bears go on to the endangered species list. But with the help of people and cooperation the Black Bears will continue to live in Alaska.