Consequences of Killing The circle of life has been called into question by many, but many have never considered the damage they are instilling on ecosystems and entire species. Trophy hunting is defined by Macmillan Dictionary as “the activity of hunting and killing animals in order to display part or all of their bodies as trophies.” Ending the life of a healthy animal will throw off the balance of an ecosystem and its natural selection. Trophy hunting subsidizes the weakening of biodiversity in ecosystems, and contributes to the extinction of entire species. The biodiversity of an ecosystem is a delicate thing to maintain. Having a variety of different species cultivating in one area is what makes up an ecosystem, and trophy hunting is …show more content…
Killing one animal may not seem like a big deal or a particular harmful thing, but the reality of the gene pool disagrees. By eliminating the strongest animal from a population, one is eliminating the strongest genes that are to be passed along to future generations in order for evolution and adaptation. Hunters and traders are unaware that “wildlife trade is destroying natural selection processes that have allowed species to evolve, thrive and survive.” (Goodall) In order for a species to continue to reproduce it must have strong genes that allow the offspring to adapt and evolve to their surroundings. The goal of trophy hunting is to kill the largest strongest animal possible therefore eliminating those strong genes from the pool. By eliminating the strong genes, hunters are shattering any chance the population of that habitat will continue to grow. Christian Kiffner, a Ph.D. associate professor in techniques of wildlife management, provides an example of the declining of a population due to trophy hunting: “if pride holding males are removed consecutively from their pride, lion population viably is considerably reduced.” The pride holding males are the strongest lions in a population, and typically mate with many of the females to generate healthy and strong offspring. Trophy hunters remove those genes, thus creating a small, weak gene pool that leads to the diminishing of an adaptable population, and causes
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
...leaving a little portion of land to the animals is not that bad. The reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone has been very beneficial to the ecosystem. We tried to eliminate this species but in the end, we need to ask ourselves the question, do we really need to eliminate another species based on our own biases and fears? We need to look past personal gain, and leave nature to take its course.
There’s another catch to trophy hunting: it is extremely expensive. Permits for trophy hunting usually cost thousands of dollars, which leads to the idea that killing animals can actually help conservation. This concept might seem ridiculous at first, but trophy-hunting permits bring in a plethora of money. For instance, the so-called “ten-day ‘elephant package’ could cost… 36,000 [dollars]” (learnenglish). Even if you merely wish to watch the hunt, you are obliged to pay 3,800 dollars (abcnews). The prices are strikingly high, meaning that so is the revenue. South Africa alone brings in more than 744 million dollars every single year, making it its “most profitable form of commercial land use” (learnenglish). This enormous amount of money can not only be used to aid the many third world countries in Africa, but also with conservation. Many argue that by killing wild game during hunting, it causes some species to go extinct. However, strong economic incentive has motivated landowners to expand their territories, reintroduce species, and take care of the animals in general, which would indicate the opposite: more animals are safe. One might even conclude that the world is saving animals, by killing
Killing animals to collect their horns, tusks and teeth is a common activity. Hunters firstly kill the animals with shotguns or snipers, and then they cut the animals into pieces to take the parts that they want to keep as souvenirs. Africa is usually the chosen “playground” because it has a wide range of animal species and lots of endemic animals. For some people, trophy hunting is a sport, and for others, it’s a job to make a living. However, trophy hunting jeopardizes animals and puts the endangered animals in a risk of extinction, and therefore it shouldn’t be allowed.
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.
For centuries humans have survived thanks to the ability we have to adapt. One of this amazing activities that helped us is hunting. Unfortunately as we have changed throughout time, hunting has been degenerated into what’s called Trophy hunting. Have you ever heard this phrase before? Well if you haven’t, trophy hunting is when people kill any kind of animal, simply for keeping their bodies as a souvenir for the brutal and ferocious action they’ve just committed.
“Many airlines now ban shipments of African “Big Five wildlife trophies. Celebrities around the world, as well as the media, are condemning the illegal killing of animals for sport. The United Nations has also spoken out in a historic resolution on wildlife trafficking by the U.N. General Assembly that “strongly encouraged governments to commit to targeted actions to eradicate supply, transit and demand for illegal wildlife products” (Source 4). Countries, media, and celebrities are now discouraging the illegal killing of large game and urges the governments of many countries to enact laws to stop the black market distribution of these predators. It is important to prohibit illegal trophies and to enforce these laws with punishments and fines to remove species from the endangered species list and stop extinctions. Stricter laws and regulations can protect and save entire species from ceasing to exist. “Just months after the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History accepted a $20 million donation from big-game hunter Kenneth Behring, the Institution sought a FWS permit to import the trophy remains of two endangered wild sheep that Behring shot in Central Asia…After a storm of ugly publicity, the Smithsonian abandoned the permit application” (Source 1). The case of the Smithsonian Museum attempting to import two endangered sheep is just one
Trophy hunting is the unnecessary slaughter of animals universally enjoyed by sportsmen around the world. The roots of trophy hunting can be traced back as early as the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad when Buffalo Bill unjustly killed 4000 buffalo in the span of 18 months. Inversely, meat hunting is the killing of animals in order to use the meat to feed a family. During the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad, the Native Americans used this tactic in order for their communities to strive. Trophy hunting should be outlawed because it is a waste of valuable resources, it can cause extinction of certain species, and it can cause the gene pool of the animal to change drastically.
...and especially to the ecosystem with the killing of those animals and primarily the poisons that they use can totally destroy an ecosystem and do much more harm than good.
My topic will be to argue that trophy hunting is wrong, you shouldn't hunt an animal unless you have a use for every part of that animal and or a good reason to be hunting that animal. It will be a question of value. My goal is to persuade hunters that they shouldn trophy hunt. I like for animals to be safe and to stop being trophy hunted. Itś a waste of meat, fur, and sad because if you think about it that animal could have a family just like the person hunting. . .so for someone to just go and kill an animal for fun isn't right.
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
According to an NBC news article, 1.2 million animals, including endangered and threatened wildlife, were killed by American trophy hunters. Trophy hunting, which is also known as big game hunting, is a threat to wildlife and should be banned. Zimbabwe’s beloved lion Cecil, who was a major tourist attraction, was killed by Dr. Walter Palmer, a dentist in Minnesota. He had a fake hunting license that was never legal to hunt a collared lion. Cecil had been illegally lured out of his protected reserve. If trophy hunting was already banned, Cecil would still be alive. Trophy hunting is the type of hunting that is done for pleasure or for sport instead of for food. A majority of people see it as cruel and unnecessary. The animals that are killed
Humans have been hunting practically since the beginning of time. Take a moment to look back at our country’s founding fathers and Native Americans. People in that era hunted as a means of survival. We all possess the skills of stalking prey. It’s in our blood. Hunting is automatically instilled in us being at the top of the food chain. Although looking back into history, one can also find that some hunting has diminished animal populations practically to the verge of extinction. However these facts have not gone unnoticed. If hunting is well regulated, whether it be for sport or recreational involvement, and there are no major affects to the species, if anything it may help bring back species from the edge of extinction. “Several wildlife managers view recreational hunting as the principal basis for protection of wildlife.”(Lebel)
People today use hunting as a sport. Of course, not everyone agrees with hunting, but those who like to hunt justify their actions by saying that they are helping with the overpopulation of animals, like deer. The truth is that we are affecting the population of animals. Animal overpopulation can be due to the loss of an animal’s natural predator. Predators are extremely important in an ecosystem, and they are nature’s way of controlling the animal population. In William Stolzenburg’s book, Where the Wild Things Were: Life, Death, and Ecological Wreckage in a Land of Vanishing Predators, he addresses the importance of predators in an ecosystem. He discusses an experiment done by a zoologist named Robert T. Paine. Paine decided to do an experiment to see what happens when one disrupts an ecosystem. He conducted his experiment on rocks along the shore in which a species of starfish was the top predator. Paine’s experiment consisted of grabbing the starfish off the rocks and throwing them into the ocean. His results showed that one single species has a tremendous effect on its ecosystem. After getting rid of the top predator, about half of the species that
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.