Arguments Against Trophy Hunting

Big game trophy hunting is flat out one of the worst kind of violations you can commit as I personally see it. Knowing that humans kill animals just to show off or either claiming it as a "sport" is truly a sad situation going on. Big game trophy hunting should be banned because it is an inhumane and dangerous practice, they can possibly be killing endangered species, and wildlife populations immensely begin plummeting. Moreover what people must understand is that animals deserve to live just like us humans

"Outcry for Cecil the Lion Could Undercut Conservation Efforts." The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Aug. 2015. Web. 26 Sept. 2016. It begins to explain the perspective of Mr. Dorrington. A nonfiction piece of emotion, so not actually true. It portrays a feeling of what he felt as many others when Cecil was killed. After it begins to explain what would have happened if someone were to want to buy game off of National organizations. In Africa’s case; “There’s only two places on the earth where wildlife at a large scale has actually increased in the 20th century, and those are North America and southern Africa,” [said Rosie Cooney, a zoologist who is the chairwoman of the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group. “Both of those models of conservation were built around hunting.”] So it’s acceptable as a “sport” but when you think about organizations taking almost extinct animals and using that district as something for fun you decrease the animal species, whereas when you look where there are animal perseverations the large scale has actually increases.

This is because, one, simply put, in our modern day Society trophy hunting or hunting in general is not needed, to include endangered animals Within the game hunting will also affect their overall environment, and trophy hunting is overall an inhumane

On the other hand, trophy hunting, which is “the selective hunting of animals for human recreation” , is a problem that can increase the risk of extinction. UK scientists confirm that hunters have the tendency to hunt the animal with the best genes. There is an intense discussion about the rightness of this activity because some argue

Big game hunting is slowly lowering the population of animals. "Schelling Ameena from Hunters Say Trophy Hunting Helps Animals. Here's Why They're Wrong." says "big game hunters will argue that killing can help a species by removing older animals from the population or say that they can trust the government to set sustainable hunting quotas." Sadly, governments are more interested in how much an animal can bring in than how many they kill. The loss of these animals is not only hurting them but hurting us too, an example are elephants. When an older elephant is hunted and killed they leave their baby elephants to fend for themselves. If a baby elephant grows up with no guidance it could have a negative effect on them consequently, they could become more hostile. Hunters are not watching carefully how many animals they kill, causing the animal population to decrease.

In conclusion, I don’t agree with big game hunting because statistics show that non lethal nature viewing benefits more than simply killing animals for money. Not only that, but they kill the animal, only taking the parts they want and leaving the rest to rot. To kill an innocent creature for bragging rights is simple

The earliest case of humans hunting can be documented as far back as 2 million years proving it is completely natural for predators to kill for food or for clothing however in the past 100 years there's been a huge boom of Trophy Hunting. This type of recreational hunting has been substantially declining many species, as well taking money away from communities that need the income from tourism and does not in anyway provide clothing food or any other use than being a decorative souvenir “Since the 1940s, when lions numbered an estimated 450,000, lion populations have blinked out across the continent. Now they may total as few as 20,000 animals.” In the past 80 years there has been a dramatic decrease in the lion population. This is an animal that is not primarily eaten and had a large impact from trophy hunting. When a species has such few numbers the variation of their gene pool becomes less different which can cause animals to have birth defects or diseases that can kill entire prides. Trophy Hunting calls for the leaders of the pride to be killed so they have the best prize to take back for their wall or as a rug, which means that the next alpha

In the editorial " The Death of Cecil the Lion " The Editorial Bored discusses the death of a black-maned lion who was illegally killed by a American hunter in Zimbabwe. The board is clearly stating " Hunting in Africa does not hold the allure it may have had in Teddy Roosevelt's day. And Cecil was no ordinary cat. ", so the board is not happy with the lion's death because they feel like times have changed and we need to stop hunting. They also state that hunters are not the main reason that the species big and small are vanishing they believe it is a vanishing habitat. I most unquestionably agree with them because these species of lions have become rare sight in the wild. A century ago we could probably see close to 200,000 lions in the

The dispute of a ban on trophy hunting has always found its way to the surface. Scrolling through social media and viewing a picture of a trophy, especially of one enrolled on the endangered species list, brings outrage to those observing. Those who come across the news are quick to show their lack of agreement, for it could drive the wildlife into further extinction. Despite the fear of loss proceeds to wildlife habitats and local communities, trophy hunting should have a ban because it has been proven that species decline is a direct impact of trophy hunting.

I personally do not like trophy hunting animals that will not be eaten and that are used for decorations. I think that trophy hunting serves no real purpose other than to sell to the black market or to say that you killed an elephant or a tiger because you can.

As Rebecca Greig of the International Business Times put it, “to use Joseph Stalin's oft-quoted phrase, that, ‘one death is a tragedy, one million is a statistic’” (Greig). As attention intensifies around Cecil, the government wastes tens of thousands of dollars and marginalizes the real problems in Africa. The citizens of America are swept up in a media storm that draws their attention away from those who really matter. The excessive over publication of trophy hunting done by the United States government yields a nation that is blind to the millions of deaths of the people in Africa. In fact, there are more lions killed because the local people are seeking protection than lions killed for sport. A 2014 report from the Unites States Wildlife & Fisheries wrote that “"[w]hen lions cause or are perceived to cause damage to livestock, property, or people, the response is generally to kill them" (Dickman). If public attention was focused on helping the African people into a safer environment, there would in fact be less lions killed each year. As blood boils over Walter Palmer, I rush to remind you that hunters help the people of Africa. When the individuals holding the guns were questioned, “[a] majority of hunters – eighty-six percent! – told the researchers they preferred hunting in an area where they knew that a portion of the proceeds went back into local communities” (Goldman). The money they spend goes to remote places that have no other major ways of income and might be bypassed anyway during simple safari tours. African people can see that American focus is on lions, not the poverty, disease, and death that plagues them every day. The account of Goodwell Zcouaug, a man from Zimbabwe going to school in America sums this concept up perfectly saying that “Zimbabweans are left shaking

When a Minnesota dentist killed a prized African lion named "Cecil" he received an onslaught of criticism and reignited the debate concerning hunting. I hunt. I have hunted for years and I don't see anything wrong with it.  The reasons I hunt are for the meat, I think it tastes better than store-bought meat and it doesn't have any additives in it, and for the time I get to spend out in the mountains. However, there are some people who are against hunting.

The act of trophy hunting involves killing a large animal to obtain a “trophy” off of the dead creature. Whether it be a pelt, tusk, bones or some may even take the whole stuffed body. This practice is cruel, unethical, and should not be continued. Should we allow hunters to kill these animals for what they call a prize?

The debate on trophy hunting is a very controversial topic; some are for it, while some are against it. However, the fact that a Newsela article reported that “Between 2005 and 2010, hunting trophy fees generated approximately $11 million” shows many believe trophy hunting is a positive business and why it should be allowed. A few other reasons why includes it helps to provide money for local communities, and its already legal in africa and should continue to be.

Trophy hunting is the selective hunting of wild game for human recreation. As we can see, now trophy hunting is a really popular recreation, people do it to show that they’re tough by hanging the heads of the animals on their walls, and it is a sign of success.