The Harmony Between Hunting And Conservation

Many people think of the bahamas, or a five star hotel when a vacation is mentioned, however that is not true for all. For those who enjoy the outdoors and nature, a nice hunting trip speak more to them. Hunting has been seen in our culture for centuries as a way of reconnecting with nature, and in todays world with the lack of predators it is used to keep nature in balance, as well as keeping in touch with our ancestral traditions.

Hunting is a common controversial issue among people. Determining when killing an animal is necessary and ethical has mixed viewpoints. One type of hunting that generally creates feelings of animosity among people is trophy hunting. There are very few ethical theories and ideas that support trophy hunting. Trophy hunting is a form of hunting in which the hunter kills an animal with the main goal of taking a part or parts of that animal for a trophy. The majority of trophy hunting occurs in Africa, with big game as the most popular trophies, but trophy hunting also applies to non-exotic species as well. In this paper, I will start with introducing a recent incident involving the killing of a popular African lion, then outlining the main ethical issues with trophy hunting. Next I will analyze the trophy hunting from an anthropocentric, biocentric, and ecocentric viewpoint, and finally I will propose a few solutions that would make trophy hunting a more ethical activity. Trophy hunting has been said to provide many benefits to conservation and preservation of species but is ethically lacking; with some stronger laws and regulations trophy hunting has the potential to be both ethically acceptable and beneficial to the environment.

disagreed upon for various reasons, the effects of hunting have been and will continue to

Because of the poaching of game like the elephant, the number of species will start to diminish. What hunters brought to the villages of Botswana was the money and the meat from the animals to feed the many people that go hungry everyday. Hunters that would take animals such as an elephant wouldn’t take any of the meat for themselves but rather they give all of the meat to the villages in the area. However, when poaching starts to take over, there will be zero meat or money that will be put back into the community. Poachers that kill elephants are only after one thing and that is the ivory from the elephant tusks. After taking the tusks, the elephant is left to rot. Another animal that is sought after by poachers in Botswana is the rhino. The rhino is poached for their horns, which are supposedly an aphrodisiac in China so the demand is high. Because of these effects, groups like SCI are so important to different places around the world. The money brought in by the hunters is used to hire conservation officers to protect the rhinos and elephants and to buy land that will be put into game preserves so the numbers of these species will increase because there aren’t any pressures from hunting or

Big game hunting is cause A major population damage . One of them is one of the most beloved animals in the world the Elephant. Every year, tens of thousands of elephants are being killed for trophies . Their population in Africa dropped from 62,000 all the way down to 20,000 in the last decade. WWF Global said they are due to be extinct in the next decade if nothing is done to stop the big game hunter. It’s not just Africa, where animals are being killed for trophies. ‘In Canada there is a breed of leopards called Amurs that were driven down to 10 left in the whole world ‘’ What caused this big game hunters from all over came to hunt an

Since the European colonization of eastern Africa, trophy hunting has been a highly debatable 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. Wildlife conservationists and hunters continue to debate the merits of legalized hunting on the economy and on the environment. However, not all hunters value the economic benefits and have passion for the outdoors. In fact, some of these hunters are conservationists themselves, who believe that it will allow for better conservation efforts in the long run. In another perspective, trophy hunters tend to downplay the reality of the killing part. To kill is to put to death, extinguish, nullify, cancel, or destroy. There is a fine line between conservation, and senseless killing of animals involved in trophy hunting.

What goes through the minds of people when they think about trophy hunting? Hunting is the act of pursuing and killing live animals for food, recreation, or trade. Early human civilizations relied on hunting for subsistence. As humans and civilizations evolved, so did hunting. Hunting became a sport rather than a necessity. People who are for hunting claim that it helps control wildlife populations, whereas people against it believe that trophy hunting will lead to the extinction of certain animals. This paper will examine viewpoint one, two, and my viewpoint on trophy hunting being banned or not.

There are many controversies out there. Abortion, Gay marriage, global warming. There is one controversy that barely ever comes to light except for a few incidents: Hunting. Nearly 6% of the United States population hunts recreationally. People hunt deer, birds, and bears and many more animals all over the country. Many people agree with hunting for sport and many people don’t. That is why it is important to shed light on both sides of the argument.

Trophy Hunters don’t always hunt the endangered species; they also hunt species that are overpopulated so the population of that species can stay under control. Dr. Michael H Knight and Dr. Richard Emslie, the chairman and the scientific officer of IUCN SSC African Rhino Specialist Group state “the killing of two old white rhino in 2012 paid for 49% of a $377,000 high-tech security fence”(Knight, Emslie). The hunt helped the reserve pay for a fence that could save the animals on the reserve from many dangers like poachers. Also, the rhinos that were killed were old. Since the rhinos were old, they might not have been able to fend for themselves anymore so killing the old ones were the best choice and because the hunters took two of these rhinos lives, they caused all the other rhinos on the reserve to now have protection. According to Jada F. Smith, a news article writer for the New York Times says “we found many troubling examples of funds’ either being diverted from their purpose or not being dedicated to conservation in the first place”(Smith). This is why we have the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. It makes sure that all the money from trophy hunting gets dedicated to a cause that helps protect endangered animals. Even if we didn’t have that organization and the hunters didn’t pay, then they wouldn’t be able to hunt the species they’re going after. Trophy hunting can help with many things concerning conservation and protection of an endangered species if it’s done the right

Wildlife hunting is a big business a 2013 estimate valued the illegal poaching trade in Africa worth 17 billion dollars a year and growing. While elephant poaching between 1800’s - 1999 and 2000’s and up have some similarities they also have a wide variety of differences. Elephant poaching in 1800’s-1999 was done to meet the worldwide demands, but elephant poaching in 2000’s and above was done for sport. Elephant poaching is wrong and shouldn’t be done.

But most of the animals that are being killed are the rare one or the ones that are in danger of bing extinct. For example the elephants are being killed for their teeth, that some people use trophies or they use it make other things like jewelries furnitures, pianos and other things that people use to as entertainment (Ivory, 1). According to article called Black Ivory; poaching, “More than 200 elephants were killed in a single state of Cameroon in the first six weeks of 2012.” The number of elephants being killed are increasing, as well as the number of rhinos. The rhinos, they are being killed by the hundreds. According to an article by Humane Society “more than 1,004 rhinos were killed in South Africa alone and this year’s tally as of October 24th was 899 – that’s three rhinos poached each day. At this rate, the 2014 rhino poaching figure for South Africa will be 1,100, exceeding last year’s record-setting poaching level.” (Poachers and Trophy Hunters Conspiring to Hurt Endangered Rhinos). These are just some example of animals that are being poached, many other are killed and mistreated like lemurs, deers, tigers, lions,

Big-game hunting is ethical if executed properly. With the recent death of Cecil the lion, renowned and “beloved” tenant of a local animal reserve in Zimbabwe, a massive uproar of “anti-hunting” protests have risen to the surface. While these oppositions are with good intentions they also squash the opinions and experiences of native Zimbabweans who view creatures like Cecil as objects of terror. While it is true that trophy hunting is indeed unethical, as it is harmful to the ecosystem, the native people of areas where hunters can pay to slay large game think otherwise. As the individuals most greatly impacted by changes in the ecosystem, their voices deserve to be heard over those of sympathetic Americans. In the article “In Zimbabwe, We

In his article, “Hunting Makes Significant Contributions to Wildlife Protections”, Hal Herring claims that hunters are a strong part of conservation. He states that even though hunters and conservationists don’t see eye-to-eye on many things, they are tied to

Hunting is the world’s oldest and most productive means of food, yet it has begun to take a turn from its originality. Most “hunters” do hunt for food, but the select few that specifically hunt for the sport and nothing else have begun to sway organizations to the concept of “Anti-hunting.” These institutions have concluded some very critical, and factual, evidence in their opposing arguments on the matter, but in some ways the argumentation presents weakness that has been overlooked; these flaws are menial, but need to be surfaced. These little defects within the following arguments justify the hunter’s right to hunt and harvest game, and Anti- Hunting organizations such as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) have stated multiple facts about the way hunting has turned against its inventiveness such as: sport hunting as an unnecessary form of cruelty, fair chase of animals, and hunters as conservatives.

Humans have been hunting on this planet for over two million years. Our ancestors used complex hunting techniques to ambush and kill antelopes, gazelles, and other large animals dated back to times before Christ. People all around the world still carry on the tradition, but the view on hunting is not the same as it was back then. The world is so industrialized, and people think hunting is cruel and useless because you can buy meat at grocery stores. But in reality, it is the reason the wildlife they see are not extinct. Harvesting game not only benefits the hunter with the meat, but also the land, the wildlife, and controls the game population; therefore, without it wildlife would starve, and land would not be managed.