Arguments Against Big Game Hunting

555 Words3 Pages
According to “Big Game Hunting Is Also Big Business, for Wealthy Few” by Liam Stackaug, "6 major pros and cons of hunting" from NLACTP.ORG, and "can trophy hunting actually help conservation?" By science magazine. Big game hunting is good because it provides economic aid to countries that allow big game hunting, and controls the population of certain species. However, big game hunting is an unpredictable activity that could hurt you. Although there are negatives to big game hunting, the benefits heavily outweigh the opposition.

A negative to big game hunting is that it can endanger the hunter. Hunters can be attacked by the animals they hunt and can be injured or kill. As the article says in page 4, “many people die each year due to accidents while hunting”. For instance, Hunters are susceptible to being attacked by the quarry when hunting and if there are others nearby, the animal may start attacking the rest of the group in its angered state. This means that more than one tragedy may happen while hunting. Another accident could be a weapon malfunctioning and it may go off accidentally shooting another member in the group.

Although hunters can be hurt, it can benefit the economy of a country where animals are hunted. For example, the article
…show more content…
On page 3 of the article they say that if hunting were to be abolished animals such as deer will become a problem because of overpopulation. This means that deer could create problems for farmland as they could eat and stomp on the crops. Hunting is what keeps the deer population from growing too large since the population of the deer’s natural predators are too small to keep the population of the deer stabilize. Deer are not the only animals that are stopped from creating problems with the ecosystem. Animals such as warthogs and the Springboks are also hunted to stop problems such as destruction of

More about Arguments Against Big Game Hunting

Open Document