Hunting: The Benefits Of Killing Animals

1173 Words5 Pages
Throughout history, hunting has been instrumental in providing food for individuals. A multitude of nomadic Native Americans centered their tribes around hunting and would follow the food source. This was their way of life, and they displayed appreciation for animals by using every part of the animal. As times progressed, hunting took on a new meaning per region. In America hunting became less of a means of food and more of a recreational activity. For the most part, hunters are passionate about wildlife and genuinely appreciate nature. An extreme is known as trophy hunting, and these individuals primarily care about hunting for the thrill. In contrast, the opposing view strongly stresses the importance of individuals not harming animals and…show more content…
The two sides are not willing to understand one another’s view. Trophy hunters, recreational hunters, and anti-hunting activists possess diverging views about killing animals.
To start, trophy hunters are viewed as killing animals for their own benefit or the thrill of the chase, but these hunters help countries benefit. Numerous trophy hunters will travel to exotic location to harvest animals of their choosing. One reason individuals justify trophy hunting is because they spend a hefty sum of money killing animals. In Africa, a hunt for one elephant for fourteen days can cost approximately $80,000 (Paterniti). The money is given to different sectors benefiting wildlife and the community. Wildlife conservation parks utilize the money to protect animals from poachers and various threats. Felix Marnewecke guides hunts for elephants in Africa, and he elaborates on his feelings for individuals to kill them, “[One] elephant pay[s] for the conservation of the other 2,500” (70). Hunting makes this
…show more content…
The contrast between trophy hunting and recreational hunting, is that the latter primarily hunts in the area they live in and assist in balancing the ecosystem. Many recreational hunters justify killing animals is to donate the excess meat to local charities for hunger insufficient individuals, and “3 million pounds of wild game meat was donated to food banks . . . that provide nearly 11 million meals to needy Americans” (McNally). These statistics provide evidence that killing animals can be worth the life of animals when aiding needy individuals. Furthermore, a purpose for killing game is provides. In addition, animals in nature die from a multitude of reasons and hunting is a better way of killing animals (Howard). Overpopulation causes a lack of food leading to animals starving, and animals suffer more this way than by getting shot. This situation can be prevented by having a set number of animals that can be shot every year and regulates the ecosystem. Furthermore, when an individual buys a hunting license the proceeds are returned to the states to support wildlife. Some of the money goes towards recruiting biologists, paying wardens, and maintain wildlife habitats (Howard). This allows for ethical hunters to continue to enjoy the land. In less than 60 years, hunters supplied over $5.5 billion for conservation, and they accomplish more than any other group to support wildlife (“Hunters
Open Document