There should not be one hungry human on the earth as long as there is one deer, goose, pheasant, rabbit, squirrel, swordfish...
We should not, however, be wasteful or cruel. Hunting should be done with the intent of an accurate and merciful end, and never for simply sport unless there is an overwhelming need for population control.
2007-08-22 10:29:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Spots^..^B4myeyes 6
·
6⤊
3⤋
Because we throw off the environment so much, it's part of our responsibility to correct the imbalances we create.
Hunting for certain types of animals, such as deer, helps keep the population within bounds. We've killed off our chased out all deer's natural predators in most areas, so, if we don't control the population, they'll multiply TOO much and become a nuisance to us and a danger to the environment. They eat all the vegetation, destroy the environment and then starve to death themselves. We caused this imbalance by chasing off/killing all the natural predators -- it's up to us to fix it.
Typically, hunting isn't cruel -- when done correctly it's a quick, painless death. Responsible hunters don't hunt during the times when there are lots of baby animals that might be orphaned. Usually, what is hunted is also used as food.
I'm not a hunter, but I do understand the reasons behind it and don't consider it cruelty in most cases.
Of course there are always poachers and others who hunt just for the fun of it, not caring if the animal is rare or endangered, and not hunting for food. That's wrong.
2007-08-22 17:37:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by goddessdawnie 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
I think dog fighting and hunting are two whole different worlds. One is cruel and abusive, the other is not necessarily.
While it is possible for a hunted animal, like a deer, to be shot incorrectly and suffer for a day or two slowly bleeding while being tracked by its shooter, eventually that animal die and will be eaten, or made into trophy.
Modern humans waste a tremendous amount from their hunted kills, unlike Native Americans, who used every piece of the animal for some purpose. So I am not saying hunting isn't silly or wasteful, but it isn't necessarily cruel, and it does serve a purpose. Without hunting, animals like deer would overbreed, and there would be an increase in the number of roadkills, and the animals themselves would be smaller, weaker, and more fragile because there would not be enough food around to support the larger population, thanks to human encroachment, chopping down trees and putting up subdivision in old cornfields, etc....
Dog fighting, however, is sick, twisted and evil, and those dogs, the ones that don't die are forced to fight over and over and over again. They are untreated for their conditions, they do not receive proper medical care, and probably do not receive enough food in most cases, from what I see on TV anyway. It is cruel on every level, and even uses other dogs in this cruel "sport", by taking innocent little puppies and teaching the fighting dogs to rip them apart. It's horrible and those animals suffer on so many levels it is not even funny.... and what benefit do humans gain out of it? Enough money to buy a bag of heroin?
2007-08-22 17:34:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by AmandaL 5
·
6⤊
0⤋
Personally I'm quite against hunting, but no, it isn't as cruel. What would you prefer: a quick bullet to the head, or to be locked in a tiny cell for days until you're forced into a steel-cage-deathmatch with another inmate, knowing you'll be whipped or electrocuted if you're not vicious and cruel enough to your victim? Better a happy life and a quick death than a miserable life and a slow painful death.
2007-08-22 17:39:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by teresathegreat 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'm not sure how you can even begin to equate the two.
Most animals are hunted to provide sustenance for humans (or other predators). Most are killed quickly and as humanely as possible.
Dogfights are carnage for entertainment... where the losers are killed and discarded.. and the winners often die from wounds.
Hunting is not illegal because MOST hunters actually eat what they kill. Hunting is generally managed by the State or municipality and permits are given based upon the numbers of animals available. When an area is NOT hunted (especially for deer or rabbits) and there are no other predators (wolves, coyotes, foxes) there is an explosion in the numbers of deer and rabbits. These animals become unhealthy due to spread of disease from proximity to one another and lack of food. We have a tremendous explosion of deer and Canadian geese locally due to lack of hunting... they are now becoming unhealthy.
2007-08-22 17:35:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by animal_artwork 7
·
6⤊
0⤋
The difference is that most people actually hunt for MEAT and consume what they kill. Dog fighting has no redeeming value.
I personally do not hunt and do not think I could, but if everyone stopped hunting the deer, what would we do??? Watch them all starve?? That seems pretty cruel too.
2007-08-22 17:44:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by ARE YOUR NEWFS GELLIN'? 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
Deer, elk, and bison are far healthier for humans to consume than cattle pumped full of antibiotics.
Responsible hunters kill only when they have a clean, lethal shot. They will not take the shot if they think they might only wound the animal.
Responsible hunters kill for meat as well as trophies. All edible parts of the animal are used. The animal is immediately field-dressed and the carcass taken directly to processing so no meat will be lost.
Responsible hunters kill only in season, with proper permits, take only the specific sex for the season, take only animals that are of correct size/age, and do not kill more than they are permitted to legally take.
Responsible hunters feed their families with what they kill. They donate extra meat to battered women's, children's, and drug counseling centers to help feed homeless or needy people.
When done properly and with respect for nature, substinence hunting is not animal cruelty.
As for meat-eating in general, the current theory in anthropology is that human beings did not begin to evolve bigger brains until they began scavenging, and then hunting, meat.
2007-08-22 18:05:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by howldine 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hunting is a lot more humane than dog fighting. It's the difference between torturing someone and quickly killing them.
2007-08-22 17:34:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Amanda I 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
the reason hunting of certain animals isnt illegal is due to overgrowth of the population (humans and animals i.e. deer). deer hunting season is usually in the fall and it is for the purpose of culling the heard to make sure they arent taking over the world and/ or starving to death. nice, huh?
maybe if people would stop building and encroaching in on them then we wouldnt have to hunt them.
2007-08-22 17:30:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by bob © 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
I wondered the same thing.
But when I thought about it its alot different we dont eat dog meat...lol Thats our way of serviving!! Hunting is a sport!
Deer is over populated!!
2007-08-22 17:29:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by Proud Army Wife 3
·
2⤊
2⤋