Pro Hunting Arguments? What do you think of hunting animals for sport?

Question

I'm writing an essay about "blood sports" and wether or not they can be justified, which particular emphasis on Fox Hunting.

I am finding it difficult to find any valid and good "pro hunting" arguements.... Can anyone think of any pro hunting ideas? If not, just what are your views on hunting animals for human sport?

And I live in England where fox hunting has just been banned.... just wanted to know a few of your views and opinions on hunting for fun....

Answer 1

If you are serious about this eassay and want the oppinion of a british hunter, who hunts in all its forms,
from game shooting. fox shooting, stalking ect , and understands the prejudice we recive in this country.
Then go into my profile and e mail me your e mail address.
Onley then will i sit and write you a thero pice on hunting,
its good points ect.
I say this cos sadley im sick of defending my actions to people who are realy just taking the micky.
I mean no disrespect to you

Answer 2

Pro Fox Hunting Arguments

Answer 3

The normal arguements are

Foxes need controlling anyway, which is true in some areas.

The survival of the hounds depends on it, which is also true if not the best of justifications.

That it helps the foxes because only the weakest get caught. This is highly unlikely and contradicts the first argument.

It is the most humane way to control foxes. This is debatable. Poisoning and shooting can lead to long painful deaths, but is chasing a petrified animal around the countryside before killing it extremely quickly much better. I think the answer is yes, but the harm should be minimised.

I have no objection to people stalking animals for sport as long as they are not harming the environment in the process. When the stalking is successful the question is whether or not to kill the animal or record it with a camera. There is a need to kull animals like deer which I agree with and killing for food or to control vermin seems reasonable as well. Killling just for the sake of killing or for trophys to stuff, I don't agree with.

Answer 4

OK, you, along with most it seems, are confused about the definition of "sport". Hunting as a sport does not mean you just kill for fun. Rather, it refers to the fact the animal is given "fair chase" rather than just farmed and harvested en mass. Fair chase is different from hunter to hunter, for personal reasons.

I have never heard a confirmed report of a hunter killing an animal and just leaving it. The whole point is to eat the meat. I've heard rumors about "americans" before but I doubt it happens very often. It's illegal to waste meat or fur from a game animal.

Hunting foxes with dogs is an exception to this. That is hardly a sport at all, rather people just watch the dogs rip apart a fox. That is just a waste, practiced by the very rich in the UK, I understand. I understand that only the rich can hunt in the UK, that's just bogus, but I guess there is no such thing as public land over there.

In Noth America, hunting is heavily regulated and an incredible amount of science and annual research goes into making it sustainable, and in fact, beneficial to wildlife populations. For example, not allowing the hunting of moose calfs would not result in higher moose populatuions, but rather higher wolf populations because they would be eaten once the deep snow forms a crust for the wolves to run on tops of. Killing rabbits means more food for the deer. Killing deer means more habitat for moose. Nothing goes to waste in the wild. Even an animal wounded by an irresponsible hunter becomes food for the foxes or wolves.

Our licensing fees and other memberships in associations pays to protect more habitat in a year than PETA could ever accompllish. As hunters, we are not just dumb hippies with signs, rather we are participants in the ecosystem, and therefore stakeholders.

Another big argument I'll share with you, is that farmed animals are usually treated horribly for their entire life, while hunted animals live naturally until "bang!". So there you have it, torture-free, enivronmentally friendly, lean, organic meat, not to mention sustainable. Also people hit a lot less deer while driving (which can be fatal) because of hunting.

Answer 5

Hunting is very important in the conservation of wildlife. In some areas, a harsh season, drought, or shortage of food may leave animals in a bad position. If there was no hunting, the entire herd of animals would die out. But with hunting, the population of the herd is decreased slightly. The rest of the herd then has a much greater chance of survival.

Answer 6

I live in America and I hunt deer, so I don't know how helpful I can be but I'll give it a shot... =D

I've enjoyed hunting almost all my life. The thrill of getting that great big buck is absolutely extraordinary! However, I'd never, ever kill one of those beautiful animals for sport and nothing else. Yes, I do enjoy the sportsman part of it, but here in the South you can find some great recipes for deer meat! It saddens me when people have a great big 15-pointer on their wall and when you ask how long they were eating of off it and they say they didn't.

The point is, I don't JUST hunt for the sport and never will. I eat what I kill.

Answer 7

I am a meat hunter, personally. Also, here in the US it is illegal to hunt game animals and then waste the meat. If you are not personally going to eat it, you must donate it or give it to someone who will.
The real point I am writing to make, though, is that in most states (in the US) the majority of funding for wildlife preservation, of both game and non-game species, comes from hunters' license fees. These fees pay the wildlife biologists' salaries, and maintain the wildlife management areas.
Regardless of how one feels about sport hunting, the end result is an overall gain for wildlife.
For a good example of this, look at the plight of the elephant in Africa. Most of the countries that banned elephant hunting now have no elephants left, because the income from elephant hunting was supporting the maintenance of elephant habitat. Without those hunting dollars, the elephants became pests, in the eyes of the local farmers.
An elephant hunt, culminating in the harvest of one elephant, costs a minimum of $30,000 USD. Most of that money goes into the local economy, and managing the elephant herd.
The typical US hunter spends $2000 USD per year, or more, on his hunting activities. Most of that money, likewise, goes into the local economy, and supporting the wildlife population. NONE of it goes to political activism, unlike Greenpeace, Sierra Club, etc. If a hunter wishes to support political activism, he/she joins clubs and pays dues to do that.

Answer 8

Killing for sport... has it's obvious morality issues to many. But, it isn't the EVIL that people want you to believe it is.
First off... when you are hunting, you should always use what you kill, skin and meat. There are also the "population control" views on it. If we do not control certain predetors then other prey will suffer, or if we do not control certain prey, then their own food supply will suffer and they will die naturally.
Hunting for sport is in my own opinion more humane then eating store bought goods because these animals were not bred in captivity or couped up in a pen.

Answer 9

The single biggest "con" is the danger from idiots who buy a gun and go hunting without ever learning how to handle a gun safely, or to identify the animal they are allegedly hunting. There have been hunters after "mule deer" who shot, AND TAGGED, a MULE on more than one occasion; mixing alcohol with hunting; trying 500 yard shots because they have the "big magnum" without being able to hit a target at 100 yards, (some of them having NEVER BEEN ON A RANGE); those who go to buy ammo and think that all .30 caliber rounds are the same; ignore vehicle restrictions on trails; shoot because they "saw 'something' moving through the brush"; etc.

Answer 10

I am in favor of baiting, and standing, which does not involve scaring animals into going into a certain direction, but simply means a single hunter shoots an animal that shows up within range. The fox hunt, or any driving method is too cruel in my opinion.

I prefer eating meat of animals that have had a good life in nature right upto the moment a shot is fired over animals that have lived indoor in a confined space, which is still the case in most European farms.

Answer 11

"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so to." All that can be said about hunting is its a personal choice to participate or choose to engage in it.* It does not matter whether others agree with it or not.* Hunting needs not to be justified or defended by anyone, anywhere at anytime by those who enjoy it.* Some people do hunt & some do not.* That is all that needs to be realized.* I respect those who choose not to hunt & all that we Hunters & Sportsman expect is the same in return without prejudice or animosity towards anyone who does Hunt.* Let others do their thing and we will do our thing.*