Taylor Easter will discuss the purpose of hunting to an audience with diverse opinions. The intent is to present both arguments for allowing and prohibiting hunting.
I. Introduction
a. Should animals be saved or consumed? While we wouldn’t want to eat Bugs Bunny, we readily consume cows and chickens raised on farms. Are animals seen as trophies, commodities such as clothing and jewelry, or simply as beautiful elements of nature and pets?
b.
This text examines various perspectives on hunting for food, trophy hunting, and the trading of animal body parts. The author seeks to understand why animals are hunted for consumption, why their body parts are traded, and how cruelty is defined in this context. It is crucial to consider both sides of the hunting debate to enhance our understanding of the motivations behind hunting animals for sustenance, sport, and accessories.
Transition: Regarding hunting for food (beginning II), there are positive and negative aspects. Throughout history, humans have hunted animals such as buffaloes, elk, deer, and other species to provide for their families. Is this morally acceptable? In some cases, it can be justified. When hunting serves the purpose of feeding a large group or community while also preventing animal overpopulation, it can be considered justifiable. Hunters argue that since wolf and cougar populations are declining, they must intervene by controlling the deer population instead (Lin & Doris). This perspective raises important points worth contemplating.
Do we want to have an overpopulation of animals? Hunters killing animals incorrectly, such as causing car/deer collisions, can be seen as a negative aspect of hunting for food. Before hunting season, some hunters purposely scare deer onto main roads in order to have them hit by cars. There are those who view hunting as a recreational sport. (Lin, Doris) (Division of Wildlife, 10/25/2012) Colorado is well aware of hunting season and hunters are always enthusiastic about hunting game. However, there are also instances where hunters mistakenly shoot people instead of animals.
This letter, addressed to all of Colorado, discusses the issue of hunting. It highlights the problem of hunters mistakenly identifying their targets, such as confusing elk for deer or even mistaking people for animals and shooting them. Additionally, it explores the pros and cons of hunting for trophy purposes. Some view it as a way to gain bragging rights or obtain income from the killed animals. However, this practice is often seen as a negative aspect of hunting because many hunters specifically target the most mature animals capable of reproducing.
Hunters are responsible for the extinction of various animals, targeting and killing young males. Polar bears, for instance, were declared threatened species in 2008 (Aguecheek, Andrew 12/09/2008). Endangerment is also evident among wolves, eagles, cougars, reptiles, and other species. Trophy hunting, if you are an animal advocate, is regarded as one of the most severe violations against nature. It is an offense to those of us who believe that animals should have the opportunity to live their lives to the fullest, just like humans.
When hunters kill endangered species, it presents a larger issue (Aguecheek, Andrew 12/09/2008). However, trophy hunting does have some benefits. The main reason people engage in trophy hunting is to keep a souvenir of their kill and take pride in their accomplishment. Furthermore, certain hunters use the meat from the animal to prevent it from going to waste. Nevertheless, they still choose to preserve the whole body or just the head by giving it to a taxidermist for display as a symbolic award or prize.
Trophy hunting has a dual purpose of generating income and protecting animals and humans. Hunters kill aggressive animals to prevent harm to humans or other animals (Gunn, Alastair S, 2001).
Hunting for fur, skin, toes, teeth, nails, etc., has both advantages and disadvantages. These materials are used in the fashion industry to create designer clothes. However, it has also caused the extinction or near-extinction of various animals like Wooly Mammoths, Caspian Tigers, Thylacines (Tasmanian tigers), Dodos, Passenger pigeons, Polar Bears, Muskoxen Mediterranean Monk Seals American crocodiles Flying foxes and Great white sharks (Huntercourse.com).
Foxes exemplify the negative impact of this trade. Although they are not extinct yet but hunted for their fur in a cruel manner typically involving dogs used in fox hunting which is a gruesome practice (all-creatures.org).
The long-standing history of trading animal furs and skins has resulted in harm and loss of precious wildlife. Additionally we rely on various parts of these animals in our daily lives (ii).
Hunting serves multiple purposes, such as the elimination of dangerous animals like Thylacines that pose a threat to livestock. These remarkable creatures, resembling a combination of dog, cat, and kangaroo, were hunted for their valuable fur used in the production of high-quality clothing.
However, hunting can also lead to the extinction of species like the flightless bird Dodo due to human activity and the introduction of pets such as dogs, cats, and pigs into their habitat.
Despite ongoing debates regarding the morality of hunting, it offers advantages like providing sustenance and acquiring trophies while also making use of various parts of an animal.
By gaining a deeper comprehension of both the positive and negative aspects associated with hunting, we can remain steadfast in our convictions.
