http://www.peta.org/issues/wildlife/wildlife-factsheets/sport-hunting-cruel-unnecessary/
http://home.nra.org/
http://www.huntfairchase.com/index.php/fuseaction/sponsors.main
http://www.trcp.org/
http://www.huntersagainstpeta.com/
QUESTION/HYPOTHESES: Among those who are against hunting what is their reasoning behind it?
As humans we were are brought up having the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of expressing your opinion.
Recently the controversies over the sport of hunting has become a major problem. Although the act of hunting is the
one of the reasons why human are still around today. If it wasn't for hunting we would have died off as a population
a long time ago. Some forget how humans have evolved from cave men to the humans we are now. All of our
ancestors survived by hunting or their family and to provide from themselves. In today's society many people are
totally against hunting for bizarre reasons. These people believe that hunting is so cruel and evil, but in reality if
it weren't for hunters the population of animals would be off. Due to tough winters half of these animals that they are
trying to save are going to end up starving in the winter anyways. Nature will do its own thing its survival of the fittest.
Hunters truly do benefit the world in many different ways.
After my survey I learned only 25% percent of people were against hunting the other 75% of the people
were pro hunting.
Pro hunting
“All really wild scenery is attractive. The true hunter, the true lover of wilderness, loves all parts of the wilderness, just as the true lover of nature loves all seasons. There is no season of the year when the country is not more attractive than the city; and there is no portion of the wilderness, where game is found, in which it is not a keen pleasure to hunt.” —Theodore Roosevelt
"In a civilized and cultured country wild animals only continue to exist at all when preserved by sportsmen. The excellent people who protest against all hunting, and consider sportsmen as enemies of wildlife, are ignorant of the fact that in reality the genuine sportsman is by all odds the most important factor in keeping the larger and more valuable wild creatures from total extermination."Theodore Roosevelt
hunters impact on our economy and wildlife:
Hunters donate thousands of pounds of venison every year to the needy and hungry.
Nobody in America donates more money or more time to our wildlife than hunters. Through hunting licenses, special taxes on hunting equipment and simply by donating money to hunting groups, clubs and foundations who help protect and preserve our land and wildlife.
Hunters spend around $38 billion every year in retail businesses.
Hunters continually raise and donate money to local charities.
Jobs related to the hunting industry account for $16.7 billion dollars in income every year.
Hunters love and respect America’s wildlife more than the people who fight against us
The following facts and statistics below were provided by the RMEF – Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
Hunting supports 680,000 jobs, from game wardens to waitresses, biologists to motel clerks…etc.
All together, hunters pay more than $1.6 billion a year for conservation programs. No one gives more money.
In 1950, only 12,000 pronghorn remained. Thanks to hunters, today there are more than 1.1 million.
In 1901, few ducks remained. Thanks to hunters’ efforts to restore and conserve wetlands, today there are more than 44 million.
In 1900, only 500,000 whitetails remained. Thanks to conservation work spearheaded by hunters, today there are more than 32 million.
Hunters and shooters have paid more than $5 billion in excise taxes since 1939.
More than 38 million Americans hunt and fish
Anti-hunting
Although it was a crucial part of humans’ survival 100,000 years ago, hunting is now nothing more than a violent form of recreation that the vast majority of hunters do not need for subsistence. Hunting has contributed to the extinction of animal species all over the world. Less than 5 percent of the U.S. population (13.7 million people) hunts, yet hunting is permitted in many wildlife refuges, national forests, and state parks and on other public lands.(40 Almost 40 percent of hunters slaughter and maim millions of animals on public land every year, and by some estimates, poachers kill just as many animals illegally. Many animals endure prolonged, painful deaths when they are injured but not killed by hunters. A study of 80 radio-collared white-tailed deer found that of the 22 deer who had been shot with “traditional archery equipment,” 11 were wounded but not recovered by hunters.Twenty percent of foxes who have been wounded by hunters are shot again. Just 10 percent manage to escape, but “starvation is a likely fate” for them, according to one veterinarian.A South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks biologist estimates that more than 3 million wounded ducks go “unretrieved” every year. A British study of deer hunting found that 11 percent of deer who’d been killed by hunters died only after being shot two or more times and that some wounded deer suffered for more than 15 minutes before dying.
Sources: US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation; National Shooting Sports Foundation.
National Research Council, “Science and the Endangered Species Act” (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1995) 21.
Grant Holloway, “Cloning to Revive Extinct Species,” CNN.com, 28 May 2002.
Canadian Museum of Nature, “Great Auk,” 2008.
Illinois Department of Natural Resources, “How the Program Works,” accessed 25 July 2013.
Stephen S. Ditchkoff et al., “Wounding Rates of White-Tailed Deer With Traditional Archery Equipment,” Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (1998).
D.J. Renny, “Merits and Demerits of Different Methods of Culling British Wild Mammals: A Veterinary Surgeon’s Perspective,” Proceedings of a Symposium on the Welfare of British Wild Mammals (London: 2002).
Spencer Vaa, “Reducing Wounding Losses,” South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks, accessed 25 July 2013.
E.L. Bradshaw and P. Bateson, “Welfare Implications of Culling Red Deer (Cervus Elaphus),” Animal Welfare 9 (2000): 3–24.
No comments:
Post a Comment