AustinJames Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Can hunting, even for sport, be considered an effective and ethical method of ecological conservation? It was difficult emotionally for me to explore this possibility, but eventually I found the idea that hunting as an optimal tool for conservation, and a boon to humanitarianism, to be irrefutable. Thoughts?
J. D. Stembal Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Without watching any of the 2.5 hour video, I agree. I'm not down with the finer points of biology and ecology, but most animals and plants require natural predators in order to thrive. When humans drive off the natural predators in an ecosystem, they must supplant them or else the populations down to the level of the spore and the microbe fall out of whack, which, in turn, undermines the overall biodiversity. Everything living and dead is inter-connected in some way, and humans should not be so naive to think that we can completely divorce ourselves from the ecology of the planet because we mostly live in cities. We have to eat, breathe, defecate and reproduce just like everyone else who has come before us. We evolved here, we were born here, we will die here, and we will ultimately go extinct like every other species on a long enough time line.
Susana Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Why would there be anything wrong with hunting animals? It seems like fishing, but presents as more brutal. I think the only issue would be killing and hunting for the sake of killing, when you don't use the animal for yourself and your family. That would be dishonorable.
PatrickC Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 Yes, in the recent emotional Twitter rage exhibted by Ricky Gervais going after so called 'trophy' hunters in Africa that kill lions and giraffes. Beneath the hubbub there seemed to be a compelling argument coming from the hunters surrounding the conservation of these animals. This was because in the regions where these animals were protected, the animals either ended up destroying the local enviroment or they faced erradication, at least within those regions. In regards to trophy hunters, it seems that the local hunters know which members of the apex predators are on their last legs (so to speak) and would direct hunters towards those individual animals only. Normally too old or bannished from their group. As a result that community would preserve the existing population of wild animals, by managing their numbers and providing a well needed source of employmernt to the area. How true all that is in practice I don't know and personally it's not a past time I'd be intereted in doing myself. But it's certainly true that elephants are busy destroying large areas of savannah due to their high numbers and protected status.
surfingthoughts Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 As long as your hunting on your own land or have the permission of the land owner (state doesn't count) I see no problem even to sell the meat presuming you have the permission of the owner. It's up to the owner to make it sustainable and because they own it its in their interest to make it sustainable for long term profitability. I'm curious as to why it was so emotionally difficult. I think I remember Steff saying that people can over connect with animals because they cannot connect to themselves as childeren Or atleast struggle and it's easier to connect to a animal such as a dog than your past (obviously said allot more eloquently). Are you a vegetarian? If this is the case I can understand that life choice even respect it but I think it would be a shame if it got in the way of clear rational thinking. Thankfully in this case it seems you came to the right conclusion in my opinion. Would be interested to hear your journey on this one and if anyone has any counter arguments to your (and my) conclusion that would also be most welcome. 1
shirgall Posted June 9, 2015 Posted June 9, 2015 In many countries, the fees for hunting licenses are used to fund surveys of animal populations in order to set proper hunting limits and policies for appropriate levels of conservation. That is, cull enough animals to prevent overpopulation (which causes problems for populated areas), and don't cull so many that it endangers the survival of the population. This could be done voluntarily, of course, but it's pretty innocuously done.
Recommended Posts