So as not to type a textbook, I'll give you my short answer:

Pro-hunting: The first reason is because hunting is an exciting past-time that allows one to get out and enjoy the great open spaces and be close to nature and participate directly in the predator-prey relationship. The second, and no less important reason is that responsible hunting is a vital part of proper game management and conservation effort. Hunting controls the game population in the most natural way possible while allowing man and nature to co-exist. By keeping the deer herd, for example, large but well below the maximum that the land can naturally sustain ensures that there are sufficient deer to maintain genetic diversity, that the land provides sufficient food resources to allow deer to flourish. All while trying to keep the deer herd out of suburbs and in the country where they belong, keep them from destroying farm crops and off the grille of everyones car. Oh, and deer (and other game) taste good.

Anti-hunting: For the most part the anti-hunting animal rights groups tend to base most of their objection on the emotional and philosophical premise that animals have the same right to live that humans do. They also project human qualities onto animals where they don't exist. When pain is inflicted on a human, we not only feel the physical pain, but also the emotional pain because someone has wronged us. The animal rights groups seem to believe that animals are capable of both feeling and SUFFERING. They also claim that any human interaction with wild animals is bad for the environment, and that humans have no business interacting with, much less trying to manage, the environment and the animals within it. They feel that the animals would be better off left to try to strike a balance with nature without humans in the picture. This position is not supported by any evidence (at least not any derived to credible sources). The fact is, since humans exist within nature, we MUST be part of it. As long as we're around we will influence nature and wild animals, no matter how hard we try not to. And by not taking an active roll in conservation and game management, wild animals (like deer) would continue to do what they instinctively do until their overpopulation overwhelms the natural food supply and drives them into contact with man, whether we like it or not. Once the ecosystem is overwhelmed, the result will be that the excess population will starve and die (couldn't be any worse than a bullet through the heart, eh?), and because of overcrouding, diseases like Chronic Wasting Disease will spread like wildfire and possibly kill millions of animals and, in the case of zoonotic diseases such as Bovine Tuberculosis, spread disease to humans (much like the bubonic plague, only worse).

Oh, and one more reason hunting, specifically, is good for the environment. Hunters spend billions of dollars annually on guns, ammunition, bows, licenses, and other hunting gear. Licensing fees go directly to the state DNR to support conservation, wildlife and game management efforts. In most states there is also a surcharge (tax) for the above items that also goes toward conservation efforts. So every hunter contributes indirectly a great deal to conservation efforts when we spend money to do the environment a favor anyway. Most hunters are also conservationists and environmentalists, both in principle and practice, since our pass-time depends on us NOT destroying the environment and wildlife. Anti-hunting and/or animal rights groups spend millions of dollars toward advertising their misguided beliefs, but only a token amount, if any at all, is spend toward conservation efforts. Most of the anti-hunting animal rights people I've met are urban dwellers by choice and by nature, who actually spend very little time in the woods or have any real knowledge of how ecosystems function and how conservation works. They are just gripped by the feel-good emotional cause of not "hurting" the animals. Those who actually know a thing or two about nature, when pressed, acknowledge that game management is necessary and/or revert back to a strictly emotional argument that hunting is violent and causes pain and "suffering", and violence, pain and suffering is bad.

Hope this answers your question,

Mike


Gun control means putting the second bullet through the same hole as the first- Ted Nugent
NRA Member
Muzzleloading- Once you go black, you'll never go back!!


Edited by - driftrider on 10/16/2002 22:20:10