| Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| What is your view on hunting?; Does hunting contribute to conservation? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 20 2014, 03:19 AM (8,746 Views) | |
| Cape Leopard | Jun 20 2014, 03:19 AM Post #1 |
|
Heterotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What is your view on hunting - is it a good or a bad thing? Should hunting be outlawed? Is it ethical in your view or not? Why or why not? Does hunting contribute to the conservation of rare species? Is it a valid method of managing wildlife and as a conservation tool? In this day and age, can hunting be viewed as a legitimate industry and/or hobby, or does it belong in a past era? Is the pleasure people get from hunting a reasonable justification for continuing the practice? Let's hear your views! |
![]() |
|
| Marek | Jun 20 2014, 05:39 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A promising thread topic. Although the perspectives you would procure from an animal-based forum might be assumed to be skewed, I find a surprisingly noticeable portion is comfortable with animal slaughter in some form or another. As such, I doubt very many will wholeheartedly object to the practice, so long as it is "vindicated" by consumption of the targeted animal. If I might personally opine, I am completely averted to the slaughter of any individual animal which meets a certain set of criteria, which I will outline here quickly. My approach to morality is, if I can so claim, logically founded; I will assume, at first, that all entities, whether living or not, are to be treated exactly equally in terms of moral consideration. Then, however, I will reason that inanimate objects are unworthy of these rights, and that morality needn't apply to them, unless there are higher implications. This is because they possess nothing of the things which might make a being valuable (being used very loosely here), and could not, lacking anything reminiscent of consciousness. Then we are left, with enough sieving, with life as a whole. Certain organisms, which I will not call primitive but which are basal cladistically speaking, do not have complex body plans at all, meaning that they are as capable, for all relevant purposes, as the already excluded objects. Plants and comparably sessile organisms have no evolutionary pressure to develop emotional functions, or at least nervous systems capable of producing what we might call pain, and in fact, have much against such adaptations (as they would wear down the helplessly suffering plant). There is no scientific evidence that plants display any of the criteria I have thus far hinted towards (to clarify, a being must be capable of suffering in order to be owed moral consideration). The same applies to Fungi, and so we have excluded two domains entirely and a handful of kingdoms beyond that. We are left with Animalia, the only clade to include organisms which can objectively be described to possess the named criteria. Chordata is the best fit, but some arthropods also require moral rights, and in my opinion, it is best, whether unethical or not, to leave all life intact (although this is not necessary, unless, again, it affects morally valuable beings).
Edited by Marek, Jun 20 2014, 05:41 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Vodmeister | Jun 20 2014, 12:24 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Ultimate Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hunting should be very restricted and limited. Likewise, poaching already endangered species deserves a very heavy fine for the crime. All in all, I'm not as much against hunting as some others on this site, but it obviously needs to be controlled. |
![]() |
|
| k9boy | Jun 20 2014, 05:43 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| FelinePowah | Jun 20 2014, 08:03 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Pussy Lover
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why hunt when we have a billion domestic animals to eat..? |
![]() |
|
| kingkazma | Jun 20 2014, 08:22 PM Post #6 |
|
Apex Predator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And how come we can not hunt birds of prey? |
![]() |
|
| Ausar | Jun 20 2014, 08:45 PM Post #7 |
|
Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can! Xi-miqa-can!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If there's a place that's in dire need of controlling the population of a particular species (ex: I guess an invasive species) or if the people in that area really do need to hunt for basic needs (ex: any hunter gatherers still remaining), I guess it can be justifiable. |
![]() |
|
| da pink | Jun 20 2014, 09:23 PM Post #8 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There are species, generally invasive, that need their populations kept at certain non-dangerous levels with regards local ecosystems. There's also native species, especially in the UK, that need culling as their population without natural predators reaches levels that have negative affects on the flora & fauna. Also, it is in our genes. There is an avatistic pleasure (for some) in fulfilling this. Some huntrers, who eat mainly what they hunt or barter with their kills would argue an animal hunted and killed has a much more natural and "happier" life than a pig bred for slaughter. They are mainly prey animals after all, and to avoid being killed by predators is just part of their life. I doubt they care much whether they're killed by a pack of wolves or a brace of hunting dogs and a dude with a knife....... |
![]() |
|
| Marek | Jun 21 2014, 08:04 AM Post #9 |
![]()
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think it is fairly obvious that hunters kill primarily, if not solely, because they enjoy doing so. Hunting is a hobby for most. Any justification provided is a constructed one. They do not experience a realization and thereafter strive to balance local ecosystems; they make a habit of slaughtering fauna and then fling any incomplete excuse they can garner at the objecting public. Overall, hunters do not care to restrict their methods to ensure decidedly beneficial ramifications; they are simply not concerned enough. Any environmentalist devoted to preserving indigenous fauna will likely be opposed to animal slaughter altogether, so people to whom that latter sentiment does not appeal will very likely be indifferent to the former as well. Hunting, historically and currently, is the source of more problems than it ameliorates. |
![]() |
|
| vegetarian | Jul 1 2014, 09:36 PM Post #10 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
is murder and should be punished with years of prison or to life |
![]() |
|
| romanianborz | Jul 1 2014, 09:42 PM Post #11 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I am 100% against trophy hunting and also against hunting rare species. |
![]() |
|
| vegetarian | Jul 1 2014, 10:04 PM Post #12 |
|
Herbivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What is your view on the murder human? Hunting is murder. Animals have life and no man has the right to kill them for hobby or for food, although it is not absolutely necessary |
![]() |
|
| MightyKharza | Jul 1 2014, 10:14 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If it's done within reasonable limits and the animal is not in danger of extinction, and its carcass is eaten, then I have no problem with it. I'm a hunter myself and make a point of only taking invasive, edible animals (pheasants, rabbits and grey squirrels). |
![]() |
|
| FelinePowah | Jul 2 2014, 01:28 AM Post #14 |
![]()
Pussy Lover
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So these hunter that hunt for there own food.....never ever go and get meat from a super market...yeah right.. |
![]() |
|
| Palaeogirl | Jul 2 2014, 02:01 AM Post #15 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I really don't think a wild animal living a happier life is a good excuse to kill it instead of an animal raised for slaughter. By that same logic we should really only be eating people's pets since they have the best lives of all. I am absolutely against hunting in all forms. In countries with a huge meat industry like the US has nobody should hunt. You can't justify it. Not even the overpopulation excuse makes sense to me because I firmly believe that we should allow the natural process to regulate the population. Sure, the deer might have a population explosion but it will crash once they exhaust the food sources they can live on. Denying natural selection is high on my list of worst possible things humans do. Even in countries that cannot just go to a supermarket and buy a steak, I still think hunting is bad. Call me immoral if you want but humans are overpopulated enough as it is. It's not the fault of the people in those countries but I really don't think its fair for a species that outnumbers its prey more than 10 to 1 (which is the case for pretty much everything commonly hunted) to hunt. We already use too much resources and we're already threatening too many species. We need some way to regulate our numbers and the best way I can think of is to have a population that we can support entirely of our own means. I don't think that's a realistic scenario at all but its the best one I can think of. Edited by Palaeogirl, Jul 2 2014, 02:03 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Zoological Debate & Discussion · Next Topic » |





![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)








9:47 AM Jul 11