Andrea Lopez Labrador

English 111
Dr. Lacey
23/10/19

Is hunting ethical?
In this essay, I am arguing against hunting, and I’m going to explain the reason why people
don’t need to hunt to survive. Also, I’m going to explain the way that the hunters or
supporters of hunting think about this activity.

Hunting is still present in the 21st century and is something that must change. It is not
beneficial in any way even if the activist groups that support the hunt say otherwise. It is time
to understand that in the middle of the hunting debate there is a third party involved, the
animals. We are intelligent living beings, and we still do activities that make us primitive.
Hunting is a centuries-old survival activity that continues in the 21st century when we have
many other ways to obtain animal meat. Hunting is not necessary to survive, it is simply an
excuse for those who are in favor of hunting to continue training using hunting as a
distraction activity. It is time to stop using animals as an easy target to entertain the human
species. We continue to behave as primitives, as unethical, aggressive and soulless beings
understanding this activity as a sport.

For those who do not know or are familiar with the main issue, I am arguing, in a nutshell,
the hunt to which we are going to refer is animal slaughter with some kind of purpose. In
prehistory, as different studies and prehistoric paintings show, it was hunted for human
survival, to be able to feed us or even not to die because when living with wild animals.
(Binford, 1985)

Animals can attack us simply for reasons of survival where we find two possible reasons: to
feed or to survive to try to avoid their death. At present, still hunted to feed us with animal
meat but, other purposes are included, hunting as a sport where the deceased animal is the
prize to be taken, as well as the trophy hunt that is the same with the difference that the
animals to hunt are an endangered species.

According to the pacifists or people against hunting like me, we believe in the idea that it is
unethical to support this activity or sport because we don’t need hunting in our lives. It
doesn't matter if your family or previous generations were hunters, support something that
you feel it as a way to feel being able to take the life of a living being is violent and immoral.
We need to eat meat, we need to feed or include in our diets part of the vitamins and qualities
of animals. But today we have different ways to get meat, and hunting is not necessary
anymore.

1
Andrea Lopez Labrador
English 111
Dr. Lacey
23/10/19

If we talk about supporters of hunting, we found the group formed by those who defend
hunting as a sport or even as an activity for their benefit purposes, be it a recreational,
economic or nutritional benefit. Here we would find hunters mainly, and those who practice
hunting or not and support hunting. They support the idea that the sport of hunting does not
have to be cruel, but rather orient it to a sport of survival and strength to feed or get
something from the hunted animals. (Shaw, 2017)

And then we find the correct side, those activists against all possible animal damage, who
support causes that defend the rights of animals and that are against playful or beneficial
issues with animal suffering in between. They support the idea that the sport of hunting is
cruel, unnecessary and unethical, where an animal can suffer a prolonged and painful death.
They justify that a human death by an animal that seeks to survive is not comparable since an
animal death by a human is a result of human pleasure. And my thesis, the thinking that we
don’t need hunting in our lives, supports this point of view. Where hunting is not a justifiable
activity, it is immoral and ancient. Evolution shows humans as intelligent people, but we still
do things like hunting. Some people think we need hunting to have meat in our lives, but
evolution and industrialization changed the way how societies obtain meat. (Komlos, 1998)

According to the hunters and those who profit from this activity, we observe the need for
hunting to obtain economic benefits that can be directed to the care and maintenance of those
endangered species, to restore their habitat and to keep these unique species alive. As Smith
said in his article where he argues that taxes and fees for the activity of protected wildlife
hunting in Africa help pay for the conservation of these natural habitats. This idea is
supported and justified by the defenders of trophy hunting and even the government of the
United States ( 2016).

In turn, the need to hunt to obtain animal meat and be able to provide animal meat in society
to feed us. In this case, we find political and regulatory limitations, where those who practice
this activity must comply with the regulations of the place where they are located or where
they want to hunt. In turn, limitations on the amount of hunting, where the bag limit law is
imposed on hunters and establishes the monthly amount of each species that can be killed.

Other limitations are seasonal ones where hunting is not allowed in the closed season. We
cand find different regulations depending on the kind of animal they were hunting. For

2
Andrea Lopez Labrador
English 111
Dr. Lacey
23/10/19

example, how we can see in the Dept of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife website, Deer just can
be hunted from October 5th until November 1st. (2019) Or even limitations produced by the
environmental problems that hunting may entail with the bullet caps that remain at the
hunting site and take many years to disintegrate. Those who violate these laws or other
hunting laws are known as poachers.

Nowadays, hunting is talked about as a necessity. The need to kill animals to get food from
them, hunt for economic goods to improve the lives of animals or hunt just to have fun. Many
think so and support these ideas either for their ideals, for the meaning of hunting in their
families or for the experiences obtained. In my case, I see these points as weaknesses of
people, as a denial of evolution to advance in society, as a way to follow those ideals because
it is more comfortable than offering a radical change.

According to the the pacifists, entities and all those people who reject hunting, they defend
the need to leave animals free, to leave them alone, to avoid being afraid of humans.
According to the National Research Council, “Science and the Endangered Species Act”,
they said that hunting is now nothing more than a violent form of recreation that the vast
majority of hunters do not need for subsistence (2019). They support not making animals
suffer because they have feelings such as fear or pain, and above all the refusal to make them
suffer for fun watching hunting as a sport. Pacifist defends not to profit from this activity,
they support natural reserves as a safe place for the maintenance of endangered species
without the need for extra benefits provided by trophy hunting.. The main limitations we find
are laws in society since to protest or put measures on this issue, these groups often disobey
the law or perform acts of civil disobedience, like make paintings against hunting during the
manifestations. And in turn, the economic need to be able to maintain the natural reserves,
without needing to obtain that income through animal suffering.

For those like me who are not experts on this topic, we can position ourselves on one side or
another of society concerning our ideals, we can criticize or comment on it but without
foundations and knowledge, it is difficult to know everything that involves this sport or
activity or what is behind. People and news just show the part that is beneficial for the
economy and they don’t care about animals or their lives.

3
Andrea Lopez Labrador
English 111
Dr. Lacey
23/10/19

We need animal food, but for this, it is not necessary to hunt the number of animals that are
hunted daily in the world. To obtain this food it is not necessary to cause suffering in the
animal.

Animals fear for their lives and suffer fear when they hear a shot or see a human being with a
weapon. It is not necessary to be able to cause a slow and suffered death caused by a bad shot
or lack of knowledge and practice.

People like power, feeling superior to animals, being able to snatch a life with their hands to
feel that they are valuable and braver or strong for doing something like that. It is a way to
have fun, to hang out, to entertain themselves where we can get ahead or some horns as a
prize. But what if it was the other way around? What would it look like to those who enjoy
hunting feeling like they make animals feel while on the opposite side? Helpless, with the
legs as an element of survival where your only defense is to run and pray so that the weapon
does not pass through your skin. But of course, hunters feel like animals do not have the
same rights to live that we humans have because they do not speak.

Others talk about the need to hunt for the economic benefits to keep the species alive. (Jan,
2012) And to this, my question is, who ensures that this money is directed to the maintenance
and protection of the species and not to profit from it? Besides, it could add the activity of
natural shelters where they protect and care for animals or even the life cycle itself. Animals,
like humans, are beings that have survived with each other for years, without the need for
economic benefits or excessive hunting. Animals do not need more food, or better facilities;
they need to be free just like us. The economic benefits only the one who receives them
knows exactly where each dollar obtained goes and, taking into account the income we obtain
with trophy hunts, it seems to be an important issue to doubt about the hunting and protection
of these species in danger of extinction.

Hunting as a matter of survival seems to me to be something old and difficult to protect as an

argument. Animals, if they needed to eat, they would kill us, since they move by instincts.
But surely a wild animal does not start killing humans simply for fun. Animals kill for
survival, to feed or not to die, they would not take life to entertain themselves. The thing that
we do. It is time to leave the activities that make us primitive and evolve finally.

4
Andrea Lopez Labrador
English 111
Dr. Lacey
23/10/19

REFERENCES

(2019) Season Dates and Bag Limits: Hunting Laws & Rules: Hunting & Trapping: Maine
Dept of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Retrieved from: https://www.maine.gov/ifw/
hunting-trapping/hunting-laws/season-dates-bag-limits.html



(2019, 21 August) The Endangered Species Act Is Under Political Attack. Earthjustice.
Retrieved from: https://earthjustice.org/features/endangered-species-act-under-attack?
gclid=EAIaIQobChMIhKHj_d-p5gIVj8DACh3dLAQcEAAYAiAAEgJULPD_BwE



Binford, L. R. (1985). Human Ancestors: Changing Views of Their Behavior.
Journal of Anthropological Archeology 4, 292-327. Retrieved from: https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0278416585900091?via%3Dihub 



Jan (2012) Can hunting endangered animals save the species? CBS News.
Retrieved from: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/can-hunting-endangered-
animalssave-the-species/4/



Komlos, J. (1998) “The New World’s Contribution to Food Consumption during the
Industrial Revolution.” The Journal of European Economic History: 67-82.



Shaw, H. (2017) On killing. Retrieved from https://honest-food.net/on-killing/



Smith, J. F. (2016, June 13) Trophy Hunting Fees Do Little to Help Threatened
Species, Report Says. The New York Times. Retrieved from: https://
www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/us/politics/trophy-hunting-fees-do-little-to-help-
threatenedspecies-report-says.html?_r=1