My Argument for Hunting

I know, shocking, right? Coming from a newly devout vegetarian and strong animal rights advocate, this must seem quite the shocker. However, this section on hunting has broadened my perspectives on something and helped me adapt a few others. First off, I think it's important for me to mention that I have no problem whatsoever with people who eat meat. That is a choice you must reconcile, or not, with yourself. Though I do have a problem with the way in which the meat was produced (referring here to the dominance of CAFOs as our meat source), I do not hold anyone who consumes it at fault.

That said, I will state simply that I believe subsistence hunting is the only defensible type of hunting. I will explain this assertion.

First, we discussed the bushmen who rely on gorilla meat as the only source of food in their area. How can we tell them there are other alternatives when there clearly are not? In more advanced societies like the one we live our daily lives in, there are indeed other ways to obtain all the necessary nutrients to survive. But this is not true of say, as Alex brought up, people living in the Himalayas who will without a doubt have to consume a yak's meat, drink its milk, and use its fur for warmth in order to survive. Thus, you cannot tell these people their actions are wrong or immoral. There is a justification of survival here for humans that exists just so much so for animals. An animal would kill to survive, so I justify it here on that basis.

The second reason I justify subsistence hunting is because it was a practice which naturally regulated our ecosystem in the, what now seems, long-distant past. I stated today in class that "By not interfering, you are interfering"; and I stand by this statement 110%. What I mean by it is that when humans do not hunt animals, as was necessary like mentioned above, they do become "overpopulated" and tend to eventually trample on one another. Example: There are too many coyotes and not enough food; not only will the food source be forced towards extinction, but the coyotes will also as they cannot feed their lot.

It's really a common sense concept. And I suppose I will have to go against my own statement that saying "animal overpopulation" is a human interest, because I just proposed it was an animal one too. In the same right, humans lived with wild animal populations in complete peace for thousands of years. This was done so by subsistence hunting which kept everything completely in check.

Concepts around respect or morality seem to bog down a conversation which could otherwise be solved relatively easily. And I believe I just have resolved it. As for trophy hunting, it is out of the question simply because it serves no purpose except to satisfy a cruel and vile human interest. There is no point and it should not continue.