Monday, November 5, 2012

Is hunting morally wrong? (QA7)


Hunting on the most basic of levels seems to be justified in terms of past historic conditions. Today, however it seems to be more a pleasure with game hunting and such (and of course we have poaching which is wrong morally and by the law). I was discussing this topic with my housemate who is a environmental studies major. In the past hunting was a way to get one’s dinner for the night. Native Americans would hunt buffalo by herding them over cliffs, yet they still had a deep connection and respect for all things around them. In regards to ethics today, it seems that the killing of animals is immoral. I still eat meat, although have considered becoming a vegetarian (although I will never eat veal), but I don’t think there is any way to justify my actions in support of killing for food when there are so many alternative ways to still get protein. In the same way, I supposed meat is similar to smoking cigarettes; you know you shouldn’t smoke, but you smoke anyway [if you are a smoker]. 
Game hunting I initially thought was an immoral practice, although their are some benefits to hunting which may assist with protecting the environment. To this extent could hunting be a force for good paradoxically? Fisheries are created for the breeding of fish in lakes which are in turn helping population control by rising populations of fish in ecosystems. Many of the fish die on the way of transport, but the ones that survive go and replenish the stock of the wild. Now it may seem that hunting would be bad in this aspect as it is depleting the stock, but the agencies that are replenishing may very well be putting more fish in lakes and rivers and, therefore, actually helping the environment. This is all funded by hunting associations which, I assume, are required to regulate hunters in the first place so environments can be protected.
It seems then that game hunting can help keep environments functioning, which thus protects animals and biodiversity, which is then morally good. Although a some fish have to die, the greater goal of keeping the ecosystem functioning and healthy keeps alive, which is similar to many situations in historical circumstances. Could we get to a point however, where instead of having regulations, people are just eager to assist the welfare of the environment because they know it is for there own benefit? That seems to be the biggest problem of our age and a constant threat to the ideas of big business which we are forced to bow down to. 

1 comment: