Hunting

NAME: Alice Williamson

THESIS: Hunting is the only practical way to avoid the negative effects of over-population

BACKGROUND: I know a lot of outdoorsmen and I have heard bits and pieces here and there, but as I started to research this topic I found it to be fascinating.

OBJECTIVE: There are many people that disagree with hunting and think it is awful that hunters take a life of an animal. What some don’t think about is what would happen if we did not hunt to help keep the animal population under control. This essay will help shed a little light on some of the negative effects over-population would have on the animals themselves along with the environment and humans as well.

SUPPORTING POINTS:

1. Data to show population growth and statistics.

a) Very rare to see deer back in the 20’s and 30’s which restricted hunting, especially does.

b) Harvest data – does typically start reproducing in 2 years from birth, and very common to give birth to twins.

c) Research supported by funds from purchasing licenses.

2. How over-population effects the environment.

a) Agricultural and landscape damage.

b) Habitat degradation and destruction.

c) When vegetation is destroyed they move to a new food source.

3. Other effect of over-population

a) Diseases such as Lyme Disease (which can affect people and pets) and CWD.

b) Threat to motorists.

c) Death due to diseases and/or starvation.

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS:

1. There are other ways to control the deer population so you don’t have to kill them.

2. Hunting is cruel and hurts them instead of helping them.

3. The only one who benefits from hunting is the hunter.

RESPONSE TO COUNTER-ARGUMENTS:

1. Other forms of population control such as relocating or a form of contraception are both costly and not guaranteed.

2. The more deer the more of them will end up starving to death or dying from disease.

3. There would be significant economic loss due to the loss of...