{"id":172,"date":"2020-12-01T07:05:14","date_gmt":"2020-12-01T07:05:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thevegandragon.com\/?page_id=172"},"modified":"2023-10-10T07:39:48","modified_gmt":"2023-10-10T07:39:48","slug":"hunting-conservation-and-poaching","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/thevegandragon.com\/index.php\/educational-journals\/hunting-conservation-and-poaching\/","title":{"rendered":"Hunting, Conservation, and Poaching"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Ga-Maleven<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this journal I will be discussing hunting, how it doesn’t help conservation, and the affects of poaching on wildlife. I won’t be discussing the causes of poaching, for that will be in another journal<\/a><\/span>. Humans don’t need to eat animals and it harms our bodies<\/a><\/span>.

Hunting of various animals, from deer, bison, wolves, bears, foxes, whales, dolphins, sharks, tigers, lions, rhinos, giraffes, etc. is often done out of the desire of fun and “bragging rights.” Modern day hunting is no longer concerned about survival or a need. the act of hunting is actually doing more harm than good. While some species of animals are overpopulated, such as white tailed deer in Northern America, hunting these animals is actually doing the opposite of population control.

While ensuring populations do not get out of control, such as human overpopulation<\/a><\/span> and pet overpopulation<\/a><\/span> are, we must also ensure wildlife populations don’t become too much for their ecosystems. But what is the best way going about this? For the longest time it was assumed that simply hunting the animals would solve issues. The complete opposite happened. Due to a crisis with losing numbers many species ended up procreating even more. And with predators killed off by hunting, whether for sport or clearing them out for cattle farming, the other species were able to keep breeding freely. This allowed population to rapidly grow and thus begin to cause issues with loss of space and vegetation.

Hunting brings about another issue of which animals are killed. While natural predators go for the weaker and sick animals, hunters kill the larger and stronger ones. In the case of deer, for example, bucks collect and keep a herd of does to breed with. The stronger bucks are able to keep the weaker bucks away and pass on their genes. When a hunter kills a strong buck, the weaker bucks are able to breed with any doe and pass on their “lesser” genes. This allows the population to not only continue growing, but allows bad genes to spread.

A better way to handle overpopulation is with TNR. TNR (Trap-Neuter-Release) is when an animal is humanely caught and castrated, just as you would take your dog to the vet to be fixed. It is humane, cost efficient, and safe. By TNR-ing strong bucks, for example, they will be able to keep their herds and mate with their does, but only not impregnate them. The weaker bucks will still be unable to breed and thus population will begin to decrease. Bucks will still have their desire to breed, for the most part, since they already have a buildup of testosterone in them. This is the same reason why you must fix your male dog at an early age for waiting too long will allow too much testosterone to stay inside of them.

TNR can be easily funded given how the money used for hunting and hunting licenses can instead be used for this humane practice. And castrating males is far easier than females, making it an even simpler solution. This can be done for any species, and best part is it doesn’t cause anyone to die or harm the ecosystem.

While spaying females who have already gone through their heat cycle can bring a higher risk of cancer (have to spay BEFORE first heat cycle), female animals can be caught and have an IUD or birth control capsule inserted in them that lasts for years. This is inexpensive, less risky than spaying an already adult female, and ensures the animal is not harmed. And with birth control options getting better everyday for humans and other animals, it gets easier and more effective to use.

Hunting also brings about injuries to not just the hunters but other species. Dogs, cattle, cats, or other “unintentional targets” can end up being shot and killed\/wounded for simply being mistaken for the target animal or getting in the way. Many hunters are also injured from being mistaken for a target animal, a gun discharging, killed by wildlife, or other hunting accidents.

Hunting is not a quick and painless death, either. The animals often live for minutes, hours, to even months with injuries from bullets, arrows, or even spears. Shots to the head are not always instant deaths, as there have been many cases of non-human animals, and even humans, living for years with injuries to their brains. Such as this soldier with a bullet in his head<\/a><\/span>, and this deer with an arrow in her head<\/a><\/span>. Even wounds to the heart don’t always guarantee a quick death. Animals can live for a while after being hit in agonizing pain before they finally die. Sometimes they manage to run off injured and are never found by the hunter again, only to die later or continue for the rest of their lives with a painful injury.

Half of all animals shot by hunters are not even “collected” by the hunters as they manage to run off with bullets and arrows penetrating their bodies. They can suffer hours, days, even weeks with these injuries.

Reports have shown that many animals, especially those shot by bow hunters, die excruciating painful deaths.<\/a><\/span>

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. In an unpublished report for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Landwehr, T. J. (1983), surveyed 3,909 Minnesota bowhunters in 1982. The data from this study indicates a wounding rate of 53% in Minnesota. The study goes on to find that at a state-wide level nearly 6,500 Minnesota deer were shot by arrows and never retrieved in 1982.

2. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Quarterly Progress Report from St. Croix, Jan. 15, 1947, 191 bowhunters killed 24 deer and left 6 carcasses. Wounding rate was 50% (61 shots per kill).

3. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Quarterly Progress Report from St. Croix, Red Lake, and Cloquet, Jan. 15, 1948. St. Croix \u2013 293 bowhunter killed only three deer out of a population of 500-600. Red Lake \u2013 83 archers killed one deer and wounded another. Cloquet \u2013 27 archers \u2013 no deer killed.

4.Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Quarterly Progress Report from Camp Ripley, Oct. 15, 1954, archers killed 43 deer. A large number of deer were reported as wounded by archers.

5. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Quarterly Progress Report from Camp Ripley, Jan. 15, 1957, archers killed 96 deer. 30 deer were reported wounded.

6. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Quarterly Progress Report from Camp Ripley, July 15, 1959, 11,086 archers killed 403 deer, 59.1% wounding rate. In questionnaires bowhunters reported firing 2,550 shots to kill 126 deer (40.9%) and wound 182 (59.1%). An average of 20.2 arrows was fired per kill.

7.Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Summaries of Wildlife Research Findings 1991, edited by Blair Joselyn, Camp Ripley Preliminary Results. 1st Hunt \u2013 Oct. 19th, 1,626 hunters, Oct. 20th1,376 hunters: Hunters killed 119 deer. Hunters reported wounding and not retrieving 40 deer. 2nd Hunt \u2013 delayed until Nov. 30th, 591 hunters, Dec. 1st, 562 hunters: Hunters killed 100 deer. 12 reports of wounded deer.

8.A major study in Texas by Boydston, G.A. and Gore, H.G., (1987) collected data from 3,568 hunters over a thirteen year time period. The authors found a wounding rate of over 50% and found that more than 21 shots were needed per kill. The authors state that these numbers are conservative due to the fact that they are based on bowhunter reported surveys. This study concluded that shot placement is for all practical purposes random, that wounds clot quickly leaving poor blood trails, that poorly hit deer, more often than not, are lost, and that almost all abdominally shot deer die a slow death due to peritonitis.

9.A study by Aho, R.W. (1984) for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources indicates that bowhunting results in a 58% wounding rate.

10.Causey, M.K., Kennamer, J.E., Logan, J. and Chapman, J.I., (1978) indicated that bowhunting in both Alabama and South Carolina results in a 50% wounding rate.

11.In a survey of Georgia bowhunters, Croft, R.L. (1963), found wounding rates over 78%.

12.A study by Downing, R.L., (1972) found crippling rates of 50%. Crippling rate refers to unretrieved mortally wounded deer in Georgia.

13.Garland, L.E., (1972) indicates that bowhunting in Vermont has resulted in a wounding rate of 63%. 10

14.Gladfelter, H.L., Kiensler, J.M. and Koehler, K.J. (1983) found wounding rates of 49% for bowhunting in Iowa.

15.In a survey of archery hunters, Hansen, L.P. and Olson, G.S. (1989) found a wounding rate of 52% for Missouri.

16.Harron, J.S.C. (1984) found a 56% wounding rate for Wisconsin, as a three-year average.

17. Jackson, R.M., and Anderson R.K. (1982) determined wounding rates at 44% for Wisconsin.

18.Langenau, E.E. and Aho, R.W., (1983) found wounding rates of 55%, and 13.25 shots needed per kill in several Midwestern states.

19.In a study of South Dakota bowhunting, McPhillips, K.B. (1983) and McPhillips, K.B., Linder, R.L. and Wentz, W.A. (1985) determined wounding rates to be between 48% and 56%, and number of shots per kill to be 13.8.

20.In a study for the Missouri Department of Conservation, Sheriff, S., Haroldson, K., and Giessman, N. (1983) found wounding rates of 50%.

21.Stomer, F.A., Kirkpatrick. C.M., and Hoekstra, T.W. (1979) found wounding rates of 58% in Indiana.

22.Westcott, G. and Peyton, R.B. (1986) report wounding rates of 50% for Michigan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n



Hunting dogs are often shot accidentally or even purposefully. In Spain, dogs are hung for not doing well enough or getting too old. Dogs and horses are overworked, beaten, and killed when they are injured or become too old to continue. This is most common in countries such as Spain.

Hunting foxes, wolves, and other predators harms ecosystems for it allows prey animals to overpopulate and consume much vegetation. Predators are killed primarily for bragging rights and to help cattle farming<\/a><\/span>. Even though we do not need to eat or use animals, the current animal agriculture industry is destroying the planet not just by removing forests and causing habitation loss for wildlife, but also killing off wildlife and giving them less land to roam. Predators, having lost their natural prey when fleeing cattle ranchers and\/or urban development, are left to find other sources of food if they hope to stay in the same area. This leads to them going after livestock. The cases of predators going after livestock is fewer than the media portrays it as, given how predators don’t always get through the fences and avoid the much larger herds than what would be natural, but when it does happen it causes immense conflict and hatred towards the animals for trying to stay on their homeland. Trapping and releasing the predators into reserves or parks would be the best solution, but sadly many seem to think killing is the only answer to solve a problem.

Fox hunting doesn’t help reduce population and is incredibly cruel. The foxes are chased down by up to a hundred hounds, and then ripped apart by them. The same case is true for other hunting using dogs. They dogs are trained to track down, overpower, and tear apart the animals they are hunting, whether foxes, hogs, badgers, raccoons, bears, dear, coyotes, etc. It is a gruesome, horrifying, and very painful way to die. And often times dogs are seriously injured or even killed by the animal they are going after.

The effects of poaching and trophy hunting are the same as licensed hunting. While poaching aims to kill animals for a specific body part, such as rhinos and their horns, it is just as cruel and devastating as hunting an animal for their meat. Similar tactics are used, from tracking down the animals and killing them with guns, arrows, spears, or even poisoning them. The animals die slow, painful deaths, and often in the case of poaching, mothers die with their infants beside them. Trophy hunting harms populations and the ecosystems due to killing apex predators, already endangered animals, and going after the largest individuals. The trophy industry doesn’t pick problem animals and have them killed off to profit. Much of the time it is simply the first animal they find. The population of giraffes, elephants, lions, rhinos, and many other animals has significantly dropped due to trophy hunting alone.

Canned hunting has sprung up due to the popularity of trophy hunting. Lions are raised on farms where tourists may play with the lion cubs and have pictures taken. The lions are hand raised and become use to human interaction. When they are adults, they are taken to a large, fenced in area and released. People pay thousands of dollars to go into these enclosures on a vehicle and shoot the friendly lions when they come near for attention. The hunters are then told that they did something truly terrifying when they never were in any danger at all.

Hunting marine life, such as dolphins, whales, and sharks is also harming the marine ecosystem. Whales are electrocuted after being harpooned, then dragged aboard ships where they bleed out. Entire pods are wiped out by Japanese whalers, despite it being illegal to kill whales unless for scientific research or if you are an Eskimo. Dolphins are slaughtered brutally as well, stabbed and dragged ashore. Some are sold to aquariums or circuses across the world. And sharks, already being endangered for many species, suffer similar fates.

Hunting throughout history has seen to the extinction or near extinction of many species. Species now forever gone due to hunting include the Passenger Pigeon, Dodo Bird, Moa, West African Black Rhino, Pyrenean Ibex, Quagga, Caribbean Monk Seal, Sea Mink, Tecopa Pupfish, Great Auk, Elephant bird, Schomburgk’s Deer, Barbary Lions, Atlas Bear, Warrah, Falkland Island Wolf, Zanzibar Leopard, Carolina Parakeet, Toolache Wallaby, Bubal Hartebeest, Stellar’s Sea Cow, and many others.

Some species near extinction or possibly are extinct\/making a comeback that hunters have almost killed off include Javan tigers, Bengal tigers, Rhinos, elephants, Tasmanian tiger, lemurs, sea turtles, tuna, gorillas, manatees, leopards, cheetahs, red wolves, grey wolves, giraffes, orangutans, sharks, snub-nosed monkeys, and many other species.

Hunting holds no place in modern society. Killing wildlife for fun, “food,” trophies, their body parts, or culling them in hopes of population control continues to not help the species or environment, nor is the best course of action. There is simply no need to destroy these animals when humane alternatives exist. Furthermore, encouraging killing has psychological effects on human individuals. Humans who are taught that killing others is alright and do so regularly are more likely to become abusive, sociopaths, or kill humans or pets. With modern technology, it is now easier than ever to eat the natural diet that herbivorous humans should. We are better equipped to grow all the plants required to eat, uses less land, and therefore gives wildlife their freedom. Not to mention those who contribute to hunting are cowards who seem to believe hunting is the only way of proving themselves. Nothing is braver and respectable than showing compassion to even the most vulnerable of beings.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n