Deer Hunting_Free Response

Many people believe hunting deer is cruel and unnecessary. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has a page dedicated to precisely this subject. PETA explained that when hunters do not kill the deer right away, it causes prolonged pain and suffering. This suffering includes a disruption of their migration patterns, destroying families. PETA assured readers that nature would allow the populations to sustain themselves as long as they are left alone. This is because natural predators will kill off the weakest animals, allowing the strong to survive. This is survival of the fittest. The article went on to warn against canned cruelty – for-profit hunting reserves. Their alternative was to control the populations by neutering the deer and returning them to their natural habitats.

While these are great ideas on paper, it is easy to pick apart the argument.

First, PETA stated that “Nature takes care of its own”. “The delicate balance of ecosystems ensures their survival – if they are left unaltered.” I do not argue with this statement – if they really were left unaltered. However, society does not leave them unaltered. Statistics show that farm land is disappearing, taking wild animals homes.  Our society continues urbanization, and humans now “dominate the local ecosystem”. While one could try to argue against this expansion, it does not seem like this trend will end. Deer, and many other wild animals, have (and will continue to have) much less land to survive on.

On this little property they do have, the deer continue with their natural instincts – they will (at least attempt to) multiply. The more animals that are born, the more food that is needed. However, there is not an over abundance of land to give to the deer. They will be forced to travel for food. When this happens, they wander into streets, highways, and property of people. This can be worse than hunting the deer – much more painful for them and much more costly to us. After wandering does not work, they will begin to starve. This, too, is much more painful than hunting.

So, while it is true that natural predators will allow the balance of the eco-system, it is only if they are left alone. Their eco systems are not left alone in this day and age.

Hunting is used to regulate the population. It keeps the animals at numbers that the present eco-system can sustain. Because their habitats are no longer completely natural, hunters step in to help. However, I am sure there are hunters do not have helping in mind. That is why there are hunting rules and regulations – licenses, specific times to hunt, specific ages of deer to hunt, a specific number allowed to be killed per person, etc. These laws protect the deer population. 

On the one hand, PETA does make a good point. If our only goal of hunting is to protect the deer population, why not give them contraceptives? Indeed. It appears, however, to be a very costly and time-consuming process. Plus, not many people would have the medical knowledge to perform the procedure on the animals. In the end, it does not seem like the most logical answer. Also, PETA is looking to maintain their natural habitat. How is this natural?

On the other hand, hunting does not have one goal. While the laws protect the deer, the hunters probably have different reasons for hunting.

Many cook with deer meat. The argument could be made that this is cruel in itself. However, what animals are eaten is simply cultural norms. For example, if an American were to eat their dog or cat, they would probably be greeted with a very negative response. It is culturally unacceptable in America, but happens in China every day.  What animals are eaten are simply cultural norms.

Animals will always have to be killed in order to be eaten. Hunters are simply heading to the woods to get a meal instead of a grocery store. They do the dirty work instead of mass factories (where the animals probably are treated worse than an animal in the woods).

When everyone in the world becomes a vegetarian, then the argument can be made that deer should not be hunted.

Deer hunting is also enjoyable. It gives a fantastic reason to sit in the woods all day and enjoy nature. It also allows family and friends to come together. For me, my uncles, grandpa, and cousins come together from hours away to spend a weekend hunting. Stories shared in the woods creates a great bonding experience.

Conclusion: Deer hunting is not cruel and unnecessary. While it is cruel for a deer to be injured instead of killed, this is not the goal of hunting. In reality, it is much worse for the deer to wander and be hit by a car or starve than to risk a bad shot. Hunting controls the population instead of relying on only natural predators. Natural instincts cannot simply be relied on when society has already taken so much land. In addition, hunting is regulated by laws and is used for food.

At least your neighbor isn’t shooting your cat.