Article

A Moral Defense of Trophy Hunting

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Abstract

This paper defends the morality of hunting for sport, also known as recreational or trophy hunting. Using an argument from analogy, I argue that there is no morally relevant difference between trophy hunting and another activity that most of us regard as uncontroversial. Since the latter is morally permissible, so is trophy hunting. Several disanalogies are examined and found irrelevant.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... Hunting is the practice of pursuing any living thing, usually wild animals, by humans for food, recreation, or trade (Hsiao 2020). This is an ancient activity, dating back thousands of years where hunting methods included the use of spears, large rocks, or running the animal over a cliff (Puertas et al. 2004;Gandiwa et al. 2014a). ...
... Trophy hunting, if based on scientifically designed and managed programs, can provide various socioeconomic and ecological benefits at the local, national, regional and global levels. However, trophy hunting has emerged as a debatable and contested issue in the world due to its profound sociopolitical and ecological consequences (Hsiao 2020). ...
... It follows that when poorly managed, trophy hunting can cause negative ecological impacts for the target species including population declines in the event of excessive off-take, threatening conservation efforts and even influencing the behavior of non-target species (Hsiao 2020). In sub-Saharan Africa there has been a noted decline of trophy quality of the hunted big game, resulting in some countries like Kenya banning trophy hunting from 1977 to date (Caro and Andimile 2009). ...
... Hunting is the practice of pursuing any living thing, usually wild animals, by humans for food, recreation, or trade (Hsiao 2020). This is an ancient activity, dating back thousands of years where hunting methods included the use of spears, large rocks, or running the animal over a cliff (Puertas et al. 2004;Gandiwa et al. 2014a). ...
... Trophy hunting, if based on scientifically designed and managed programs, can provide various socioeconomic and ecological benefits at the local, national, regional and global levels. However, trophy hunting has emerged as a debatable and contested issue in the world due to its profound sociopolitical and ecological consequences (Hsiao 2020). ...
... It follows that when poorly managed, trophy hunting can cause negative ecological impacts for the target species including population declines in the event of excessive off-take, threatening conservation efforts and even influencing the behavior of non-target species (Hsiao 2020). In sub-Saharan Africa there has been a noted decline of trophy quality of the hunted big game, resulting in some countries like Kenya banning trophy hunting from 1977 to date (Caro and Andimile 2009). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study was based on a temporal analysis of trophy quality trends and hunting effort in Chewore South Safari Area (CSSA), Zimbabwe, for the period 2009-2012. We selected four of the big five species, namely; buffalo (Syncerus caffer), elephant (Loxodonta africana), the leopard (Panthera pardus) and lion (Panthera leo) for analysis. Existing database of 188 trophies from 2009 to 2011 was reviewed and recorded using the Safari Club International (SCI) scoring system. Further, 50 trophies for 2012 were measured and recorded based on the SCI scoring system. Local ecological knowledge on trophy quality and hunting effort in CSSA was obtained through semi-structured questionnaires from 22 conveniently selected professional hunters in 2012. The results indicated no significant change in trophy quality trends of buffalo, leopard and lion (p > 0.05) over the study period. In contrast, there was a significant decline in elephant trophy quality trend over the same period (p < 0.05). The results showed no significant change in hunting effort over the study period for all the four study species (p > 0.05). Furthermore, seventy-two percent (72%, n = 13) of the professional hunters confirmed that elephant population was declining in CSSA and this was likely due to poaching. Professional hunters perceived trophy hunting as a source of financial capital generation for wildlife conservation (61%, n = 11), as well as positively contributing to the local economy (56%, n = 10). It was concluded that hunting has limited negative impact on species trophy quality trends when a sustainable hunting system is consistently followed in CSSA. CSSA management need to continuously monitor trophy hunting, animal populations and employ adaptive management approach to quota setting and species conservation.
Article
Full-text available
The widespread activity of recreational hunting is proposed as a means of conserving nature and supporting livelihoods. However, recreational hunting-especially trophy hunting-has come under increasing scrutiny based on ethical concerns and the arguments that it can threaten species and fail to contribute meaningfully to local livelihoods. We provide an overview of the peer-reviewed literature on recreational hunting of terrestrial birds and mammals between 1953 and 2020 (>1,000 papers). The most-studied species are large mammals from North America, Europe, and Africa. While there is extensive research on spe-cies' ecology to inform sustainable hunting practices, there is comparably little research on the role of local perceptions and institutions in determining socioeconomic and conservation outcomes. Evidence is lacking to answer the pressing questions of where and how hunting contributes to just and sustainable conservation efforts. We outline an agenda to build this evidence base through research that recognizes diverse social-ecological contexts.
Article
Full-text available
This book critically examines how Walt Disney Animation Studios has depicted – and sometimes failed to depict – different forms of harming and objectifying non-human animals in their films. Each chapter addresses a different form of animal harm and objectification through the theories of speciesism, romanticism, and the ‘collapse of compassion’ effect, from farming, hunting and fishing, to clothing, work, and entertainment. Stanton lucidly presents the dichotomy between depictions of higher order, anthropomorphised and neotonised animal characters and that of lower-order species, showing furthermore how these depictions are closely linked to changing social attitudes about acceptable forms of animal harm. An engaging and novel contribution to the field of Critical Animal Studies, this book explores the use of animals not only in Disney’s best known animated films such as 101 Dalmatians, but also lesser known features including Home on the Range and Fun and Fancy Free. A quantitative appendix supplying data on how often each animal species appears and the amount of times animal harm or objectification is depicted in over fifty films provides an invaluable resource and addition to scholars working in both Disney and animal studies.
Chapter
This chapter examines depictions of animal food farming, encompassing meat production, dairy farming, farmhouses, farmers, and the various species that usually live on farms in WDAS films. Part I explores the history of animal farming, and the common tropes evident in notable cultural representations of it. Part II documents how often animal farming has been depicted in WDAS films. Part III analyses key depictions of farming within WDAS films. Finally, Part IV examines Home on the Range (2004), a WDAS film set on a dairy farm that reinforces many misconceptions about the farming industry. This chapter concludes by arguing that WDAS’s image of animal farming has been consistently saccharine even though life has become far worse for farm animals since WDAS has been producing films.
Chapter
This chapter focuses on WDAS’s depictions of hunting and fishing. Part I of this chapter explores the history and current discussions surrounding these two practices. Then, Part II documents the frequency with which these practices have been depicted in WDAS films. Next, Part III explores how WDAS has portrayed hunting and fishing, paying particular attention to how hunted and fished animals have been depicted, as well as the portrayal of humans who participate in these practices. Finally, Part IV concentrates on how hunting and fishing were portrayed in 2003’s Brother Bear. This chapter concludes by arguing that the manner in which WDAS has depicted hunting and fishing reflects common speciesist attitudes. Additionally, WDAS has helped to sustain these speciesist attitudes with their own texts.
Article
This is a critique of Timothy Hsiao’s ‘A Moral Defense of Trophy Hunting.’ I argue that Hsiao’s arguments on pain, consciousness, behavior, cruelty, and necessity all fail. More importantly, I argue against his broader conclusion that non-human animals ‘do not have any inherent moral significance.’ My conclusion is that Hsiao’s moral defense of trophy hunting fails.
Article
Full-text available
Critics of industrial animal agriculture (also known as “factory” farming) have argued that its practices are cruel, inhumane, or otherwise degrading to animals. These arguments sometimes form the basis of a larger case for the complete abolition of animal agriculture, while others argue for more modest welfare-based reforms that allow for certain types of industrial farming. This paper defends industrial farming against the charge of cruelty. As upsetting as certain practices may seem, I argue that they need not be construed as cruel or inhumane. Any link between industrial farming and cruelty or inhumanity is contingent on certain cultural, behavioral, and psychological facts that are person-dependent. For many people working in animal agriculture, these facts do not obtain. To be sure, industrial animal agriculture has real moral hazards that must be carefully avoided, but all that this shows is that working with animals is not for everyone.
Article
Can one be cruel to an inanimate object? In the following I argue that one can in fact be cruel to an inanimate object, defining cruelty as taking pleasure in intentionally causing suffering to another person, animal or (in this case) inanimate object, whether such suffering be genuine, mistakenly believed, or sincerely hoped for. I label the conception of cruelty in question 'agent-subjective, possible mistake of fact', and touch upon some implications of this.
Article
Defending Life is the most comprehensive defense of the prolife position on abortion ever published. It is sophisticated, but still accessible to the ordinary citizen. Without high-pitched rhetoric or appeals to religion, the author offers a careful and respectful case for why the prolife view of human life is correct. He responds to the strongest prochoice arguments found in law, science, philosophy, politics, and the media. He explains and critiques Roe v. Wade, and he explains why virtually all the popular prochoice arguments fail. There is simply nothing like this book.
Article
This book treats the question of what a human person is and the ethical and political controversies of abortion, hedonism and drug-taking, euthanasia, and sex ethics. It defends the position that human beings are both body and soul, with a fundamental and morally important difference from other animals. It defends the traditional position on the most controversial specific moral and political issues of the day. © Patrick Lee and Robert P. George 2008 and Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Article
Some arguments for moral vegetarianism proceed by appealing to widely held beliefs about the immorality of causing unjustified pain. Combined with the claim that meat is not needed for our nourishment and that killing animals for this reason causes them unjustified pain, they yield the conclusion that eating meat is immoral. However, what counts as a good enough reason for causing pain will depend largely on what we think about the moral status of animals. Implicit in these arguments is the claim that sentience is sufficient for having moral status. These arguments, however, fail to specify the conceptual connection between the two. I argue in this paper that sentience is not sufficient for moral status. Thus, although animals experience pain as it is physically bad, their experience of it is not in itself morally bad. They are harmed in feeling pain, but this harm is not of a moral kind. This distinction parallels the more familiar distinction between moral and non-moral goods. When considered, this significantly mitigates the force of sentience-based arguments for moral vegetarianism. Since animals lack moral status, it is not wrong to eat meat, even if this is not essential to nutrition.
Article
What is the basis for being a subject of rights? And what beings possess that moral-status conferring property? In particular, are all human beings subjects of basic rights? I argue that the basis for being a subject of rights is a substantial nature—as opposed to an accidental attribute or set of accidental attributes—specifically, rational nature, that is, a nature oriented to conceptual thought and deliberate choice. I answer the objection that some beings are human beings and yet lack a rational nature, such as brain-dead bodies and radically cognitively impaired human beings.
Article
Many debates about the moral status of things—for example, debates about the natural rights of human fetuses or nonhuman animals—eventually migrate towards a discussion of the capacities of the things in question—for example, their capacities to feel pain, think, or love. Yet the move towards capacities is often controversial: if a human’s capacities are the basis of its moral status, how could a human having lesser capacities than you and I have the same "serious" moral status as you and I? This book answers this question by arguing that if something is human, it has a set of typical human capacities; that if something has a set of typical human capacities, it has serious moral status; and thus all human beings have the same sort of serious moral status as you and I. Beginning from what our common intuitions tell us about situations involving "temporary incapacitation"—where a human organism has, then loses, then regains a certain capacity—this book argues for substantive conclusions regarding human fetuses and embryos, humans in a permanent vegetative state, humans suffering from brain diseases, and humans born with genetic disorders. Since these conclusions must have some impact on our ongoing moral and political debates about the proper treatment of such humans, this book will be useful to professionals and students in philosophy, bioethics, law, medicine, and public policy.
Article
There is a lack of consensus among some conservation NGOs and African governments concerning the acceptability and effectiveness of trophy hunting as a conservation tool. This lack of consensus is due partly to a lack of reliable information on the economic significance and ecological impact of the industry. We provide a review of the scale of the trophy hunting industry, and assess both positive and negative issues relating to hunting and conservation in Africa. Trophy hunting occurs in 23 countries in Africa, with the largest industries occurring in southern Africa and Tanzania, where the industry is expanding. The trophy hunting industry has remained static or is shrinking in Central and West Africa. A minimum of 1,394,000 km2 is used for trophy hunting in sub-Saharan Africa, which exceeds the area encompassed by national parks. Trophy hunting is thus of major importance to conservation in Africa by creating economic incentives for conservation over vast areas, including areas which may be unsuitable for alternative wildlife-based land uses such as photographic ecotourism. However, there are a number of problems associated with the industry which limit conservation benefits. Several of these problems are common to multiple countries, suggesting that if solutions were developed, conservation benefits would accrue over large areas.
Embryo: A defense of human life
  • R George
  • C Tollefsen
WWF Policy and Considerations on Trophy Hunting
  • World Wildlife Fund
The difference of man and the difference it makes
  • M Adler
Applied ethics: A non-consequentialist approach
  • D S Oderberg
Body and soul: Human nature and the crisis in ethics. Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Academic
  • J P Moreland
  • S B Rae