I think there is no morality in hunting animals just for fun.

Your viewpoint and valuable comments would be highly appreciated.

I think that hunting is not acceptable not only from the moral side, but also from the point of view of common sense. There are still relict conserved communities where hunting is a means of survival. But these are unique cases, at this moment these are being justified. The second type is hunting, as a means of earning (fur animals, such as sable; then rhinos; dolphins, etc.), the third (and in my opinion the most disgusting) is hunting for pleasure. In general, in developed societies, hunting looks like unwarranted cruelty and channeling unwanted human activity. In addition, hunting damages the animal world, which is already depressed and disappears rapidly. Therefore, I do not see reasonable arguments supporting the hunt "for fun", at least. This type of hunting can be prohibited relatively easily (including exotic "traditional" kinds, such as hunt with falcon). As for hunting for earning, this type is gradually disappearing (unfortunately, along with rare animals - the objects of this hunt).

"Competitive hunting" (for the purpose of "liberation of the territory" - the destruction of buffaloes in the USA, kangaroos in Australia, saigas in Kazakhstan) has practically gone down in history, but one should not forget about this. It remains only the "regulating hunt" (wolves, wild dogs, rabbits), but there must be specialists, acting based on knowledge and exact calculations.

If you hunt animals for your survival or to regulate their population in absence of predators it is morally acceptable. However if you do it for pleasure, it is to my opinion not acceptable.

Depends on the reason for hunting. I think it should be out of necessity, and nothing else. Otherwise one would surely be bearing a moral burden someday.

Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov, Edwin Chigozie Nwokorie , Jean-Pierre Jost and Fateh Boutekkouk.

Thank you for your valuable responses.

Your comments are welcome.

Best regards,

it depends on the purpose, if you hunt to eat or to live, that is ok. if you are hunting for nothing except enjoying your self , it is unethical

Thanks dear Doaa El Amrousy for your inputs.

Others, please share your views and thoughts.

Best regards,

The answer would depend on your religious beliefs. If you believe that all living things (includes humans and animals) have soul and further believe that taking away a sound is immoral, then the practice of hunting may be immoral to that person. If you believe that one needs to hunt and use the hunted animal for food and nourishment, then that person morally justifies the killing. From a biology standpoint there is a 10% rule, meaning that only 10% of the energy will be passed on from one trophic level to the next. Thus a lot of energy is wasted when someone eats an animal. Humans are better off eating the plants directly which will be ecologically more efficient.

Thanks dear Srini Vasan for your inputs.

Others, please share your views and thoughts.

Best regards,

It does actually

Hunting animals can not be acceptable regardless of the purpose. We have groceries, to buy food, it is not a sport, it can not be method to control the population of some species. It is full cruelty and sadistic behavior of human beings.

Thanks dear Marwah Firas Abdullah Al-Rawe and Meltem İdiğ-Çamuroğlu.

Your comments are welcome.

Hunting for the fun to kill an animal as a trophy is immoral, in my opinion. I also think that bullfights are immoral, too, for this reason. Personally, I find it morally reprehensible to have fun when the suffering of sentient beings is involved. There are many other ways to show skill or to have fun that do not involve hurting or killing sentient brings.

Now, if the hunting is done, as it has been through history, to feed your family or group, especially if it involved using the whole animal for survival purposes, then I cannot think of it as immoral.

Yes hunting is moral. As long as you are obeying the law. If you are breaking the law you are a poacher, and a poacher is immoral.

Frankly speaking it is very controversial activity.

Thank you very much Dear Sadanand Pandey for your sincere and wonderful opinion.

Your comments are welcome.

I greatly appreciate your valuable response.

Others, please share your views and thoughts.

Best regards,

I agree to the answer by Dr @ Jean-Pierre Jost

I think there is no morality in hunting animals just for fun.

Hunting animals can not be acceptable regardless of the purpose.

Thank you very much Dear Sadif Khan, Mohammad Mehdizadeh , Syed Asad Ali Zaidi and Sadanand Pandey for your sincere and wonderful opinion.

Your comments are welcome.

I greatly appreciate your valuable response.

Others, please share your views and thoughts.

Best regards,

I agree to the answer by Dr @ Jean-Pierre Jost

Thank you all.

Your comments are welcome... . . .........

I refuse to hunt the animals

Thank you Alaa Jabbar Al-Manhel

Your comments are welcome.

Best regards,

I agree to the answer by Dr @ Jean-Pierre Jost

Dear Sikander,

As I see it, to hunt animals to our food may be rmorally acceptable, even though I have much respect for all vegeterians. Such hunch, however, should be made without hurting the Environment. To hunt animals for fan in a highly immoral behavior because we are harm them.

KInd regrads,

Orlando.

Though I live in Montana, hunting is not only something I would not do, but it upsets me. BUT, I know that some species (e.g. deer and a number of others) need to be thinned (their numbers cut down on) for their own good (given limits to the territory where they live and their inability to well take that under sufficient consideration themselves); often/sometimes the number and various kinds of hunting permits (BUT NOT ALL) seem to be taking this into perspective -- and properly regulating things. Thus, at least under the circumstances, are "good".

What perhaps should be worried about more is: lack of diversity in species because of limiting their territory TOO much (a BIG example: close familial inter-breeding is a problem for Yellowstone Bison and wolves). Obviously, this has little to nothing to do with hunting (and hunting, in no way I can think of, helps this problem). THE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IS KNOWN AND IT IS IMPORTANT WE ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH IT: To reduce close familial inter-breeding, animals should have a way to mix with LARGER NUMBERS of their kind: The solution involves leaving or making connections between all the most major population areas and, by that I mean: leave or further create (and, in some/many cases, create) CONNECTIONS BETWEEN MAJOR NATIONAL PARKS, etc.; Big example: Yellowstone should have a clear, usable connection to Glacier National Park (it barely has one now) AND then Glacier to parks north of that in Canada; Yellowstone should also have (or have created) connections to big parks to the south if of it., Tetons ... . [ Right now a logging company wants to do their logging in the corridor between Yellowstone and Glacier, and that was approved, but then fought against with injunctions, I believe. ]

ALSO:

With the resulting increase in territory, larger numbers of these precious sentient beings could live AND NOT NEED THEIR NUMBERS THINNED SO OFTEN OR MUCH by humans; that result would, too, be nice. I will explain. Animals (the bunch of naturally-occurring-together various ones) balance their numbers quite well, if there is natural species diversity (diversity OF species) (which develops naturally, if things are left alone and/or allowed to return to the conditions that once existed) there is more this-or-that to be eaten and this-or-that to eat -- you can see this also can be aided by connecting territories. Less hunting would (again) be needed.

Unfortunately such good solutions do not stick in peoples' minds or matter enough to People -- as is true of so many other things good for us and the other precious, amazing, dear sentient beings (and even reptiles, fishes, and insects). We MUST find ways to become more and rightfully mindful (with always striving for/with wise attention, which gets clearer, easier, and actually gets rewarding, with constant practice -- thus fortunately is also more directly for our own good). (AND we must be/allow-ourselves-to-be LESS IRRATIONAL -- though I will say no more here ; you know AND YOU MUST ACT, accordingly).

[ It is not hard to formulate some arguments that some of the other sentient beings are in many ways morally superior to us; AND, if you define intelligence in terms of doing what is needed for long-term survival, they are smarter than us, too. ]

Dear,

Brad Jesness

Orlando M Lourenço

Thanks a lot for your elegant answers.

With my best regards!

.