Big Animal Hunting

not killing it but merely wounded it. The wound was not fatal, and the team tracked the lion for 40 hours before shooting it with a rifle, skinning the corpse, and cutting off the head .
Targeting such creatures as Cecil, opponents contend, undermines conservation efforts by diminishing wildlife populations. "When an adult male lion is killed, the destabilization of that lion's pride can lead to more lion deaths as outside males compete to take over the pride," Jeff Flocken, North American director for the International Fund for Animal Welfare, wrote in August 2013 in National Geographic. "Once a new male is in the dominant position, he will often kill the cubs sired by the pride's previous leader, resulting in the loss of an entire lion generation within the pride." …show more content…
"Ukutula, a lion park near Johannesburg…also breeds the majestic animals for tourism purposes. Rather than sell the right to kill them, however, it sells the right to photograph and interact with them," the Economist asserted in August 2015. "Their business model illustrates an important point: African fauna has commercial value while living too. There are better ways to build tourism-based economies—and to conserve nature's great beasts—than down the barrel of a gun." And even if big game hunting did bring big profits to small villages and others, opponents claim, that would not justify the wanton violence of the sport. "The pro-hunting lobby maintains that it supports African economies and protects endangered species by creating a market for their lives," the Economist stated in August 2015. "So what if hunting is economically rational? Slavery is economically rational too, [but] that doesn't make it morally defensible…. [R]ight-thinking societies do not conserve animals by sating the bloodlust of gun-toting