Organization like PETA might claim they care about the environment, but then why is none of their money going to help the environment rather than going to trying to banned hunting. According to PETA in their article “Why Sport Hunting Is Cruel and Unnecessary”, “Hunters kill any animal whose head they would like to hang over the fireplace-including large, healthy animals who are needed to keep the population strong”. This is far from the truth,even though some hunters will do it, yet most will let the bigger healthier animals grow until they are old and have spread their genes before killing them. This ensures the hunters that they will have more healthier animals on their property. PETA saying that hunters only kill the healthy animals is a false statement too. When hunting with dogs they usually catch the old, weak, sick, and injured of that species and there is no wounding; the wildlife is either killed or escapes unharmed (Barrington). Most anti-hunting groups, such as PETA, are charities which are supposed to base their statements on firm evidences which is not …show more content…
Yes it is because it helps control animal populations at safe and healthy rates. Hunting also creates a revenue for conservation efforts. In some cases, it allows some communities that would not usually have revenue have one. Hunting may have some cons but the pros overwhelm the cons. Organization such as PETA do not have a foot to stand on when it comes to hunting. PETA fighting to banned hunting is like the government taking away our basic rights. It will never happen because they do not have strong enough evidence to do so. Hunting has been part of American history and tradition since before the first settlers. Hunting will continue to be a tradition that fathers past onto their sons for many years to