Current Excel Award for Excellence of publishingCurrent Excel Award for Excellence of publishing

Current Laws On Trophy Hunting Must be ChangedEmily SterryMillard South High SchoolAbstractThis paper explores the the nine writers on research about trophy hunting. It  talks about the laws of trophy hunting and why they must be changed. Trophy hunting has been going on in our society for many years. People have always had something to say about it and their viewpoint.  This paper elaborates on many topics,  ranging from the decline in the population to poor governments being corrupted by the easy cash flow it brings into their wallets. These hunters are setting imbalances in the ecosystem, endangering the prime animals, and killing off Africa’s major income, wildlife tourism. From the gathered research trophy hunting causes more harm than good. Current Laws On Trophy Hunting Must be Changed”Trophy hunting isn’t a sport. In a sport, both sides know they’re in the game.” Paul Rodriguez. For supporters of animal rights hunting for trophies is one of the worst violations­. An animals rights starts with the assumption that animals deserve to live out their natural life just like humans. From that viewpoint killing any animal for a “sport” is morally wrong. It robs animals of their right of life, and their deaths serve no purpose. Although it was a crucial part of human’s’ survival 100,000 years ago, trophy hunting is now nothing more than a violent form of recreation that the vast majority of hunters do not need for subsistence. Hunting has contributed to the extinction of animal species all over the world, including the Tasmanian tiger and the great auk. Confirmed by the Conservation magazine, Gold Excel Award for Excellence of publishing and reporting on the Environment. (Can trophy hunting actually help conservation, 2014, par. 14). While many believe trophy hunting is okay, these facts prove them wrong. Some hunters think it’s okay to hunt wildlife and put them on display.  Many people who trophy hunt justify their actions by claiming they are helping the animal conservations. Big game hunters claim they support the local communities and conservations by paying for the big game hunts. .Declared by the Conservation magazine,  (What if we banned trophy hunting in Africa, 2015, par. 5). Hunters pay roughly three million each year for big game trophy hunting, but only three percent of those funds go to the conservations. Confirmed by Conservation magazine,   (What if we banned trophy hunting in Africa 2015, par.3).Trophy Hunters also think it helps control the animal population. 20,000 to 35,000 wild lions are left in Africa, and big game hunters legally kill around 600 each year. Informed by, Dr. Dawn, master’s degree in clinical psychology from Eastern Michigan University. (Dawn, D. 2017, par. 2). That’s two to three percent population loss, which is not maintainable, not adding the deaths due to poaching,  livestock protection, and mother nature  picking off the weakest of them. Confirmed by Ameena Schelling, Princeton graduate and daily Editor-and Chief of the Princetonian.(Schelling, A.2015, November 5th, par. 5). It’s evident that trophy hunting has no benefits and causes many problems for the animals. These animals lives are more important than a insecure man or women boosting their self-esteem by killing an animal for a trophy. Trophy hunters aren’t helping anyone by killing animals. The locals living in areas like Africa where trophy hunting is very high aren’t receiving any benefits from this act. The trophy hunters don’t help the conservations or the locals who live in these areas.The hunters are just out for the kill and the trophy, not helping others. An animal, especially if it’s a member of the iconic species, is worth far more to a country alive over the course of their life rather than dead. Ameena Schelling (2015), a Princeton graduate and daily Editor-and Chief of the Princetonian confirmed:While trophy hunting does bring in some capital to African countries, it makes as little as 1.8 percent of tourism revenues. The majority of tourists come to see Africa’s wildlife, not kill it. And if big game hunting continues to deplete that wildlife, it could take down the other 98 percent of Africa’s tourism income.  (par. 6)Trophy hunters aren’t doing any good killing the animals if anything they’re making it harder on Africa in the long run. Want proof? Conservation magazine (2014)Botswana in January 2014, prohibited almost all hunting after noticing the conservation cost of big game hunting along with the income developed from photo tourism: The photo tourism season is lengthier, allows better use of animals and employs tons of locals. (par. 3)  .In the first year of the ban, the country brought in around $344 million from non barbaric tourism. .Declared by the Conservation magazine. (What if we banned trophy hunting in Africa, 2015, par. 2). Yes, change does take time to get use to, but at time where the supreme animals are at risk of becoming extinct, killing a single animal for enjoyment while claiming to help the locals is very counterproductive. Shooting endangered animals as a contribution to the efforts of the conservations sounds like the greatest oxymoron of all time. With the hunters financial and political arm, this strong clique of trophy hunters is shamelessly promoting hunting as a type of conservation.( Crosswell, A. 2013 par. 7).  Many poor countries are so easily won over because it offers easy money to the government. Announced by  Downes Azzedine, President and CEO, International Fund For Animal Welfare. (Azzedine, D. 2016, June 14, par. 9). The sum of which goes straight into their pockets. The large amounts are mostly gathered by the Government, which are the ones to give out the hunting licenses.  (Azzedine, D. 2016, June 14, par. 9). Officially, only a small portion of this is sent to the the conservations. Endangered species handbook (2016). The Animal Welfare institute reported:”A new report by the Democratic staff of the House Natural Resources Committee challenges those claims, finding little evidence that the money is being used to help threatened species, mostly because of rampant corruption in some countries and poor wildlife programs. In concludes that trophy hunting is contributing to the extinction of certain animals.” (par. 4) In the sum of it all, trophy hunting has been proven to be the cause of extinction to all sorts of animals and poor governments are being fooled by the easy cash. Many try to justify the actions of killing an animal. If there was a shooting, it would automatically be on the news that someone was murdered. If an animal was shot in the head it would be considered an “activity” or “sport”. The act of killing any living organism should be considered murder and be punished equally. Why is the word “murder” reserved for only humans? Sixty-four percent of U.S. citizens voters told the  Humane Society of the United States that they oppose trophy hunting in the United States. ( Effects of trophy hunting on animals 2005, par. 4). Hunting for a ‘sport’ is pretty much another way to describe the thrill of killing. (Schelling, A. 2015, par. 9) .When a human is killed it’s automatically criminal behavior/ murder, but when an animal is killed it’s considered a “sport”.   (Schelling, A. 2015, par. 9) .Animals have the right of life and trophy hunters are taking one of the few rights animals have. (Azzedine, D. 2016, June 14, par. 10).Regardless of it’s a human or an animal the thrill to kill should punished equally for both sides.  Dr. Mallett (2014) an American theoretical physicist, academic, and author strongly claimed:People who hunt for sport are known as the “dark triad”. This includes narcissism, (egotistical admiration of one’s own attributes, and a lack of compassion), Machiavellianism (being deceitful, cunning and manipulative) and psychopathy (lack of remorse or empathy, and prone to impulsive behaviour. (Par. 6)Many serial killers have started off by killing animals for example, Jeffrey Dahmer. Study shows there is similarities between individuals who harm animals and sociopathic behavior. Validated by Dawn Drucker, master’s degree in clinical psychology from Eastern Michigan University. (Drucker, D 2016, par. 4). This proves that there definitely needs to be background checks on trophy hunters. Why do trophy hunters find pleasure in killing animals? On social media you see these hunters with huge smiles sitting next to an animal they murdered. (Azzedine, D. 2016, par. 15). The largest and most dangerous prey tend to evoke the biggest smile upon the trophy hunters. (Effects of trophy hunting on animals. 2005, par. 4).  “Demonizing other beings is a technique used in war and torture propaganda, and in other calculated ways to eliminate humans and nonhumans from the moral equation. It is an indefensible prejudice and runs counter to creating peace.” (Schelling, A. 2015, par. 3). Those who trophy hunt like to be the “predator”, which is also seen in cases of sexual assault. (Conservation magazine, 2015, par. 2).These actions are not necessary, they encourage violence, suffering, and excetera to their kids or those who look up to them. People need to stop rationalizing the trophy hunters horrible behavior. (Crosswell, A. 2013, par. 7). “In reality, it will take one person after another refusing to kill. Indiscriminate killing will only stop when each person stands up and refuses to be part of this malignant extermination ideology. The end can start now.”  (Mallet, R. 2014, par. 7). Over time there has been a big drop in the overall population due to trophy hunting. Animals are suffering in all sorts of ways due to these killings. One of the ways this is happening is due to canned hunting and act that allows the animal no chance of survival. The term “canned hunt” refers to the shooting of exotic animals on game farms or hunting ranches. (Effects of trophy hunting on animals 2005 par. 2). It’s a business of breeding or buying exotic animals so that “hunters” can pay to be guaranteed a kill.”  Affirmed by Alexis Croswell intern with leading animal rights organization. (Crosswell, A. 2013, par. 3).  These breeders claim they are helping by repopulating the specie that is being bred, but these animals are no longer capable of living in the wild.. Ameena Schelling (2015), a Princeton graduate and daily Editor-and Chief of the Princetonian confirmed:”Taken away from their mothers at just a few days old and raised by humans, the lions are incapable of surviving on their own. Many of them are inbred, breeding with wild lions could weaken the species’ gene pool. And releasing a captive-bred lion into a wild lions’ territory could lead to fighting, upsetting the delicate balance – and the safety – of existing prides.”  (par. 13) Affirmed by Azzedine, President and CEO, International Fund for Animal Welfare, these breeders typically breed with big game animals, such as the White Lions. They usually charge $50,000 to hunt these animals. ( Azzedine, D. 2016, June 14, par.7).In Africa where canned hunting is very popular there is roughly 200 ranches with 6,000 to 8,000 lions incaptivated. (Azzedine, D. 2016, June 14, par.3). The fenced enclosures range from about only a few yards to to thousands of acres leaving these poor animals no chance of survival. (Azzedine, D. 2016, June 14, par.3). People who canned hunt animals do it for a thrill and that is sick, and inhumane. If someone put humans in an enclosed area to kill them they would be sent to jail and most likely a mental hospital, but for animals it’s just a price. “Animals on canned-hunting ranches are often accustomed to humans and may be native to the area, raised elsewhere and brought in, or purchased from individuals who are trafficking in unwanted or surplus animals from zoos and likely even circuses.”  Affirmed by Alexis Croswell intern with leading animal rights organization. (Crosswell, A. 2013, par. 6). These hunters and breeders are barbaric to allow such a thing to happen and then try to justify themselves and claim they are helping the animals in the long run. As a result, no animal should be put in a small enclosure to die for man or woman’s self pride.  The most compelling evidence is the unsustainable population loss it has caused. Big-game hunters target the largest, strongest, and most athletic members of a population. For lions, that means the male pack leader; for elephants, the oldest elephant with the biggest tusks. Killing these animals, who play a critical role in their communities, allows the population to collapse. Professed by Ronald Mallet, an American theoretical physicist, academic, and author. (Mallet, R. 2014 par. 2).  This means the hunt for one lion leads to the death of many others. “The Endangered Species Act has an arrangement that allows hunting of the most endangered animals if it’s done through legal channels.” Reported by Peta Kids, award winning of the humanitarian award. (Seven reasons why trophy hunting is wrong. 2013, par. 3). For example, the Black Rhino that was on the list for huntable species until recently declared extinct. Validation. Putting any animal at risk of endangerment or even extinction is not worth the cost. Hunting the prime members of an animal population can affect its gene pool.Validation This will reduce the average size of future generations and threaten the ability of the species to thrive in its own habitat. Validation.  In Africa, these animals are known as the “Big Five” the lion, leopard, rhinoceros, elephant, and Cape buffalo. Claimed by Azzedine T. Downes president and CEO, International Fund for Animal Welfare.  Downes, A. (2016, par. 25). The phrase “big five” was established by big-game hunters and refers to the five hardest  animals in Africa to hunt by foot. These animals are desired by the hunters. From the analyzed data 150,000 trophies have been imported to the United States alone from 2004-2014 and that number only continues to grow. Validation In conclusion, trophy hunting has caused a major downfall in the population throughout many species, leading them to endangerment or extinction.To wrap up, trophy hunting doesn’t help the conservations, these animal conservations are receiving as little to no benefits from trophy hunting. The population has decreased from hunting the biggest, baddest animals leaving lots of species close to extinction. Along with canned hunting, this act is killing off the supreme animals not allowing them to be capable to live in the wild. Locals in areas like Africa would do so much better without hunting tourism, considering it’s taking away their animals that most people come to see. Not to mention the psychology aspect, these hunters are demonstrating traits of the “dark triad”. From the gathered information, trophy hunting doesn’t prove to have any benefits that come along with it, only a dark, long, downward spiral that ends in disaster. References Azzedine, D. (2016, June 14). Killing for trophies an analysis of global trophy hunting trade. Retreived from, trophy hunting actually help conservation. (2014, January 15). Conservation magazine. Retreived from,, A. (2013, December 31). Five reasons trophy hunting is not conservation. Retrieved from,, D. (2017). Why Sport Hunting Is Cruel and Unnecessary. Animals are not ours.  Retrieved from, Effects of trophy hunting on animals. (2005). Endangered species handbook. Retrieved from,, R. (2014). How trophy hunting works. Arguments against trophy hunting. Retrieved from, ( Seven reasons why trophy hunting is wrong. (2013). Peta Kids. Retrieved from,, A. (2015, November, 5th). Hunters Say Trophy Hunting Helps Animals. Here’s Why They’re Wrong. Retrieved from, If We Banned Trophy Hunting In Africa. (2015, October 23). Conservation magazine. Retreived from, Style Argumentative Paper Scoring Rubric 1.  Title Page, Correct Headers, Correct Headings:                                  ______/ 5 points 2.  Abstract: correct format, length, and summary                                      ______/ 10 points 3.  Intro Para: proper hook (illustrating stance, well-defined focus,reference to hook, clear two-part argumentative thesis                                ______/ 5 points 4.  Body Sections: follows format, noticeable levels of pro paragraphs,varied use of transitions, strong validations utilized correctly,persuasive word choice, strong summary sentences, direct quoting(at least two) put in correctly, 7-11 pieces of research, long quotesdone correctly, opposition section done correctly                        ______/ 40 points 5.   Conclusion:  transition/restate thesis, recap main ideas, final “round off”        ______/ 5 points 6.  A.P.A. Style:  internal documentation done correctly, reference page is         correct, all sources in paper match references page (9 minimum)           ______/ 20 points 7.  Embedded documentation: utilized correctly in paper                            ______/ 5 points 8.  Conventions:  spelling, grammar, formal language, no you/your, verb tense,         unnecessary first person, punctuation, capitalization, italics, usage,         number rule, paragraphing, etc.                                                                  ______/ 10 points                                             ARGUMENTATIVE PAPER GRADE   ______/ 100 pts                                                                                                  X  2