return to About PETAreturn to peta.org
 
Home Get Active Media Center TV Cruelty-Free Living  Shop  About PETA Donate Now
 
Subscribe to E-News
 
 
Search
 
About Us
Contact Information
FAQ
History
Ingrid Newkirk
Financial Reports
Hampton Roads, Virginia
About PETA.org
Get Involved
Milestones
PETA in the News
Victories
Get Active
Work at PETA
Intern at PETA
Volunteer at PETA
Subscribe to E-News
Join Our Online Community
Attend PETA's Conference
Subscribe to E-News
Resources
Action Alerts
Media Center
Videos
Podcast


About PETA > FAQs > Wildlife

Wildlife FAQs

“Without hunting, wouldn’t deer and other animals overpopulate and die of starvation?”

Starvation and disease are unfortunate, but they are nature’s way of ensuring that the strong survive. Natural predators help keep prey species strong by killing only the sick and weak. Hunters, however, kill any animal they come across or any animal whose head they think would look good mounted above the fireplace—often the large, healthy animals needed to keep the population strong. And hunting creates the ideal conditions for overpopulation. After hunting season, the abrupt drop in population leads to less competition among survivors, resulting in a higher birth rate.

If we were really concerned about keeping animals from starving, we would not hunt but instead take steps to reduce the animals’ fertility. We would also preserve wolves, mountain lions, coyotes, and other natural predators. Ironically, many deer herds and duck populations are purposely manipulated to produce more and more animals for hunters to kill.

“Aren’t hunting fees a major source of revenue for wildlife management and habitat restoration?”

The relatively small fee that each hunter pays does not cover the cost of hunting programs or salaries for game wardens. Hunting fees pay for hunter programs that benefit only hunters, like manipulating animal populations to increase the number of animals available to kill. The public lands that many hunters use are supported by taxpayers, and funds benefiting “nongame” species are scarce.

“Isn’t hunting OK as long as I eat what I kill?”

Did the fact that Jeffrey Dahmer ate his victims justify his crimes? What is done with a corpse after its murder doesn’t lessen the victim’s suffering.

Furthermore, hunters are harming animals other than the ones they kill and take home. Those who don’t die outright often suffer disabling injuries. Additionally, the stress that hunting inflicts on animals—the noise, the fear, and the chase—severely restricts their ability to eat adequately and store the fat and energy that they need to survive the winter.

Hunting also disrupts migration and hibernation. And for animals like wolves, who mate for life and have close-knit families, hunting can severely harm entire communities.

“Isn’t hunting much less cruel than factory farming?”

Yes, and Jack the Ripper was less cruel than Hitler—but that didn’t make him a nice guy. It is true that killing an animal in the wild is less cruel than the months of torture that animals endure on factory farms. However, hunting, like farming, disrupts families and causes pain, trauma, and grief to both the victims and the survivors. Why cause any suffering when we can avoid it?

“What about people who have to hunt to survive?”

We have no quarrel with subsistence hunters and fishers who truly have no choice in order to survive. However, in this day and age, meat, fur, and leather are not a necessary part of survival for the vast majority of us.

Unfortunately, many “sport” hunters have borrowed from aboriginal tradition and manipulated it into a justification for killing animals for recreation or profit.

“Is recreational fishing OK if the fish are released after being caught?”

Unfortunately, people who practice “catch and release” fishing cause no less harm to fish than do other anglers. Fish who are caught and then returned to the water suffer such severe physiological stress that they often die of shock, or their injuries may make them easy targets for predators.

Fish often swallow a hook so deeply that to remove it, the fishers shove their fingers or pliers down the fish’s throat and, along with the hook, rip out some of the fish’s throat and guts. We can appreciate nature and bond with friends and family without hurting animals. Find out more at FishingHurts.com.

“Why Should Animals Have Rights?”

Supporters of animal rights believe that animals have an inherent worth—a value completely separate from their usefulness to humans. We believe that every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering. For more information, click here.

More Information
General
Animals Used for Clothing
Animals Used for Entertainment
Animals Used for Experimentation
Companion Animals
Vegetarian/Vegan
Wildlife
CDW Ends Ad Campaign Featuring Chimpanzees
Nike and Cole Haan Ditch Fur!
H&M Refuses to Buy Mulesed Wool
Subaru Pledges Not to Use Great Apes in Future Ads
Yale Cancels Pro-Animal-Testing Lecture for Kids
A.C. Moore Stops Rabbit-Pelt Sales and Goes Fur-Free
Printer-Friendly    l    E-Mail This Page    l    Subscribe to E-News    
About PETA    Donate Now    Privacy Policy    Disclaimer    PETA Web Sites   
Click here to return to PETA.org