Motion : Hunters Conserve Wildlife

We had a short debate today about the above motion. It was a very interactive debate and a lot of lessons were learnt. The following are brief points raised.

Points for the motion

First speaker : The anti-hunter argument that hunting threats wildlife is inaccurate and untrue. Thanks to science, hunting quotas and procedure established BT wildlife biologist and professional big game managers , wildlife sought by hunters are in fact thriving. Each state wildlife agency uses hunting as a game management tool in line with the North American Wildlife Conservation Model to help manage predators and prey populations.

Second speaker : Hunting helps maintain healthy animal population z preventing overcrowding, resource depletion and the spread if diseases. Furthermore, it promotes active engagement with nature and ensures humans are invested in preserving wildlife and land

Points against motion

First speaker : For centuries humans have claimed to be more superior to any other species in the world, because of this humans tend to kill wildlife that have the capacity to take care of themselves. People do not realize that nature doesn't need people, people need nature. Hunting alters the natural composition of animal herds and even when population sizes are maintained, it negatively impacts their long term survival (population affects their reproductive systems and animals can fail to reproduce , this can lead to extinction of species)

Second speaker: Endangered animals are already at risk of extinction by poachers and natural predators: legalized hunting exacerbates the problem. Even if hunting is legalized, domestic and international regulatory agencies that oversee hunters are often pressured to set quotas based on industry demand and not wellbeing.