Remove Hunters Remove Hunting Remove New York Times Remove Slaughtered
article thumbnail

From Today's New York Times

Animal Ethics

To the Editor: Re “ Working to Keep a Heritage Relevant ” (news article, Sept. 26): The “heritage” of hunting will continue its decline into irrelevance and will eventually disappear. First, there is no “heritage” of hunting as it is practiced today. In the early days trappers and others hunted for survival.

article thumbnail

From Today's New York Times

Animal Ethics

14): To the animals being slaughtered, it does not matter whether their killers are local or whether they will be eaten or displayed on a wall. Hunting is cruel and cowardly, and any attempt to rationalize or gain acceptance for it as a sport does not eradicate this fact. Their suffering is the same. Rebecca Sunshine Hartsdale, N.Y.,

article thumbnail

The Nonessential Whooping Crane

10,000 Birds

So, one might surmise, it’s OK if they get shot by hunters thinking they’re sandhill cranes? What could motivate gunmen (I cannot call them hunters) in two states to deliberately kill North America’s tallest and most critically endangered bird? Do all hunters realize that? It gives one to wonder why this designation was made.

2011 244