Hunters have been chasing birds with dogs for hundreds of years. This history makes it tempting to argue, as indeed many have, that hunting is instinctual, rooted deeply in our evolutionary history. From the moment the first human killed an animal for its flesh, hunting became as much a culturally defined as it was a biologically ordained activity. Over the millennia, layers and layers of culture have been deposited on whatever genes have contributed. (Blumstein, Alfred, and Joel Wallman, eds. 2000)
I believe that hunting animals morally should not be acceptable as Hunters understand that what they do causes pain and suffering. Hunters are also participants in a culture that increasingly holds pain and suffering unacceptable. While they do not take this to the lengths that animal activists do, hunters are nevertheless bothered by the thought that they have caused an animal to suffer. This sense of responsibility produced some of the most intense comments my questions elicited. People told of how they relentlessly tracked a wounded deer until they caught up with it and dispatched it, or until they were satisfied that the wound was a superficial one from which the deer would recover.
“Hunting arose from natural predation and for many responsible people, is carried on as a tradition. In earlier times, when a hunter killed an animal, there was rejoicing because he provided food for his family or tribe. There is, undeniably, a sense of pleasure and personal achievement and fulfilling tradition in such activity”. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/2921/LRE001.html
In this context there are also people who went for hunting and they track a wounded deer. The stories told in which a person was very proud of his tracking abilities as he was of his shooting. Everyone who hunts learns that it is wrong not to do all that can.......
