Hunting issues according to melissa white

Interview with PETA Representative M. White, personal communication, September 28, 2016.

Through my interview with PETA representative, Melissa White, I got a valuable insight from someone who opposes hunting and human’s use of animals for food. Melissa White has the credentials of being an active supporter and representative of the PETA movement. My question to Mrs. White was what her organization’s opinion on hunting was. She responded by saying that, “ Hunting might have been necessary for human survival in prehistoric times, but today, most hunters stalk and kill animals merely for the thrill of it, not out of necessity. This unnecessary, violent form of “ entertainment” tears animal families apart and leaves countless animals orphaned or badly injured when hunters miss their targets” (2016). My second question to Mrs. White was if she thought that hunting was helpful or harmful to animal ecosystems. Her response to this question was, “ Animal populations will keep themselves in check through natural processes such as natural selection. Species have always been self-regulating, and modern-day hunting can cause unnatural spikes in populations” (2016). My third and final question was what her opinion on trophy hunting was. She took a firm stance against not only “ 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. On private properties that are set up as for-profit hunting reserves or game ranches, hunters can pay to kill native and exotic species in “ canned hunts.” These animals are hunted and killed for the sole purpose of providing hunters with a “ trophy” Because these animals are usually kept in fenced enclosures, they never stand a chance of escaping, fighting back, or surviving. Hunters kill these animals solely in order to hang their heads, horns, or antlers on the wall and eat their meat. This gives hunters an unfair advantage even when they’re obeying the laws and killing “ free-range” animals. trophy hunting but the consumption of animal meats by saying that, “ 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. On private properties that are set up as for-profit hunting reserves or game ranches, hunters can pay to kill native and exotic species in “ canned hunts.” These animals are hunted and killed for the sole purpose of providing hunters with a “ trophy” Because these animals are usually kept in fenced enclosures, they never stand a chance of escaping, fighting back, or surviving. Hunters kill these animals solely in order to hang their heads, horns, or antlers on the wall and eat their meat. This gives hunters an unfair advantage even when they’re obeying the laws and killing “ free-range” animals. Hunting is completely unnecessary. With so many cruelty-free and vegan options available at so many stores, there is never a reason to harm any animal. Consuming animals is actually terrible for human health and the environment” (2016).

This interview was very helpful because it provided me with an opinion on the topic of hunting from someone who is firmly against trophy hunting and hunting in general. The information I have obtained from this interview will be provide me with a strong opposing viewpoint to my personal stance on the topic of hunting. This source was more helpful than some of my other sources because it allowed me to hear an opinion from a representative from one of the largest animal rights organizations, PETA, which will be a very valuable insight to have in my final paper. I felt that this source was somewhat biased because they seemed to completely oppose the idea of hunting or consuming animals for food. While they did support most of their information with facts, some portions of their responses seemed opinionated.

This source fits into my research because it provides me with a valuable opposing viewpoint to the side of this controversy that I plan to support in my paper. This source has enhanced how I think about the topic of hunting because it allowed me to get a glimpse of why the opposing side of this controversy supports what they support.