Thesis (MPhil (Philosophy))--University of Stellenbosch, 1999. / The hunters and anti-hunting have been arguing for years over whether or not trophy hunting should be allowed. While attempts have been made to resolve the issue, no widely acceptable solution has yet been found. Hunters have put forward various arguments including: religion, instinct, sustainable utilization, money, excessive populations and the wildlife management support argument. These have usually been criticized for being management orientate and not addressing the focal question of the anti-hunters: 'What gives man the right to hunt'. Anti-hunters have countered these arguments and presented new ones. These include: cruelty, animal rights, animal liberation, special and rare species as well as religion and wildlife management support arguments. The anti-hunters have used sympathy and emotion to gain support for their movement while making effective use of the media. Hunters on the other hand have been slow to make use of this communication tool. In presenting their arguments, a fundamental difference has been identified between the use of the various terms. The seemingly simple word 'ethics' has been used by the hunters to mean a code of conduct while the anti-hunters have used this word in indicate the morality of man's actions. The inherent value of an animal has also been debated. Does an animal have value in and of itself or does it only have value in that it is useful to man? Furthermore, is it the individual animal, the species or the population which has value? The value of wildlife as a natural resource and the right to use this resource is also discussed. Do developed countries have the right to determine the use that a developing country may make of its resources? Leopold's land ethics is discussed an it is shown how hunting preserves the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. In order to address the issues raised by the debate, it is necessary for the hunters and the anti-hunters to be willing to work towards common goals. It is unlikely that either side would ever be willing to give up their position but if they can agree to work towards some common goals, the long on-going debate would have achieved something. For this reason, four solution to this debate are looked at and analyzed. Their weakness and failures are discussed as well as their strong points. Taylor's Priority Principles are then analyzed to identify the first steps that need to be taken in draWing up guidelines for hunting. While this assignment does not attempt to identify these guidelines it does point out the need to have such guidelines and establishes that there can be common ground. Also, that it is desirable to achieve this aim. The assignment highlights the need for groups to work towards common goals without having to give up their beliefs and standpoints. There will be time later to determine whether or not man should hunt. In the meantime, man should be focussing on hunting ethically - both in the moral sense and within the framework of a good code of conduct.

Thesis (MA (Philosophy))--University of Stellenbosch, 2003. / Trophy hunting remains a highly contentious issue within environmental spheres of debate. Whether it is morally justifiable for humans to kill other living creatures for recreation, even if by doing so generates revenue in aid of their conservation, is a contested issue that will not easily rest and on which there is as yet no clear ground for consensus between opposing viewpoints. Within environmental philosophy, the topic of the morality of sport hunting has been extensively discussed, with the focus shifting constantly between various moral and ethical theories; while in an African context, big game trophy hunting continues to be a vital source of income for wildlife conservation and rural communities amidst the contested meaning of its role and place. The phrase "the hunting debate" refers to the ongoing discourses that surround the contested meaning and morality of recreational hunting, while the groups involved in the debate are polarised along the lines of preservationist and conservationist viewpoints. The lack of consensual ground between opposing viewpoints and the strength of the conviction of held beliefs and values result in a stalemate. In this thesis an attempt is made to map this stalemate by identifying the role players relevant to an African context, and the groups who stand in opposition to one another, namely those within the anti-hunting and pro-hunting communities. Points of contention are highlighted, and the various moral theories inherent in the debate are identified, with the crux of the stalemate being shown to be essentially between deontological moral assumptions regarding the wrongness of hunting, and utilitarian approaches that attempt to justify it morally according to an aggregation of benefits. The meaning of hunting for the Ethical Hunter is also clarified, as is the meaning of the hunting experience as a philosophical and historical symbolic construction. The political nature of the debate is also explored against the backdrop of a postmodern description of culture and communities, as is the way in which certain symbols are employed as ideological tools within the debate, and how they serve to influence public opinion regarding the morality of hunting. The hunting experience is discussed in detail as a historical construct, and certain hunting narratives are briefly identified in this regard, as are the symbolisms of indigenous hunter-gatherer hunting practices. This is in order to identify similarities or differences in meaning of the hunting experience, and so doing reach a position to say what hunting with integrity may mean. Integrity as a Virtue is promoted as the founding conceptual criterion around which discussions of trophy hunting may be based, and trophy hunting of the Big Five species in Africa is contextually explored with this notion in mind. While trophy hunting of the Big Five offers tangible and much needed instrumental benefits, it does not stand up well to a critique of "the hunting experience" as a historical construct and as a commodified package, as The Hunting Experience in this sense is seen to lack authenticity in terms of an idealised and primitivist notion of the meaning of Ethical Hunting. The paradox of Big Five trophy hunting is that it is very hard to justify, as it is seen to reinforce dualistic assumptions of nature, and objectify animals as a commodity; notwithstanding the moral uncertainty surrounding the act it can, however, be seen to offer benefits that are pragmatic and tangible, for ecosystems as well as humans. However, with the exception of strictly utilitarian approaches, the findings of this thesis suggest that instrumental economic benefits are not enough to justify trophy hunting of the Big Five in Africa from a moral philosophical perspective, although in keeping with the aims of the study no attempt is made to posit one moral position over another as to the morality of trophy hunting. In conclusion, it is suggested that trophy hunting be de-emphasised as an inevitable and singularly viable wildlife management tool, and instead be understood in terms of a short-term strategic compromise, as doing so allows more room for the growth of ideas that may offer an acceptable alternative. Based upon the findings of this study, it is acknowledged that such a compromise is essentially and theoretically also a compromise of integrity, which may nevertheless within certain contexts be necessary in the short-term.