The House of Representatives passed an amendment that blocked the previously passed vote in 2015 that was issued from the National Park Service that had protected grizzly bears, wolves, black bears, caribou, and coyotes in Alaska. Now that congress has passed this new law, hunters are allowed to go into Alaska and kill entire packs of wolves, chase and kill black bears with trailing hounds, or kill grizzly bear families(cubs included) with bait. The Humane society, National Park Service, and other organizations are also upset because they believe they are ruining the animal’s habitats by destroying the population, as well as wrecking the economy of the National Parks. Many people have previously visited Alaska to see these animals in their natural habitat, but that could all change soon. On the other hand, Alaska is the least populated state in America, and having more hunters enter their state may boost population levels, decrease the poverty rate, and increase job opportunities. Besides that, the state relies heavily on the oil industry alone, and increasing sport hunting will help Alaska earn more money.
What is your opinion on this matter? Is it okay for hunters to come and kill these species? Why or why not?
What is more important: the lives of the animals, or the lives of the people living in Alaska and their economy? Explain.
Why do you think Congress would amend this law? What is the reasoning behind it?
Replies
Excellent job Lucy!
I myself don't think it is okay for hunters to kill these animals. There is a reason why they were protected so they need to continue to be protected. Personally I think the lives of the animals are more important because they provide a lot of things we need in the world. The people of Alaska can move to other places and find other jobs. The animals however can't just completely relocate their families. I think the only reason why Congress amended this law was to help created jobs for the people in Alaska.
I think that it is okay if they are killing species that there is an abundance of. If they are killing animals that are rare then it is a different answer. We should protect rare species instead of killing them. I think that Alaska is doing just fine with their economy and the people living there knew what they were getting into when they moved. So I think that the animals are more important than the people living there. I think that they could of amended it to let the growing populations decrease and then will create a new law.
I don't think that it is right to kill these animals. This is one of the only areas in the world that creatures can roam free.
I think that Alaskan economy is important but I think there are better ways of boosting it than just killing animals.
I think that congress wants to see Alaska be more populated, and by amending this law they are getting more hunters into the state.
I'm not against hunting, but hunting whatever, whenever, wherever, and as much as you want to is a problem. You should not be allowed to kill an entire pack of wolves; that's absurd.
Obviously human lives are more important than the lives of animals, but having a balanced ecosystem is just as important for the well-being of Alaska. Hunting may increase help the economy, but it also may not. Tourism is huge in Alaska. If all these animals that tourists come to see are killed, that could be a serious problem. Tourism creates a lot of jobs as well.
Congress probably thought it would boost the economy, but maybe they also figured that these animals weren't endangered, so why not?
Yes as long as it is limited, there are obviously tags so they can't just kill everything they see.
The lives of the people....Humans are on top of the food chain and if we put their lives over ours it wouldn't be right.....But they should still be kinda protected.
Because they wanted to boost reasons to live in Alaska as well as earning more income. I think they will put more restrictions though.
I don't think that hunters should be able to kill as many animals as they want where ever and when ever they want. I understand that some people like to hunt or need to for food, clothing, etc but I don't think they should be able to kill off all of the animals. I think it's silly that Alaska is using this law to boost their population and economy instead of trying to save these animals. There are other ways that they could attract people to the state than this. I think that Congress probably amended this law because Alaska does need more money and a higher population, but that doesn't mean this is the right way to do it.
I agree with your opinions! I think that this law isn't the best way to boost the economy; there are other ways Alaska can fix it. I can tell that you are against this law and don't agree with Congress about killing innocent animals. However, what if the animals aren't so innocent and have attacked people? Do you think that would make it okay for hunters to shoot and kill the animals?
I personally believe that this whole thing is ridiculous and it's incredibly sad to see how how greedy people really are. I think it is wrong for hunters to come and kill these species, especially since they are being purposefully killed on their territory. The lives of these animals are more important than some "hobby" that involves the death of innocent creatures. Alaska should find some other way to boost their economy. They shouldn't be able to just kill species (some endangered) whenever they feel like it.
Interesting viewpoints, Emma! I agree that they shouldn't be killing these animals, especially if they are innocent. This shows me that you are very into animal rights which is great! How would you suggest Alaska boost their economy besides killing these animals?
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next