1. Why have people been talking a lot lately about how hunting is not ethical, and how hunting should be removed from our society all together? There have been many studies that have shown the positive impacts of hunting on not only the environment, but the economy as well. Many people argue that hunting is not morally or ethically correct. They say that hunting actually leads to the extinction of some species, and that it is a cruel and unnatural thing to do to animals. But without hunting would animals not become over populated and die in ways that are slower and more painful than if one was hunted? But, on the other end of the spectrum people say that without hunting, our environments would not be in the condition they are in without hunting. These people say that hunting maintains animal levels in a way that is beneficial for multiple different species of animals in that environment.
2. If people were to convince the government that hunting is not ethically or morally correct, and that our economy and environment would be better without hunting, then the environment would actually become ten times worse than it has ever been. People that are against hunting would be the ones that are causing the animals to suffer way more than any hunter could make them suffer. Hunting actually provides more for the environment than it could ever possibly take away from it.
3. Warren Gauden told me that hunting is the main source for funds for conservation biologists. Before I sat down with him, I never thought about hunting from an economic standpoint, I had always just thought about it from a ethical standpoint. Gauden shows me that what I do every year to prepare for hunting season, greatly affects not only me, but everyone in my community. Taxes that are levied against hunting supplies and equipment all goes to funds that help to better the environment.
Whit Gibbons says that in 2003 people that hunt and fish contributed more than $70 billion to the economy. Gibbons later says that hunters themselves do not actually better the environment, but they maintain the environment where it is in a sustainable manner. Meaning that the environment is not getting better, but it is remaining intact and undisturbed for other people to enjoy such as bird watchers or hikers. Gibbons also says that hunting keeps the environment clean, undamaged, and as natural as humanly possible.
The grey wolf was once an endangered species, but lately the population of Rocky Mountain Grey Wolf has been increasing rapidly. The wolves have actually become a problem amongst communities in Wyoming and Montana. The government called upon hunters to take care of this problem. President Obama lifted the ban against the hunting of grey wolves to ensure the safety of communities. The wolves are known to be aggressive and have actually killed people’s livestock. This shows that without hunters people and other animals could be in danger if hunters were not allowed to manage the population of some animals that are a danger to society.
4. My tentative thesis would be something like, “Many people argue that hunting is ethically and environmentally improper, but studies have show that hunting actually does in fact lead to a better environment.” Hunting is the main reason that our environment is as healthy as it is today. If hunting was not allowed, there would not be sufficient funds to help the environment get better and better everyday. How does hunting do this? All the money that is spent on hunting licenses, trips, land, leases, and other things involved with hunting, goes into the Environmental Protection Agency fund, to help the environment in any way possible.
5. The evidence that I will use in my argument is what I have already presented to you. I will use statistics that prove that hunting helps the economy. I will use other outside sources that show just how good hunting is for the environment and economy. Statistics are always something that help give your argument credibility, so I will use statistics and other tactics to get my argument across.
Works Cited:
Gauldin. Warren. Personal interview. 30 Mar. 2014.
Gibbons, Whit. “WHY IS HUNTING GOOD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT?” N.p., 23 Nov. 2003. Web. 01 Apr. 2014.
Black. Jeff. “Protected no longer more than 550 gray wolves killed this season by hunters and trappers” NBC News. 6 Mar. 2013. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
danielcox123 
My writing process for the proposal was way different than the other assignments this semester. I started off by researching my topic. I took time to talk to a friend of mine that is an Environmental Conservation Biologist to get more information on what I needed to know. The next thing I did was research on the computer. I am not into the whole library research stuff, so I thought I could find all the information I needed online. I found a couple sources online that really helped me through the beginning process of this paper. The main point that I was trying to get across to the audience was that hunting is, in fact, good for the environment. I do believe that I gave sufficient evidence supporting my claim to prove my stance on the topic. I believe that a couple strengths of my paper would be that I have knowledge of my topic prior to my research process. A weakness that I may have is presenting the information in a way that I feel is effective, but it may not be effective to someone with different beliefs than me. Are the sources that I have so far a good start, and if so, what other types of information would help my argument?
I think this topic is pretty interesting to argue with, because I never consider this issue before, and I would like to learn more from your essay. Your essay structure is logical, I can see why you choose this topic, and what matters to it. I think it is better to describe more about how the current information relate to your tentative thesis. Moreover, I think many people would have opposite opinion with your topic, it better to discuss every aspects specific to convince your audience. Good luck!