Arguments Against Internet Hunting
The term "fair chase" is used to describe a major element of hunting. It refers to a physical presence in the field with the animals, using a bow or a firearm, as part of the sporting tradition. Opponents say that clicking a computer mouse long distance is a far cry from that tradition [source: Humane Society].
Surprisingly, organizations like Safari Club International, which supports the hunting of exotic trophy animals, and the National Rifle Association both oppose Internet hunting [source: Humane Society]. Even hunters themselves have spoken out against computer-assisted remote hunting, citing the need for maintaining good sportsmanship and the physical experience of hunting in nature. Many hunters view traditional hunting as a time to share with friends and to get away from civilization or as an opportunity to provide their families with food. They distinguish between hunting and killing [source: Axtman].
Another argument against the practice of remote-controlled hunting is that it doesn't require any knowledge of state or local laws regarding hunting or wildlife. Other concerns include the distancing of the hunter from the act of killing, so that it becomes a way to be desensitized to death. Furthermore, it extends no respect to animals. Yet another issue is the potential danger to humans at the ranch site. Although the workers there have the ability to override a remote hunter's shot, some fear that such technology is dangerous to humans [source: Animal Protection Institute].
One thing is fairly clear: Those in favor of Internet hunting, who deny that the practice is unsporting, will continue attempting to provide it. Mention has already been made of the possibility of an offshore game hunting preserve [source: Humane Society]. Whatever your views on Internet hunting, this is one practice to watch closely.