She's killing animals for sport, whether she eats it afterwards or not seems irrelevant to me.
No, she is killing animals so she can eat. She chooses to participate in the cycle of life in a hands on, non-denial fashion that allows her to be an active participant in nature. Mankind has lost its connection with the natural world and its place in that world, we are mammals, we are omnivores and we are also an integral part of the natural world, not a passive observer somehow disconnected from having any effect on our surroundings.
The only difference between hunters and those opposed to hunting is that hunters accept their role in nature, while those opposed to hunting deny that for anything to eat another thing dies. Far more animals are killed and displaced for agriculture and urbanization than are ever taken from hunters. In fact entire eco-systems are permanently altered or destroyed to build houses and plant soybeans and corn. Insects, worms, snakes, squirrels, gophers, deer, bear...etc you name it is directly affected when we expand based on our needs.
As deer, bear and other species are increasingly confined to smaller and less desirable habitats, the need to hunt actually increases for a variety or reasons including but not limited to, lack of available food, increased disease, dangerous human animal encounters that include car accidents, bear and big cat attacks on children and pets and nuisance encounters such as coons, possums, etc in garbage and deer eating the foliage from human gardens.
The hunter provides a valuable service in this day and age, that those who never venture beyond the pavement cannot even begin to realize. Although, with todays super markets and fast food life is easier to live, it is no less important for humans to consume food in order to live and when all else fails (as with Hurricane Katrina) the hunter and woodsman will be the go to guy so that you may live.
