On Safari for sport for fun etc.. Those kinds of reasons are both selfish, self gratifiing and highly destrutive in both action and mentality. They are also highly dangerous in todays world where the gun has made the act of killing a much reduced risk for the hunter - especailly if you hunt for plains animals like many you find on african safari - where shooting from a safe distance is a high possibility --- tigers are not plains creatures and thus are harder to kill because you have to close distance with them to find and get a line of sight to shoot. However I said dangerous and then countered that so I should clarify - its dangerous for the animal (and by direct extension its ecosystem that it is a part of) itself. This is because the gun has made it easy and tourism is a big buisness =-= put the two together and you have a reciepy as deadly as the fur trade, skins, bone and meat trades. Infact one that can be even worse for the abuse of the animal. Consider pheasant shooting in the UK - today there are more and more tourist shoots starting up because of the high price tourists will pay to act the upper class gent and shoot for the day/week. They buy all the "right gear" and go out and shoot - but instead of a hunt or a few braces they shoot dozens of birds (with shotguns) most of which are simply let fly on one side of a hill - to be shot as soon as they take flight (Rather like a living clay pidgeon). However the meat is lost because butchers won't take birds filled with shot and the shooters themselves will only take a brace or two at the end of the day. Leaving many killed birds to go to waste. For pheasant shoots the birds were always raised for the hunt before (originally a food source as well as sport) - however animals like otter, fox, tiger, lion etc.. are not breed for the kill - they are taken direct from wild stocks only. Thus an increase in killing results in reduced growth or even loss of growth in the populations (eventually that leads to extinction without fail unless growth again is allowed to increase). And of course when lots of money gets involved peoples willingness to heed advice gets lost and its very easy to over predate upon the animals and thus cause massive destruction. Killing of other animals of course does go on for good reasons - consider deer in the UK - an animal which now has no predator save man to control its populations. Without culling and control of their populations their main method of self control would be to increase in population until such a time as they eat more food than is produced in a year - thus they would stave. A boom and starve cycle would start up, but such a cycle is destructive by nature because pressured and under threat lands would have little to no recovery time and thus would be a more risk to die of completly. Add into that the fact that habitat destruction would also affect other populations and you have a massive problem; and that is without taking into account the fact that many ecosystsmes are already in need of recovery time from mans activities. If you want a "REAL" challenge then put down the gun and pick up a camera (I am serious). I know several people who have swapped the gun for the camera (or binoculars) and without fail most are well into their senior years and many lose the drive/desire to hunt altogether. Heck one guy I know still shoots only to cull the deer (as needed and no more) each year to help stave off a starve cycle starting up because he has grown to care for them enough to not wish that they suffer. Cameras are also far harder than a gun - not only must one track as a hunting - get into perfect position - but one must often be a lot closer for the "killer shot" and also have the light perfect and from the right angle - two things a hunter might never worry about save to ensure that they are not easily lit or shadowing their prey. Heck even getting the right shot itself is a far harder thing than many appreciate.