text:
Mariner 8

Mariner-H (Mariner Mars '71), also commonly known as Mariner 8, was (along with Mariner 9) part of the Mariner Mars '71 project. It was intended to go into Mars orbit and return images and data, but a launch vehicle failure prevented Mariner 8 from achieving Earth orbit and the spacecraft reentered into the Atlantic Ocean shortly after launch.

Mission
Mariner 8 was launched on an Atlas-Centaur SLV-3C booster (AC-24). The main Centaur engine was ignited 265 seconds after launch, but the upper stage began to oscillate in pitch and tumbled out of control. The Centaur stage shut down 365 seconds after launch due to starvation caused by the tumbling. The Centaur and spacecraft payload separated and re-entered the Earth's atmosphere approximately 1500 km downrange and fell into the Atlantic Ocean about 560 km north of Puerto Rico.

A guidance system failure was suspected as the culprit, but JPL navigation chief Bill O'Neil dismissed the idea that the entire guidance system had failed. He argued that an autopilot malfunction had occurred since the event had occurred at the exact moment when the system was supposed to activate. Investigation proceeded quickly and the problem was soon discovered to be the result of a malfunction in the pitch rate gyro amplifier. A diode intended to protect the system from transient voltages was thought to have been damaged during repairs/installation of the pitch amplifier's printed circuit board, something that would not have been detected through bench tests.

, Mariner 8 is the most recent US planetary probe to be lost in a launch vehicle malfunction.

Mariner Mars 71 Project
The Mariner Mars 71 project consisted of two spacecraft (Mariners H and I), each of which would be inserted into a Martian orbit, and each of which would perform a separate but complementary mission. Either spacecraft could perform either of the two missions. The two spacecraft would have orbited the planet Mars a minimum of 90 days, during which time data would be gathered on the composition, density, pressure, and temperature of the atmosphere, and the composition, temperature, and topography of the surface. Approximately 70 percent of the planetary surface was to be covered, and temporal as well as spatial variations would be observed. Some of the objectives of the Mariner-H mission were successfully added to the Mariner-I (Mariner 9) mission profile.

Total research, development, launch, and support costs for the Mariner series of spacecraft (Mariners 1 through 10) was approximately $554 million.

Spacecraft and subsystems
The Mariner 8 spacecraft was built on an octagonal magnesium frame, 45.7 cm deep and 138.4 cm across a diagonal. Four solar panels, each 215 x, extended out from the top of the frame. Each set of two solar panels spanned 6.89 m from tip to tip. Also mounted on the top of the frame were two propulsion tanks, the maneuver engine, a 1.44 m long low gain antenna mast and a parabolic high gain antenna. A scan platform was mounted on the bottom of the frame, on which were attached the mutually bore-sighted science instruments (wide- and narrow-angle TV cameras, infrared radiometer, ultraviolet spectrometer, and infrared interferometer spectrometer). The overall height of the spacecraft was 2.28 m. The launch mass was 997.9 kg, of which 439.1 kg were expendables. The science instrumentation had a total mass of 63.1 kg. The electronics for communications and command and control were housed within the frame.

Spacecraft power was provided by a total of 14,742 solar cells which made up the 4 solar panels with a total area of 7.7 m2 area. The solar panels could produce 800 W at Earth and 500 W at Mars. Power was stored in a 20 ampere hour nickel-cadmium battery. Propulsion was provided by a gimbaled engine capable of 1340 N thrust and up to 5 restarts. The propellant was monomethyl hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide. Two sets of 6 attitude control nitrogen jets were mounted on the ends of the solar panels. Attitude knowledge was provided by a Sun sensor, a Canopus star tracker, gyroscopes, an inertial reference unit, and an accelerometer. Passive thermal control was achieved through the use of louvres on the eight sides of the frame and thermal blankets.

Spacecraft control was through the central computer and sequencer which had an onboard memory of 512 words. The command system was programmed with 86 direct commands, 4 quantitative commands, and 5 control commands. Data was stored on a digital reel-to-reel tape recorder. The 168 m 8-track tape could store 180 million bits recorded at 132 kbit/s. Playback could be done at 16, 8, 4, 2, and 1 kbit/s using two tracks at a time. Telecommunications were via dual S-band 10 W/20 W transmitters and a single receiver through the high gain parabolic antenna, the medium gain horn antenna, or the low gain omnidirectional antenna.

title: Mariner 8


text:
Hunting

Hunting is the human practice of seeking, pursuing, capturing, and killing wildlife or feral animals. The most common reasons for humans to hunt are to obtain the animal's body for meat and useful animal products (fur/hide, bone/tusks, horn/antler, etc.), for recreation/taxidermy (see trophy hunting), although it may also be done for resourceful reasons such as removing predators dangerous to humans or domestic animals (e.g. wolf hunting), to eliminate pests and nuisance animals that damage crops/livestock/poultry or spread diseases (see varminting), for trade/tourism (see safari), or for ecological conservation against overpopulation and invasive species.

Recreationally hunted species are generally referred to as the game, and are usually mammals and birds. A person participating in a hunt is a hunter or (less commonly) huntsman; a natural area used for hunting is called a game reserve; and an experienced hunter who helps organise a hunt and/or manage the game reserve is known as a gamekeeper.

Hunting activities by humans arose in Homo erectus or earlier, in the order of millions of years ago. Hunting has become deeply embedded in various human cultures and was once an important part of rural economies—classified by economists as part of primary production alongside forestry, agriculture, and fishery. Modern regulations (see game law) distinguish lawful hunting activities from illegal poaching, which involves the unauthorised and unregulated killing, trapping, or capture of animals.

Apart from food provision, hunting can be a means of population control. Hunting advocates state that regulated hunting can be a necessary component of modern wildlife management, for example to help maintain a healthy proportion of animal populations within an environment's ecological carrying capacity when natural checks such as natural predators are absent or insufficient, or to provide funding for breeding programs and maintenance of natural reserves and conservation parks. However, excessive hunting has also heavily contributed to the endangerment, extirpation and extinction of many animals. Some animal rights and anti-hunting activists regard hunting as a cruel, perverse and unnecessary blood sport. Certain hunting practices, such as canned hunts and ludicrously paid/bribed trophy tours (especially to poor countries), are considered unethical and exploitative even by some hunters.

Marine mammals such as whales and pinnipeds are also targets of hunting, both recreationally and commercially, often with heated controversies regarding the morality, ethics and legality of such practices. The pursuit, harvesting or catch and release of fish and aquatic cephalopods and crustaceans is called fishing, which however is widely accepted and not commonly categorised as a form of hunting, even though it essentially is. It is also not considered hunting to pursue animals without intent to kill them, as in wildlife photography, birdwatching, or scientific-research activities which involve tranquilizing or tagging of animals, although green hunting is still called so. The practices of netting or trapping insects and other arthropods for trophy collection, or the foraging or gathering of plants and mushrooms, are also not regarded as hunting.

Skillful tracking and acquisition of an elusive target has caused the word hunt to be used in the vernacular as a metaphor for searching and obtaining something, as in "treasure hunting", "bargain hunting", "hunting for votes" and even "hunting down" corruption and waste.

Etymology
The word hunt serves as both a noun ("the act, the practice, or an instance of hunting") and a verb ("to pursue for food or in sport"). The noun has been dated to the early 12th century, from the verb hunt. Old English had huntung, huntoþ. The meaning of "a body of persons associated for the purpose of hunting with a pack of hounds" is first recorded in the 1570s. "The act of searching for someone or something" is from about 1600.

The verb, Old English huntian "to chase game" (transitive and intransitive), perhaps developed from hunta "hunter," is related to hentan "to seize," from Proto-Germanic huntojan (the source also of Gothic hinþan "to seize, capture," Old High German hunda "booty"), which is of uncertain origin. The general sense of "search diligently" (for anything) is first recorded c. 1200.

Types

 * Recreational hunting, also known as trophy hunting, sport hunting or "sporting"
 * Big game hunting
 * Big Five game (lion, elephant, African buffalo, African leopard, black rhinoceros)
 * Bear hunting
 * Bison hunting
 * Boar hunting
 * Tiger hunting
 * Reindeer and caribou hunting
 * Deer hunting/stalking
 * Medium/small game hunting
 * Fox hunting
 * Mink hunting
 * Coon hunting
 * Hare coursing
 * Squirrel hunting
 * Fowling
 * Waterfowl hunting
 * Shorebird hunting (snipe, woodcock, curlew, sandpiper, plover)
 * Upland hunting (quail, pheasant, grouse, turkey)
 * Pest control/nuisance management
 * Predator hunting
 * Wolf hunting
 * Jackal coursing
 * Coyote hunting
 * Bobcat hunting
 * Varmint hunting
 * Rabbiting
 * Rook shooting
 * Culling
 * Commercial hunting and traditional sustenance hunting
 * Seal hunting
 * Whaling, dolphin drive, dugong hunting
 * Alligator hunting
 * Kangaroo hunting
 * Other
 * Falconry
 * Green hunting
 * Poaching

Lower to Middle Paleolithic
Hunting has a long history. It predates the emergence of Homo sapiens (anatomically modern humans) and may even predate the genus Homo.

The oldest undisputed evidence for hunting dates to the Early Pleistocene, consistent with the emergence and early dispersal of Homo erectus about 1.7 million years ago (Acheulean). While it is undisputed that Homo erectus were hunters, the importance of this for the emergence of Homo erectus from its australopithecine ancestors, including the production of stone tools and eventually the control of fire, is emphasised in the so-called "hunting hypothesis" and de-emphasised in scenarios that stress omnivory and social interaction.

There is no direct evidence for hunting predating Homo erectus, in either Homo habilis or in Australopithecus. The early hominid ancestors of humans were probably frugivores or omnivores, with a partially carnivorous diet from scavenging rather than hunting. Evidence for australopithecine meat consumption was presented in the 1990s. It has nevertheless often been assumed that at least occasional hunting behaviour may have been present well before the emergence of Homo. This can be argued on the basis of comparison with chimpanzees, the closest extant relatives of humans, who also engage in hunting, indicating that the behavioural trait may have been present in the Chimpanzee–human last common ancestor as early as 5 million years ago. The common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) regularly engages in troop predation behaviour, where bands of beta males are led by an alpha male. Bonobos (Pan paniscus) have also been observed to occasionally engage in group hunting, although more rarely than Pan troglodytes, mainly subsisting on a frugivorous diet. Indirect evidence for Oldowan era hunting, by early Homo or late Australopithecus, has been presented in a 2009 study based on an Oldowan site in southwestern Kenya.

Louis Binford (1986) criticised the idea that early hominids and early humans were hunters. On the basis of the analysis of the skeletal remains of the consumed animals, he concluded that hominids and early humans were mostly scavengers, not hunters, Blumenschine (1986) proposed the idea of confrontational scavenging, which involves challenging and scaring off other predators they have made a kill, which he suggests could have been the leading method of obtaining protein-rich meat by early humans.

Stone spearheads dated as early as 500,000 years ago were found in South Africa. Wood does not preserve well, however, and Craig Stanford, a primatologist and professor of anthropology at the University of Southern California, has suggested that the discovery of spear use by chimpanzees probably means that early humans used wooden spears as well, perhaps, five million years ago. The earliest dated find of surviving wooden hunting spears dates to the very end of the Lower Paleolithic, just before 300,000 years ago. The Schöningen spears, found in 1976 in Germany, are associated with Homo heidelbergensis.

The hunting hypothesis sees the emergence of behavioral modernity in the Middle Paleolithic as directly related to hunting, including mating behaviour, the establishment of language, culture, and religion, mythology and animal sacrifice. Sociologist David Nibert of Wittenberg University argues that the emergence of the organized hunting of animals undermined the communal, egalitarian nature of early human societies, with the status of women and less powerful males declining as the status of men quickly became associated with their success at hunting, which also increased human violence within these societies. However, 9000-year-old remains of a female hunter along with a toolkit of projectile points and animal processing implements were discovered at the Andean site of Wilamaya Patjxa, Puno District in Peru.

Upper Paleolithic to Mesolithic
Evidence exists that hunting may have been one of the multiple, or possibly main, environmental factors leading to the Holocene extinction of megafauna and their replacement by smaller herbivores.

In some locations, such as Australia, humans are thought to have played a very significant role in the extinction of the Australian megafauna that was widespread prior to human occupation.

Hunting was a crucial component of hunter-gatherer societies before the domestication of livestock and the dawn of agriculture, beginning about 11,000 years ago in some parts of the world. In addition to the spear, hunting weapons developed during the Upper Paleolithic include the atlatl (a spear-thrower; before 30,000 years ago) and the bow (18,000 years ago). By the Mesolithic, hunting strategies had diversified with the development of these more far-reaching weapons and the domestication of the dog about 15,000 years ago. Evidence puts the earliest known mammoth hunting in Asia with spears to approximately 16,200 years ago.

Many species of animals have been hunted throughout history. One theory is that in North America and Eurasia, caribou and wild reindeer "may well be the species of single greatest importance in the entire anthropological literature on hunting" (see also Reindeer Age), although the varying importance of different species depended on the geographic location.

Mesolithic hunter-gathering lifestyles remained prevalent in some parts of the Americas, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Siberia, as well as all of Australia, until the European Age of Discovery. They still persist in some tribal societies, albeit in rapid decline. Peoples that preserved Paleolithic hunting-gathering until the recent past include some indigenous peoples of the Amazonas (Aché), some Central and Southern African (San people), some peoples of New Guinea (Fayu), the Mlabri of Thailand and Laos, the Vedda people of Sri Lanka, and a handful of uncontacted peoples. In Africa, one of the last remaining hunter-gatherer tribes are the Hadza of Tanzania.

Neolithic and Antiquity

Even as animal domestication became relatively widespread and after the development of agriculture, hunting usually remained a significant contributor to the human food-supply. The supplementary meat and materials from hunting included protein, bone for implements, sinew for cordage, fur, feathers, rawhide and leather used in clothing.

Hunting is still vital in marginal climates, especially those unsuited for pastoral uses or for agriculture. For example, Inuit in the Arctic trap and hunt animals for clothing and use the skins of sea mammals to make kayaks, clothing, and footwear.

On ancient reliefs, especially from Mesopotamia, kings are often depicted by sculptors as hunters of big game such as lions and are often portrayed hunting from a war chariot - early examples of royalty symbolically and militaristically engaging in hunting as "the sport of kings". The cultural and psychological importance of hunting in ancient societies is represented by deities such as the horned god Cernunnos and lunar goddesses of classical antiquity, the Greek Artemis or Roman Diana. Taboos are often related to hunting, and mythological association of prey species with a divinity could be reflected in hunting restrictions such as a reserve surrounding a temple. Euripides' tale of Artemis and Actaeon, for example, may be seen as a caution against disrespect of prey or against impudent boasting. With the domestication of the dog, birds of prey, and the ferret, various forms of animal-aided hunting developed, including venery (scent-hound hunting, such as fox hunting), coursing (sight-hound hunting), falconry, and ferreting. While these are all associated with medieval hunting, over time, various dog breeds were selected by humans for very precise tasks during the hunt, reflected in such names as "pointer" and "setter".

Pastoral and agricultural societies

Even as agriculture and animal husbandry became more prevalent, hunting often remained as a part of human culture where the environment and social conditions allowed. Hunter-gatherer societies persisted, even when increasingly confined to marginal areas. And within agricultural systems, hunting served to kill animals that prey upon domestic and wild animals or to attempt to extirpate animals seen by humans as competition for resources such as water or forage.

When hunting moved from a subsistence activity to a selective one, two trends emerged:

 * 1) the development of the role of the specialist hunter, with special training and equipment
 * 2) the option of hunting as a "sport" for members of an upper social class

The meaning of the word game in Middle English evolved to include an animal which is hunted. As the domestication of animals for meat grew, subsistence hunting remained among the lowest classes; however, the stylised pursuit of game in European societies became a luxury. Dangerous hunting, such as for lions or wild boars, often done on horseback or from a chariot, had a function similar to tournaments and manly sports. Hunting ranked as an honourable, somewhat competitive pastime to help the aristocracy practice skills of war in times of peace.

In most parts of medieval Europe, the upper class obtained the sole rights to hunt in certain areas of a feudal territory. Game in these areas was used as a source of food and furs, often provided via professional huntsmen, but it was also expected to provide a form of recreation for the aristocracy. The importance of this proprietary view of game can be seen in the Robin Hood legends, in which one of the primary charges against the outlaws is that they "hunt the King's deer". In contrast, settlers in Anglophone colonies gloried democratically in hunting for all.

In medieval Europe, hunting was considered by Johannes Scotus Eriugena to be part of the set of seven mechanical arts.

Use of dog

Although various other animals have been used to aid the hunter, such as ferrets, the dog has assumed many very important uses to the hunter. The domestication of the dog has led to a symbiotic relationship in which the dog's independence from humans is deferred. Though dogs can survive independently of humans, and in many cases do ferrally, when raised or adopted by humans the species tends to defer to its control in exchange for habitation, food and support.

Dogs today are used to find, chase, retrieve, and sometimes kill game. Dogs allow humans to pursue and kill prey that would otherwise be very difficult or dangerous to hunt. Different breeds of specifically bred hunting dog are used for different types of hunting. Waterfowl are commonly hunted using retrieving dogs such as the Labrador Retriever, the Golden Retriever, the Chesapeake Bay Retriever, the Brittany Spaniel, and other similar breeds. Game birds are flushed out using flushing spaniels such as the English Springer Spaniel, the various Cocker Spaniels and similar breeds.

The hunting of wild mammals in England and Wales with dogs was banned under the Hunting Act 2004. The wild mammals include fox, hare, deer and mink. There are, however, exceptions in the Act.

Religion
Many prehistoric deities are depicted as predators or prey of humans, often in a zoomorphic form, perhaps alluding to the importance of hunting for most Palaeolithic cultures.

In many pagan religions, specific rituals are conducted before or after a hunt; the rituals done may vary according to the species hunted or the season the hunt is taking place. Often a hunting ground, or the hunt for one or more species, was reserved or prohibited in the context of a temple cult. In Roman religion, Diana is the goddess of the hunt.

Indian and Eastern religions

Hindu scriptures describe hunting as an occupation, as well as a sport of the kingly. Even figures considered divine are described to have engaged in hunting. One of the names of the god Shiva is Mrigavyadha (deer-slayer). The word Mriga, in many Indian languages including Malayalam, not only stands for deer, but for all animals and animal instincts (Mriga Thrishna). Shiva, as Mrigavyadha, is the one who destroys the animal instincts in human beings. In the epic Ramayana, Dasharatha, the father of Rama, is said to have the ability to hunt in the dark. During one of his hunting expeditions, he accidentally killed Shravana, mistaking him for game. During Rama's exile in the forest, Ravana kidnapped his wife, Sita, from their hut, while Rama was asked by Sita to capture a golden deer, and his brother Lakshman went after him. According to the Mahabharat, Pandu, the father of the Pandavas, accidentally killed the sage Kindama and his wife with an arrow, mistaking them for a deer.

Jainism teaches followers to have tremendous respect for all of life. Prohibitions for hunting and meat eating are the fundamental conditions for being a Jain.

Buddhism's first precept is the respect for all sentient life. The general approach by all Buddhists is to avoid killing any living animals. Buddha explained the issue by saying "all fear death; comparing others with oneself, one should neither kill nor cause to kill."

In Sikhism, only meat obtained from hunting, or slaughtered with the Jhatka is permitted. The Sikh gurus, especially Guru Hargobind and Guru Gobind Singh were ardent hunters. Many old Sikh Rehatnamas like Prem Sumarag, recommend hunting wild boar and deer. However, among modern Sikhs, the practise of hunting has died down; some even saying that all meat is forbidden.

Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

From early Christian times, hunting has been forbidden to Roman Catholic Church clerics. Thus the Corpus Juris Canonici (C. ii, X, De cleric. venat.) says, "We forbid to all servants of God hunting and expeditions through the woods with hounds; and we also forbid them to keep hawks or falcons." The Fourth Council of the Lateran, held under Pope Innocent III, decreed (canon xv): "We interdict hunting or hawking to all clerics." The decree of the Council of Trent is worded more mildly: "Let clerics abstain from illicit hunting and hawking" (Sess. XXIV, De reform., c. xii), which seems to imply that not all hunting is illicit, and canonists generally make a distinction declaring noisy (clamorosa) hunting unlawful, but not quiet (quieta) hunting.

Ferraris gives it as the general sense of canonists that hunting is allowed to clerics if it be indulged in rarely and for sufficient cause, as necessity, utility or "honest" recreation, and with that moderation which is becoming to the ecclesiastical state. Ziegler, however, thinks that the interpretation of the canonists is not in accordance with the letter or spirit of the laws of the church.

Nevertheless, although a distinction between lawful and unlawful hunting is undoubtedly permissible, it is certain that a bishop can absolutely prohibit all hunting to the clerics of his diocese, as was done by synods at Milan, Avignon, Liège, Cologne, and elsewhere. Benedict XIV declared that such synodal decrees are not too severe, as an absolute prohibition of hunting is more conformable to the ecclesiastical law. In practice, therefore, the synodal statutes of various localities must be consulted to discover whether they allow quiet hunting or prohibit it altogether. Small-scale hunting as a family or subsistence farming activity is recognised by Pope Francis in his encyclical letter, Laudato si', as a legitimate and valuable aspect of employment within the food production system.

Hunting is not forbidden in Jewish law, although there is an aversion to it. The great 18th-century authority Rabbi Yechezkel Landau after a study concluded although "hunting would not be considered cruelty to animals insofar as the animal is generally killed quickly and not tortured... There is an unseemly element in it, namely cruelty." The other issue is that hunting can be dangerous and Judaism places an extreme emphasis on the value of human life.

Islamic Sharia Law permits hunting of lawful animals and birds if they cannot be easily caught and slaughtered. However, this is only for the purpose of food and not for trophy hunting.

East Africa

A safari, from a Swahili word meaning "journey, expedition," especially in Africa, is defined as a journey to see or kill animals in their natural environment, most commonly in East Africa. Safari as a distinctive way of hunting was popularized by the US author Ernest Hemingway and President Theodore Roosevelt. A safari may consist of a several-days—or even weeks-long journey, with camping in the bush or jungle, while pursuing big game. Nowadays, it is often used to describe hunting tours through African wildlife.

Hunters are usually tourists, accompanied by licensed and highly regulated professional hunters, local guides, skinners, and porters in more difficult terrains. A special safari type is the solo-safari, where all the license acquiring, stalking, preparation, and outfitting is done by the hunter himself.

Indian subcontinent
During the feudal and colonial times in British India, hunting or shikar was regarded as a regal sport in the numerous princely states, as many maharajas and nawabs, as well as British officers, maintained a whole corps of shikaris (big-game hunters), who were native professional hunters. They would be headed by a master of the hunt, who might be styled mir-shikar. Often, they recruited the normally low-ranking local tribes because of their traditional knowledge of the environment and hunting techniques. Big game, such as Bengal tigers, might be hunted from the back of an Indian elephant.

Regional social norms are generally antagonistic to hunting, while a few sects, such as the Bishnoi, lay special emphasis on the conservation of particular species, such as the antelope. India's Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 bans the killing of all wild animals. However, the Chief Wildlife Warden may, if satisfied that any wild animal from a specified list has become dangerous to human life, or is so disabled or diseased as to be beyond recovery, permit any person to hunt such an animal. In this case, the body of any wild animal killed or wounded becomes government property.

The practice among the soldiers in British India during the 1770s of going out to hunt snipes, a shorebird considered extremely challenging for hunters due to its alertness, camouflaging colour and erratic flight behavior, is believed to be the origin of the modern word for sniper, as snipe-hunters needed to be stealthy in addition to having tracking skills and marksmanship. The term was used in the nineteenth century, and had become common usage by the First World War.

United Kingdom

Unarmed fox hunting on horseback with hounds is the type of hunting most closely associated with the United Kingdom; in fact, "hunting" without qualification implies fox hunting. What in other countries is called "hunting" is called "shooting" (birds) or "stalking" (deer) in Britain. Fox hunting is a social activity for the upper classes, with roles strictly defined by wealth and status. Similar to fox hunting in many ways is the chasing of hares with hounds. Pairs of sighthounds (or long-dogs), such as greyhounds, may be used to pursue a hare in coursing, where the greyhounds are marked as to their skill in coursing the hare (but are not intended to actually catch it), or the hare may be pursued with scent hounds such as beagles or harriers. Other sorts of foxhounds may also be used for hunting stags (deer) or mink. Deer stalking with rifles is carried out on foot without hounds, using stealth.

These forms of hunting have been controversial in the UK. Animal welfare supporters believe that hunting causes unnecessary suffering to foxes, horses, and hounds. Proponents argue that the activity is a historical tradition. Using dogs to chase wild mammals was made illegal in February 2005 by the Hunting Act 2004; there were a number of exemptions (under which the activity may not be illegal) in the act for hunting with hounds, but no exemptions at all for hare-coursing.

Shooting traditions
Game birds, especially pheasants, are shot with shotguns for sport in the UK; the British Association for Shooting and Conservation says that over a million people per year participate in shooting, including game shooting, clay pigeon shooting, and target shooting. Shooting as practised in Britain, as opposed to traditional hunting, requires little questing for game—around thirty-five million birds are released onto shooting estates every year, some having been factory farmed. Shoots can be elaborate affairs with guns placed in assigned positions and assistants to help load shotguns. When in position, "beaters" move through the areas of cover, swinging sticks or flags to drive the game out. Such events are often called "drives". The open season for grouse in the UK begins on 12 August, the so-called Glorious Twelfth. The definition of game in the United Kingdom is governed by the Game Act 1831 (1 & 2 Will. 4. c. 32).

A similar tradition, ojeo, exists in Spain.

United States

North American hunting pre-dates the United States by thousands of years and was an important part of many pre-Columbian Native American cultures. Native Americans retain some hunting rights and are exempt from some laws as part of Indian treaties and otherwise under federal law —examples include eagle feather laws and exemptions in the Marine Mammal Protection Act. This is considered particularly important in Alaskan native communities.

Gun usage in hunting is typically regulated by game category, area within the state, and time period. Regulations for big-game hunting often specify a minimum caliber or muzzle energy for firearms. The use of rifles is often banned for safety reasons in areas with high population densities or limited topographic relief. Regulations may also limit or ban the use of lead in ammunition because of environmental concerns. Specific seasons for bow hunting or muzzle-loading black-powder guns are often established to limit competition with hunters using more effective weapons.

Hunting in the United States is not associated with any particular class or culture; a 2006 poll showed seventy-eight per cent of Americans supported legal hunting, although relatively few Americans actually hunt. At the beginning of the 21st century, just six per cent of Americans hunted. Southerners in states along the eastern seaboard hunted at a rate of five per cent, slightly below the national average, and while hunting was more common in other parts of the South at nine per cent, these rates did not surpass those of the Plains states, where twelve per cent of Midwesterners hunted. Hunting in other areas of the country fell below the national average. Overall, in the 1996–2006 period, the number of hunters over the age of sixteen declined by ten per cent, a drop attributable to a number of factors including habitat loss and changes in recreation habits.

The principles of the fair chase have been a part of the American hunting tradition for over one hundred years. The role of the hunter-conservationist, popularised by Theodore Roosevelt, and perpetuated by Roosevelt's formation of the Boone and Crockett Club, has been central to the development of the modern fair chase tradition. Beyond Fair Chase: The Ethic and Tradition of Hunting, a book by Jim Posewitz, describes fair chase: "Fundamental to ethical hunting is the idea of fair chase. This concept addresses the balance between the hunter and the hunted. It is a balance that allows hunters to occasionally succeed while animals generally avoid being taken."

When Internet hunting was introduced in 2005, allowing people to hunt over the Internet using remotely controlled guns, the practice was widely criticised by hunters as violating the principles of fair chase. As a representative of the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) explained, "The NRA has always maintained that fair chase, being in the field with your firearm or bow, is an important element of hunting tradition. Sitting at your desk in front of your computer, clicking at a mouse, has nothing to do with hunting."

Animals such as blackbuck, nilgai, axis deer, fallow deer, zebras, barasingha, gazelle and many other exotic game species can now be found on game farms and ranches in Texas, where they were introduced for sport hunting. These hunters can be found paying in excess of $10,000 to take trophy animals on these controlled ranches.

Russia
The Russian imperial hunts evolved from hunting traditions of early Russian rulers—Grand Princes and Tsars—under the influence of hunting customs of European royal courts. The imperial hunts were organised mainly in Peterhof, Tsarskoye Selo, and Gatchina.

Australia
Hunting in Australia has evolved around the hunting and eradication of various animals considered to be pests or invasive species. All native animals are protected by law, and certain species such as kangaroos and ducks can be hunted by licensed shooters but only under a special permit on public lands during open seasons. The introduced species that are targeted include European rabbits, red foxes, deer (sambar, hog, red, fallow, chital and rusa), feral cats, pigs, goats, brumbies, donkeys and occasionally camels, as well as introduced upland birds such as quails, pheasants and partridges.

New Zealand
New Zealand has a strong hunting culture. When humans arrived, the only mammals present on the islands making up New Zealand were bats, although seals and other marine mammals were present along the coasts. However, when humans arrived they brought other species with them. Polynesian voyagers introduced kuri (dogs), kiore (Polynesian rats), as well as a range of plant species. European explorers further added to New Zealand's biota, particularly pigs which were introduced by either Captain Cook or the French explorer De Surville in the 1700s. During the nineteenth century, as European colonisation took place, acclimatisation societies were established. The societies introduced a large number of species with no use other than as prey for hunting. Species that adapted well to the New Zealand terrain include deer, pigs, goats, hare, tahr and chamois. With wilderness areas, suitable forage, and no natural predators, their populations exploded. Government agencies view the animals as pests due to their effects on the natural environment and on agricultural production, but hunters view them as a resource.

Iran
Iranian tradition regarded hunting as an essential part of a prince's education, and hunting was well recorded for the education of the upper-class youths during pre-Islamic Persia. As of October 2020, a hunting licence costs $20,000. The Department of Environment although do not report the number of permits issued.

Japan
The numbers of licensed hunters in Japan, including those using snares and guns, is generally decreasing, while their average age is increasing. , there were approximately 190,000 registered hunters, approximately 65% of whom were sixty years old or older.

Trinidad and Tobago
There is a very active tradition of hunting small to medium-sized wild game in Trinidad and Tobago. Hunting is carried out with firearms, slingshots and cage traps, and sometimes aided by the use of hounds. The illegal use of trap guns and snare nets also occurs. With approximately 12,000 to 13,000 hunters applying for and being granted hunting permits in recent years, there is some concern that the practice might not be sustainable. In addition there are at present no bag limits and the open season is comparatively very long (5 months – October to February inclusive). As such hunting pressure from legal hunters is very high. Added to that, there is a thriving and very lucrative black market for poached wild game (sold and enthusiastically purchased as expensive luxury delicacies) and the numbers of commercial poachers in operation is unknown but presumed to be fairly high. As a result, the populations of the five major mammalian game species (red-rumped agouti, lowland paca, nine-banded armadillo, collared peccary and red brocket deer) are thought to be relatively low when compared to less-hunted regions in nearby mainland South America (although scientifically conducted population studies are only just recently being conducted ). It appears that the red brocket deer population has been extirpated in Tobago as a result of over-hunting. By some time in the mid 20th century another extirpation due to over-hunting occurred in Trinidad with its population of horned screamer (a large game bird). Various herons, ducks, doves, the green iguana, the cryptic golden tegu, the spectacled caiman, the common opossum and the capybara are also commonly hunted and poached. There is also some poaching of 'fully protected species', including red howler monkey and capuchin monkeys, southern tamandua, Brazilian porcupine, yellow-footed tortoise, the critically endangered island endemic Trinidad piping guan and even one of the national birds, the scarlet ibis. Legal hunters pay relatively small fees to obtain hunting licences and undergo no official basic conservation biology or hunting-ethics/fair chase training, and are not assessed regarding their knowledge and comprehension of the local wildlife conservation laws. There is presumed to be relatively little subsistence hunting in the country (with most hunting for either sport or commercial profit). The local wildlife management authorities are under-staffed and under-funded, and as such little in the way of enforcement is done to uphold existing wildlife management laws, with hunting/poaching occurring both in and out of season and even in wildlife sanctuaries. There is some indication that the government is beginning to take the issue of wildlife management more seriously, with well drafted legislation being brought before Parliament in 2015. It remains to be seen if the drafted legislation will be fully adopted and financially supported by the current and future governments, and if the general populace will move towards a greater awareness of the importance of wildlife conservation and change the culture of wanton consumption to one of sustainable management.

Wildlife management
Hunting is claimed to give resource managers an important tool in managing populations that might exceed the carrying capacity of their habitat and threaten the well-being of other species, or, in some instances, damage human health or safety.

In some cases, hunting actually can increase the population of predators such as coyotes by removing territorial bounds that would otherwise be established, resulting in excess neighbouring migrations into an area, thus artificially increasing the population. Hunting advocates assert that hunting reduces intraspecific competition for food and shelter, reducing mortality among the remaining animals. Some environmentalists assert that (re)introducing predators would achieve the same end with greater efficiency and less negative effect, such as introducing significant amounts of free lead into the environment and food chain.

In the United States, wildlife managers are frequently part of hunting regulatory and licensing bodies, where they help to set rules on the number, manner and conditions in which game may be hunted.

Management agencies sometimes rely on hunting to control specific animal populations, as has been the case with deer in North America. These hunts may sometimes be carried out by professional shooters, although others may include amateur hunters. Many US city and local governments hire professional and amateur hunters each year to reduce populations of animals such as deer that are becoming hazardous in a restricted area, such as neighbourhood parks and metropolitan open spaces.

A large part of managing populations involves managing the number and, sometimes, the size or age of animals harvested so as to ensure the sustainability of the population. Tools that are frequently used to control harvest are bag limits and season closures, although gear restrictions such as archery-only seasons are becoming increasingly popular in an effort to reduce hunter success rates in countries that rely on bag limits per hunter instead of per area.

Laws
Illegal hunting and harvesting of wild species contrary to local and international conservation and wildlife management laws is called poaching. Game preservation is one of the tactics used to prevent poaching. Violations of hunting laws and regulations involving poaching are normally punishable by law. Punishment can include confiscation of equipment, fines or a prison sentence.

Right to hunt
The right to hunt—sometimes in combination with the right to fish—is protected implicitly, as a consequence of the right of ownership, or explicitly, as a right on its own, in a number of jurisdictions. For instance, as of 2019, a total of 22 U.S. states explicitly recognize a subjective right to hunt in their constitutions.

Bag limits
Bag limits are provisions under the law that control how many animals of a given species or group of species can be killed, although there are often species for which bag limits do not apply. There are also jurisdictions where bag limits are not applied at all or are not applied under certain circumstances. The phrase bag limits comes from the custom among hunters of small game to carry successful kills in a small basket, similar to a fishing creel.

Where bag limits are used, there can be daily or seasonal bag limits; for example, ducks can often be harvested at a rate of six per hunter per day. Big game, like moose, most often have a seasonal bag limit of one animal per hunter. Bag limits may also regulate the size, sex, or age of animal that a hunter can kill. In many cases, bag limits are designed to allocate harvest among the hunting population more equitably rather than to protect animal populations, as protecting the population would necessitate regional density-dependent maximum bags.

Closed and open season
A closed season is a time during which hunting an animal of a given species is contrary to law. Typically, closed seasons are designed to protect a species when they are most vulnerable or to protect them during their breeding season. By extension, the period that is not the closed season is known as the open season.

Methods

Historical, subsistence, and sport hunting techniques can differ radically, with modern hunting regulations often addressing issues of where, when, and how hunts are conducted. Techniques may vary depending on government regulations, a hunter's personal ethics, local custom, hunting equipment, and the animal being hunted. Often a hunter will use a combination of more than one technique. Laws may forbid sport hunters from using some methods used primarily in poaching and wildlife management.
 * Baiting is the use of decoys, lures, scent, or food.
 * Battue involves scaring animals (by beating sticks) into a killing zone or ambush.
 * Beagling is the use of beagles in hunting rabbits, and sometimes in hunting foxes.
 * Beating uses human beaters to flush out game from an area or drive it into position.
 * Stand hunting or blind hunting is waiting for animals from a concealed or elevated position, for example from tree stands, hunting blinds or other types of shooting stands.
 * Calling is the use of animal noises to attract or drive animals.
 * Camouflage is the use of visual or odour concealment to blend with the environment.
 * Dogs may be used to course or to help flush, herd, drive, track, point at, pursue, or retrieve prey.
 * Driving is the herding of animals in a particular direction, usually toward another hunter in the group.
 * Falconry is the hunting of wild animals in their natural state and habitat by means of a trained bird of prey.
 * Flushing is the practice of scaring animals from concealed areas.
 * Ghillie suit is a type of gear a person can wear to blend with environment.
 * Glassing is the use of optics, such as binoculars, to locate animals more easily.
 * Glue is an indiscriminate passive form to kill birds.
 * Internet hunting is a method of hunting over the Internet using webcams and remotely controlled guns.
 *  involves using nets, including active netting with the use of cannon nets and rocket nets.
 * Persistence hunting is the use of running and tracking to pursue the prey to exhaustion.
 * Posting is done by sitting or standing in a particular place with the intentions of intercepting your game of choice along their travel corridor.
 * Scouting for game is typically done prior to a hunt and will ensure the desired species are in a chosen area. Looking for animal sign such as tracks, scat, etc.... and utilizing "trail cameras" are commonly used tactics while scouting.
 * Shooting is the use of a ranged weapon such as a gun, bow, crossbow, or slingshot.
 * Solunar theory says that animals move according to the location of the moon in comparison to their bodies and is said to have been used long before this by hunters to know the best times to hunt their desired game.
 * Spotlighting or shining is the use of artificial light to find or blind animals before killing.
 * Stalking or still hunting is the practice of walking quietly in search of animals or in pursuit of an individual animal.
 * Tracking is the practice of reading physical evidence in pursuing animals.
 * Trapping is the use of devices such as snares, pits, and deadfalls to capture or kill an animal.

Trophy hunting
Trophy hunting is the selective seeking and killing of wild game animals to take trophies for personal collection, bragging rights or as a status symbol. It may also include the controversial hunting of captive or semi-captive animals expressly bred and raised under controlled or semi-controlled conditions so as to attain trophy characteristics; this is sometimes known as canned hunts.

History
In the 19th century, southern and central European sport hunters often pursued game only for a trophy, usually the head or pelt of an animal, which was then displayed as a sign of prowess. The rest of the animal was typically discarded. Some cultures, however, disapprove of such waste. In Nordic countries, hunting for trophies was—and still is—frowned upon. Hunting in North America in the 19th century was done primarily as a way to supplement food supplies, although it is now undertaken mainly for sport. The safari method of hunting was a development of sport hunting that saw elaborate travel in Africa, India and other places in pursuit of trophies. In modern times, trophy hunting persists and is a significant industry in some areas.

Conservation tool
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, hunting "provides an economic incentive" for ranchers to continue to breed those species, and that hunting "reduces the threat of the species' extinction."

A scientific study in the journal, Biological Conservation, states that trophy hunting is of "major importance to conservation in Africa by creating economic incentives for conservation over vast areas, including areas which may be unsuitable for alternative wildlife-based land uses such as photographic ecotourism." However, another study states that less than 3% of a trophy hunters' expenditures reach the local level, meaning that the economic incentive and benefit is "minimal, particularly when we consider the vast areas of land that hunting concessions occupy."

Financial incentives from trophy hunting effectively more than double the land area that is used for wildlife conservation, relative to what would be conserved relying on national parks alone according to Biological Conservation, although local communities usually derive no more than 18 cents per hectare from trophy hunting.

Trophy hunting has been considered essential for providing economic incentives to conserve large carnivores according to research studies in Conservation Biology, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Wildlife Conservation by Sustainable Use, and Animal Conservation. Studies by the Centre for Responsible Tourism and the IUCN state that ecotourism, which includes more than hunting, is a superior economic incentive, generating twice the revenue per acre and 39 times more permanent employment. At the crosssection of trophy hunting, ecotourism and conservation is green hunting, a trophy hunting alternative where hunters pay to dart animals that need to be tranquilized for conservation projects.

The U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources in 2016 concluded that trophy hunting may be contributing to the extinction of certain animals. Animal welfare organizations, including the International Fund for Animal Welfare, claim that trophy hunting is a key factor in the "silent extinction" of giraffes.

According to a national survey that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts every five years, fewer people are hunting, even as population rises. National Public Radio reported, a graph shows 2016 statistics, that only about 5 per cent of Americans, 16 years old and older, actually hunt, which is half of what it was 50 years ago. The decline in popularity of hunting is expected to accelerate over the next decade, which threatens how US will pay for conservation.

Controversy
Trophy hunting is most often criticised when it involves rare or endangered animals. Opponents may also see trophy hunting as an issue of morality or animal cruelty, criticising the killing of living creatures for recreation. Victorian era dramatist W. S. Gilbert remarked, "Deer-stalking would be a very fine sport if only the deer had guns."

There is also debate about the extent to which trophy hunting benefits the local economy. Hunters pay substantial fees to the game outfitters and hunting guides which contributes to the local economy and provides value to animals that would otherwise be seen as competition for grazing, livestock, and crops. However, the argument is disputed by animal welfare organizations and other opponents of trophy hunting. It is argued that the animals are worth more to the community for ecotourism than hunting.

Economics

A variety of industries benefit from hunting and support hunting on economic grounds. In Tanzania, it is estimated that a safari hunter spends fifty to one hundred times that of the average ecotourist. While the average photo tourist may seek luxury accommodation, the average safari hunter generally stays in tented camps. Safari hunters are also more likely to use remote areas, uninviting to the typical ecotourist. Advocates argue that these hunters allow for anti-poaching activities and revenue for local communities.

In the United Kingdom, the game hunting of birds as an industry is said to be extremely important to the rural economy. The Cobham Report of 1997 suggested it to be worth around £700 million, and hunting and shooting lobby groups claimed it to be worth over a billion pounds less than ten years later.

Hunting also has a significant financial impact in the United States, with many companies specialising in hunting equipment or speciality tourism. Many different technologies have been created to assist hunters. Today's hunters come from a broad range of economic, social, and cultural backgrounds. In 2001, over thirteen million hunters averaged eighteen days hunting, and spent over $20.5 billion on their sport. In the US, proceeds from hunting licences contribute to state game management programs, including preservation of wildlife habitat.

Hunting contributes to a portion of caloric intake of people and may have positive impacts on greenhouse gas emissions by avoidance of utilization of meat raised under industrial methods.

Environmental problems
40SW.jpg round with hollow-point bullet

Left: Expanded bullet of the same calibre with exposed lead core]] Lead bullets that miss their target or remain in an unretrieved carcass could become a toxicant in the environment but lead in ammunition because of its metallic form has a lower solubility and higher resistance to corrosion than other forms of lead making it hardly available to biological systems. Waterfowl or other birds may ingest the lead and poison themselves with the neurotoxicant, but studies have demonstrated that effects of lead in ammunition are negligible on animal population size and growth. Since 1991, US federal law forbids lead shot in waterfowl hunts, and 30 states have some type of restriction.

In December 2014, a federal appeals court denied a lawsuit by environmental groups that the EPA must use the Toxic Substances Control Act to regulate lead in shells and cartridges. The groups sought EPA to regulate "spent lead", yet the court found EPA could not regulate spent lead without also regulating cartridges and shells.

Conservation

Hunters have been driving forces throughout history in the movement to ensure the preservation of wildlife habitats and wildlife for further hunting. However, excessive hunting and poachers have also contributed heavily to the endangerment, extirpation and extinction of many animals, such as the quagga, the great auk, Steller's sea cow, the thylacine, the bluebuck, the Arabian oryx, the Caspian and Javan tigers, the markhor, the Sumatran rhinoceros, the bison, the North American cougar, the Altai argali sheep, the Asian elephant and many more, primarily for commercial sale or sport. All these animals have been hunted to endangerment or extinction. Poaching currently threatens bird and mammalian populations around the world. The 2019 Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services lists the direct exploitation of organisms, including hunting, as the second leading cause of biodiversity loss, after land use for agriculture. In 2022, IPBES released another report which stated that unsustainable hunting, along with unsustainable logging and fishing, are primary drivers of the global extinction crisis. A 2023 study published in BioScience posited that the prioritizing of hunting by state agencies in the United States over the rewinding of key species is "reinforcing" the loss of biodiversity.

Pittman–Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937
In 1937, American hunters successfully lobbied the US Congress to pass the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act, which placed an eleven per cent tax on all hunting equipment. This self-imposed tax now generates over $700 million each year and is used exclusively to establish, restore and protect wildlife habitats. The act is named for Nevada Senator Key Pittman and Virginia Congressman Absalom Willis Robertson.

Federal Duck Stamp program
On 16 March 1934, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act, which requires an annual stamp purchase by all hunters over the age of sixteen. The stamps are created on behalf of the program by the US Postal Service and depict wildlife artwork chosen through an annual contest. They play an important role in habitat conservation because ninety-eight per cent of all funds generated by their sale go directly toward the purchase or lease of wetland habitat for protection in the National Wildlife Refuge System. In addition to waterfowl, it is estimated that one third of the nation's endangered species seek food and shelter in areas protected using Duck Stamp funds.

Since 1934, the sale of Federal Duck Stamps has generated $670 million, and helped to purchase or lease 5200000 acres of habitat. The stamps serve as a license to hunt migratory birds, an entrance pass for all National Wildlife Refuge areas, and are also considered collectors items often purchased for aesthetic reasons outside of the hunting and birding communities. Although non-hunters buy a significant number of Duck Stamps, eighty-seven per cent of their sales are contributed by hunters. Distribution of funds is managed by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission (MBCC).

Arabian oryx
The Arabian oryx, a species of large antelope, once inhabited much of the desert areas of the Middle East. Native Bedouin tribes had long hunted the oryx using camels and arrows. Oil exploration made the habitat increasingly accessible, and the species' striking appearance made it (along with the closely related scimitar-horned oryx and addax) a popular quarry for sport hunters, including foreign executives of oil companies. The use of automobiles and high-powered rifles destroyed their only advantage: speed, and they became extinct in the wild exclusively due to sport hunting in 1972. The scimitar-horned oryx followed suit, while the addax became critically endangered. However, the Arabian oryx has now made a comeback and been upgraded from "extinct in the wild" to "vulnerable" due to conservation efforts like captive breeding.

Markhor
The markhor is an endangered species of wild goat which inhabits the mountains of Central Asia and Pakistan. The colonization of these regions by Britain gave British sport hunters access to the species, and they were hunted heavily, almost to the point of extinction. Only their willingness to breed in captivity and the inhospitability of their mountainous habitat prevented this. Despite these factors, the markhor is still endangered.

American bison
The American bison is a large bovid which inhabited much of western North America prior to the 1800s, living on the prairies in large herds. However, the vast herds of bison attracted market hunters, who killed dozens of bison for their hides only, leaving the rest to rot. Thousands of these hunters quickly eliminated the bison herds, bringing the population from several million in the early 1800s to a few hundred by the 1880s. Conservation efforts have allowed the population to increase, but the bison remains near-threatened due to lack of habitat.

White rhino
The Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy cites that the legalization of white rhinoceros hunting in South Africa motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than one hundred individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies.

However, the illegal hunting of rhinoceros for their horns is highly damaging to the population and is currently growing globally, with 1004 being killed in South Africa alone according to the most recent estimate. The White Rhino (along with the other 4 rhino species) are poached due to beliefs that the Rhinos horns can be used to cure Cancer, Arthritis and other diseases and illnesses, even though they are scientifically proven wrong.

Other species
According to Richard Conniff, Namibia is home to 1,750 of the roughly 5,000 black rhinos surviving in the wild because it allows trophy hunting of various species. Namibia's mountain zebra population has increased to 27,000 from 1,000 in 1982. Elephants, which "are gunned down elsewhere for their ivory", have gone to 20,000 from 15,000 in 1995. Lions, which were on the brink of extinction "from Senegal to Kenya", are increasing in Namibia.

In contrast, Botswana in 2012 banned trophy hunting following a precipitous wildlife decline. The numbers of antelope plummeted across Botswana, with a resultant decline in predator numbers, while elephant numbers remained stable and hippopotamus numbers rose. According to the government of Botswana, trophy hunting is at least partly to blame for this, but many other factors, such as poaching, drought and habitat loss are also to blame. Uganda recently did the same, arguing that "the share of benefits of sport hunting were lopsided and unlikely to deter poaching or improve [Uganda's] capacity to manage the wildlife reserves." In 2020, Botswana reopened trophy hunting on public lands.

Studies
A study published by the Wildlife Society concluded that hunting and trapping are cost effective tools that reduce wildlife damage by reducing a population below the capacity of the environment to carry it and changing the behaviors of animals to stop them from causing damage. The study furthermore states that the cessation of hunting could cause wildlife to be severely harmed, rural property values to fall, and the incentive of landowners to maintain natural habitats to diminish.

Although deforestation and forest degradation have long been considered the most significant threats to tropical biodiversity, across Southeast Asia (Northeast India, Indochina, Sundaland, Philippines) substantial areas of natural habitat have few wild animals (>1 kg), bar a few hunting‐tolerant species.

Opposition
It has been argued by animal rights activists that killing animals for sport is unethical, cruel, and unnecessary. They note the suffering and cruelty inflicted on animals hunted for sport: "Many animals endure prolonged, painful deaths when they are injured but not killed by hunters ... Hunting disrupts migration and hibernation patterns and destroys families." Animal rights activists also comment that hunting is not needed to maintain an ecological balance, and that "nature takes care of its own". They say that hunting can be combated on public lands by "spread[ing] deer repellent or human hair (from barber shops) near hunting areas". Animal rights activists also argue that hunting is speciesist:

Whether hunters try to justify their killing by citing human deaths caused by wild animals, by making conservationist claims, by claiming that it's acceptable to hunt as long as the animals' bodies are eaten, or simply because of the pleasure it brings them, the fact remains that hunting is morally unacceptable if we consider the interests of nonhuman animals. Hunted animals endure fear and pain, and then are deprived of their lives. Understanding the injustices of speciesism and the interests of nonhuman animals makes it clear that human pleasure cannot justify nonhuman animals' pain.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Hunting


text:
Sausthorpe

Sausthorpe is a small village and civil parish in the East Lindsey district of Lincolnshire, England, 8 mi east of Horncastle and 3 mi north-west of Spilsby. It lies on the southern edge of the Lincolnshire Wolds – a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty – in the valley of the River Lymn. Farming remains the dominant economic activity in the area. The population was 305 in the 2011 census and estimated at 306 in 2019.

Derivation
The name is believed to derive from "Sauthr's thorpe", a farming settlement here in Viking times.

Church
The parish church, dedicated to St Andrew, is a Grade II listed building, designed by Charles Kirk and built in 1842 on the site of an earlier medieval church. Its construction was sponsored by Rev. Francis A. Swan, Lord of the Manor and parish rector from 1819 until his death in 1878. The spire is a prominent landmark resembling on a smaller scale that of St. James Church, Louth, 12 mi to the north.

Pelham Dale SSC – prosecuted and imprisoned for ritualist practices in 1876 and 1880, and so regarded as a martyr by Anglo-Catholics – was the parish priest from 1881 to 1892. His grave lies under the trees on the eastern side of the churchyard. Inside the church, several Dymoke family gravestones date from the 18th century, having been transferred from the earlier church.

In 1885 Kelly's Directory recorded Rev. Charles Trollope Swan LLB as living at Sausthorpe Hall, a "modern mansion in a park of 30 acres". He had inherited the roles of Lord of the Manor and Rector from his father, Francis Swan, in 1878. He granted the rectorate, including the rectory living, residence (the Old Hall, see below) and 34 acre of glebe land, to T. Pelham Dale in 1882.

Facilities
Rev. Francis A. Swan built a National School for 50 children in 1860. It survived until 1983.

The parish of Sausthorpe had a population of 206 in 30 inhabited houses in 1831.

Kelly's Directory recorded that in 1885 the area of the parish was 727 acre, in which were grown wheat, barley and turnips, that Sausthorpe's population at the time of the 1881 census was 141, and that within the parish were a grocer, wheelwright, carrier, two farmers, a farmer-cum-beer retailer, and a farmer-surveyor.

Sausthorpe Hall is a late 18th-century Grade II listed country house, extended and remodelled in 1822.

The Old Hall is a Grade II* listed 15th-century house, with 16th and 18th-century alterations. It has rendering over red brick and the remains of a timber frame.

Historically there were three principal farms in the village: East Farm (the farmhouse is set back from the main road about one mile east of the village); Grange Farm (the farmhouse is on the main road at the eastern entry to the village); and Church Farm (the farmhouse, now known as Linden House, is on the corner of the crossroads at the centre of the village).

Notable people

 * Pelham Dale (1821–1892), an Anglo-Catholic priest prosecuted for ritualistic practices, was parish priest of Sausthorpe-cum-Aswardby from 1881 until his death. He was buried in the churchyard.
 * Standish Vereker, 7th Viscount Gort (1888–1975), connoisseur and art collector, was born in Sausthorpe.

Transport
Sausthorpe lies on the main A158 road between Horncastle and Skegness. It is served by the Spilsby CallConnect weekday bus service, which must be ordered by phone in advance. The nearest railway station is Skegness (13 mi).

title: Sausthorpe


text:
Arthur Andersen

Arthur Andersen LLP was an American accounting firm based in Chicago that provided auditing, tax advising, consulting and other professional services to large corporations. By 2001, it had become one of the world's largest multinational corporations and was one of the "Big Five" accounting firms (along with Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG and PricewaterhouseCoopers). The firm collapsed by mid-2002, as details of its questionable accounting practices for energy company Enron and telecommunications company WorldCom were revealed amid the two high-profile bankruptcies. The scandals were a factor in the enactment of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002.

Founding
Born May 30, 1885, in Plano, Illinois, and orphaned at the age of 16, Arthur E. Andersen began working as a mail boy by day and attended school at night, eventually being hired as the assistant to the comptroller of Allis-Chalmers in Chicago. In 1908, after attending courses at night while working full-time, he graduated from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University with a bachelor's degree in business. That same year, at age 23, he became the youngest Certified Public Accountant in Illinois.

In 1913, Andersen and Clarence DeLany founded an accounting firm as Andersen, DeLany & Co. The firm changed its name to Arthur Andersen & Co. in 1918. Arthur Andersen's first client was the Joseph Schlitz Brewing Company of Milwaukee. In 1915, due to his many contacts there, the Milwaukee office was opened as the firm's second office.

Andersen believed education was the basis upon which the new profession of accounting should be developed. He created the profession's first centralized training program and believed in training during normal working hours. In 1927, he was elected to the board of trustees of Northwestern University and served as its president from 1930 to 1932. He was also chairman of the board of CPA examiners of Illinois.

Reputation
Andersen, who headed the firm until his death in 1947, was a zealous supporter of high standards in the accounting industry. A stickler for honesty, he argued that accountants' responsibility was to investors, not their clients' management. This gave rise to the uniform look of all the so-called "Arthur Androids", as employees referred to themselves, the intent being to provide the same service the same way to all customers in all locations. For many years, Andersen's motto was "Think straight, talk straight"—an axiom passed on from his mother. During the early years, it is reputed that Andersen was approached by an executive from a local rail utility to sign off on accounts containing flawed accounting, or else face the loss of a major client. Andersen refused in no uncertain terms, replying that there was "not enough money in the city of Chicago" to make him do it. The railroad fired Andersen, only to go bankrupt a few months later.

Arthur Andersen also led the way in a number of areas of accounting standards. Being among the first to identify a possible sub-prime bust, Arthur Andersen dissociated itself from a number of clients in the 1970s.

Arthur Andersen struggled to balance the need to maintain its faithfulness to accounting standards with its clients' desire to maximize profits, particularly in the era of quarterly earnings reports. The firm has been alleged to have been involved in the fraudulent accounting and auditing of Sunbeam Products, Waste Management, Asia Pulp & Paper, the Baptist Foundation of Arizona, WorldCom, as well as Enron, among others.

Andersen Consulting and Accenture
The consulting wing of the firm became increasingly important during the 1970s and 1980s, growing at a much faster rate than the more established accounting, auditing, and tax practice. In a further effort to take advantage of economies of scale, Price Waterhouse and Arthur Andersen discussed a merger in 1989 but the negotiations failed, mainly because of conflicts of interest such as Andersen's strong commercial links with IBM and PW's audit of IBM, as well as the two firms' radically different cultures. It was said by those involved with the failed merger that at the end of the discussion, the partners at the table realized they had different views of business, and the potential merger was scrapped.

In 1989, Arthur Andersen and Andersen Consulting became separate units of Andersen Worldwide Société Coopérative. The two businesses spent most of the 1990s in a bitter dispute. Andersen Consulting saw a huge surge in profits during the decade. The consultants, however, continued to resent transfer payments they were required to make to Arthur Andersen. In August 2000, at the conclusion of International Chamber of Commerce arbitration of the dispute, the arbitrators granted Andersen Consulting its independence from Arthur Andersen, but awarded $1.2 billion in past payments (held in escrow pending the ruling) to Arthur Andersen, and declared that Andersen Consulting could no longer use the Andersen name. As a result, Andersen Consulting changed its name to Accenture on January 1, 2001, and Arthur Andersen, having the right to the Andersen Consulting name, rebranded itself to "Andersen".

Four hours after the arbitrator made his ruling, Arthur Andersen CEO Jim Wadia resigned. Industry analysts and business school professors alike viewed the event as a complete victory for Andersen Consulting. Wadia would provide insight on his resignation years later at a Harvard Business school case activity about the split. It turned out that the Arthur Andersen board passed a resolution saying he had to resign if he did not get at least an incremental $4 billion (either through negotiation or via the arbitrator decision) for the consulting practice to split off, hence his quick resignation once the decision was announced.

Accounts vary on why the split occurred—executives on both sides of the split cite greed and arrogance on the part of the other side. The executives on the Andersen Consulting side maintained it was a breach of contract when Arthur Andersen created a second consulting group, AABC (Arthur Andersen Business Consulting) which competed directly with Andersen Consulting in the marketplace.

Enron scandal
Following the 2001 scandal in which energy giant Enron was found to have fraudulently reported $100 billion in revenue through institutional and systematic accounting fraud, Andersen's performance and alleged complicity as an auditor came under intense scrutiny. The Powers Committee (appointed by Enron's board to look into the firm's accounting in October 2001) came to the following assessment: "The evidence available to us suggests that Andersen did not fulfill its professional responsibilities in connection with its audits of Enron's financial statements, or its obligation to bring to the attention of Enron's Board (or the Audit and Compliance Committee) concerns about Enron's internal contracts over the related-party transactions".

On June 15, 2002, Andersen was convicted of obstruction of justice for shredding documents related to its audit of Enron. Although the Supreme Court reversed the firm's conviction, the impact of the scandal combined with the findings of criminal complicity ultimately destroyed the firm. Nancy Temple (in the firm's legal department) and David Duncan (lead partner for the Enron account) were cited as the responsible managers in the scandal because they ordered subordinates to shred relevant documents.

Because the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission does not accept audits from convicted felons, the firm agreed to surrender its CPA licenses and its right to practice before the SEC on August 31, 2002—effectively putting the firm out of business. It had already started winding down its American operations after the indictment, and many of its accountants joined other firms. The firm sold the majority of its American operations to other accounting firms such as KPMG, Ernst & Young, Deloitte & Touche and Grant Thornton International. At this time, Arthur Andersen had lost most of its business and two-thirds of its 28,000 employees.

The indictment also put a spotlight on the firm's faulty audits of other companies, most notably Waste Management, Sunbeam Products, the Baptist Foundation of Arizona and WorldCom.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of errors in the trial judge's jury instructions. The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

Demise
The 2005 Supreme Court ruling theoretically left Andersen free to resume operations. However, CNN reported that by then, Andersen was "nearly defunct," with about 200 employees remaining from a high of 28,000 in 2002. Following the ruling, William Mateja, a former counsel to the US Attorney General who had supervised the Andersen appeal, told NPR that he did not believe the government would seek a retrial because, "there's nothing left of Arthur Andersen, and to spend the taxpayers' money on another prosecution would be just—defy common sense." Echoing this, United States Chamber of Commerce vice president Stephen Bokat pronounced Andersen "dead," and said that "there is no putting the company back together." In his post-mortem of the Enron scandal, Conspiracy of Fools, journalist Kurt Eichenwald argued that even if Andersen had escaped the Enron scandal, it would have likely been brought down by the massive accounting fraud at WorldCom. The WorldCom fraud came to light just days after Andersen was convicted of wrongdoing at Enron.

Indeed, Andersen has never returned as a viable business on even a limited scale. Ownership of the partnership has been ceded to four limited liability companies named Omega Management I through IV.

Arthur Andersen LLP operated the Q Center conference center in St. Charles, Illinois, until day-to-day management was turned over to Dolce Hotels and Resorts in 2014, but Andersen retains ownership. In 2018, that relationship ended, and day-to-day management returned to the Q Center. The Q Center is currently used for training, primarily for internal Accenture personnel, and other large-scale companies.

In 2014, Wealth Tax and Advisory Services (WTAS), a tax and consulting firm started by several former Andersen partners, changed its name to Andersen Tax after acquiring the rights to the Andersen name. It rebranded its year-old international arm, WTAS Global, as Andersen Global.

Collapse
The firm collapsed by mid-2002, as details of its questionable accounting practices for energy company Enron and telecommunications company Worldcom were revealed amid the two high-profile bankruptcies. The scandals were a factor in the enactment of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002. After the collapse, some parts of the company continue to exist: the company's consulting services were split out before the collapse and continue today as Accenture and Protiviti, while some of the former partners formed a new firm in 2002 focused on tax services, now called Andersen Tax.

Migration of partners and local offices to new firms
Many offices were acquired by other consulting firms as described above. Some partners formed new companies such as:
 * Accuracy which was founded in 2004 by a team of seven former partners and is headquartered in Paris
 * Andersen Tax which acquired the rights to the company name and changed their name from WTAS in 2014
 * BearingPoint, formerly the US consulting unit spun off by KPMG, which purchased Andersen business consulting practices in various countries
 * Huron Consulting Group, which was formed by former employees of the Chicago office of Anderson
 * West Monroe Partners which was founded in 2002 by a few former consultants, based in Chicago
 * Navigant Consulting which absorbed eight partners from Andersen
 * Protiviti was formed in 2002 by hiring more than 700 professionals who had been affiliated with the internal audit, business and technology risk consulting practice of Arthur Andersen.
 * SMART Business Advisory and Consulting which absorbed some staff
 * jcba Limited which was founded by a partner from the aviation practice
 * True Partners Consulting, a tax consultancy founded by Arthur Andersen alumni

title: Arthur Andersen


text:
Big Four accounting firms

The Big Four are the four largest professional services networks in the world: Deloitte, EY, KPMG, and PwC. They are the four largest global accounting networks as measured by revenue. The four are often grouped because they are comparable in size relative to the rest of the market, both in terms of revenue and workforce; they are considered equal in their ability to provide a wide scope of professional services to their clients; and, among those looking to start a career in professional services, particularly accounting, they are considered equally attractive networks to work in, because of the frequency with which these firms engage with Fortune 500 companies.

The Big Four all offer audit, assurance, taxation, management consulting, valuation, market research, actuarial, corporate finance, and legal services to their clients. A significant majority of the audits of public companies, as well as many audits of private companies, are conducted by these four networks.

Until the late 20th century, the market for professional services was actually dominated by eight networks which were nicknamed the "Big Eight". The Big Eight consisted of Arthur Andersen, Arthur Young, Coopers & Lybrand, Deloitte Haskins and Sells, Ernst & Whinney, Peat Marwick Mitchell, Price Waterhouse, and Touche Ross.

The Big Eight gradually reduced due to mergers between these firms, as well as the 2002 collapse of Arthur Andersen, leaving four networks dominating the market at the turn of the 21st century. In the United Kingdom in 2011, it was reported that the Big Four account for the audits of 99% of the companies in the FTSE 100 Index, and 96% of the companies in the FTSE 250 Index, an index of the leading mid-cap listing companies. Such a high level of industry concentration has caused concern, and a desire among some in the investment community for the UK's Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) to consider breaking up the Big Four. In October 2018, the CMA announced it would launch a detailed study of the Big Four's dominance of the audit sector. In July 2020, the UK Financial Reporting Council told the Big Four that they must submit plans by October 2020 to separate their audit and consultancy operations by 2024.

Legal structure
None of the "firms" within the Big Four is actually a single firm; rather, they are professional services networks. Each is a network of firms, owned and managed independently, which have entered into agreements with the other member firms in the network to share a common name, brand, intellectual property, and quality standards. Each network has established a global entity to co-ordinate the activities of the network.

Until 2020, KPMG was the only Big Four firm not registered as a UK private company, but rather the co-ordinating entity was a Swiss association (verein). However, KPMG International changed its legal structure from a verein to a co-operative under Swiss law in 2003, then to a UK limited company in 2020. For Deloitte, PwC and Ernst & Young, the co-ordinating entity is a UK limited company. Those entities do not themselves perform external professional services, nor do they own or control the member firms. Nevertheless, these networks colloquially are referred to as "firms" for the sake of simplicity and to reduce confusion with lay-people. These accounting and professional services networks are similar in nature to how law firm networks in the legal profession work.

In many cases, each member firm practices in a single country, and is structured to comply with the regulatory environment in that country.

Ernst & Young also includes separate legal entities which manage its three geographic areas: the Americas, Asia-Pacific, and EMEIA (Europe, the Middle East, India and Africa) groups. These entities coordinate services performed by local firms within their respective areas, but do not perform services or hold ownership in the local entities. There are rare exceptions to this convention; in 2007, KPMG announced a merger of four internationally distinct member firms (in the United Kingdom, Germany, Switzerland and Liechtenstein) to form a single firm, KPMG Europe LLP.

History of mergers
Since the 1980s, numerous mergers and one major scandal involving Arthur Andersen, have reduced the number of major professional-services firms from eight to four.

Big Eight
The firms which came to be known as the "Big Eight" originated in various UK and US audit firms established in the 19th or early 20th centuries and later merged together. The firms' initial international expansion was driven by the needs of British and American based multinationals for worldwide service. They expanded by forming local partnerships, or by forming alliances with local firms. Arthur Andersen was the exception: the firm originated in the United States, and then expanded internationally by establishing its own offices in other markets, including the United Kingdom.

In 1932, Fortune published an article listing the 15 largest American CPA firms by number of public corporation clients. At this point in time, Price, Waterhouse and Co. was far and away the most successful of the firms with more than double the clients compared to the firms in the second and third spots.

From the 1930s through the 1950s, audit firms expanded their national sizes and their service offerings. After the Wall Street Crash of 1929, numerous regulations were put into place by the federal government to ensure that investors were able to view accurate and detailed financial information. As a result of the fierce competition between themselves, many of the firms merged together to further expand their practices and geographic reach. These mergers led to a few name changes as the firms embraced a larger identity. In 1947, Touche, Niven and Co. merged with George Bailey and Co. and Allen R. Smart and Co. to become Touche, Niven, Bailey and Smart (TNBS). In 1950, Barrow, Wade, Guthrie and Co. merged into Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Co., which kept the more notable PMM name. In 1955, the Audit Co. of New York merged into Price, Waterhouse and Co., again keeping PW as the firm name. In 1958, two of the firms listed on Fortune list merged into larger firms: Loomis, Suffern and Fernald was assumed by Lybrand, Ross Bros. and Montgomery while Miller, Donaldson and Co. was assumed by Haskins and Sells. Finally, in 1960, TNBS merged with the Canadian accounting firm Ross to form Touche, Ross, Bailey and Smart (later simplified in 1969 to Touche Ross).

By 1960, business among the CPA firms had consolidated such that the top eight firms audited about 80% of all firms listed with the SEC. Around this time the term "Big Eight" came to be used to describe these CPA firms' dominance of the market. Fortune published an article in the same year listing these firms along with their number of partners, offices, and estimated gross revenues.

In the following 20 years, the consolidation pattern continued. The two remaining firms from the top 15 in 1932 outside of the Big Eight in 1960 were merged in 1963 and 1967, respectively: F. W. Lafrentz and Co. with Main and Co. to form Main Lafrentz and Co. (later merging with Thomson, McLintock and Co., a British firm, to form McLintock Main Lafrentz International or MMLI in 1969) and Leslie, Banks and Co. into Lybrand, Ross Bros. and Montgomery. Six years later, in 1973, LRBM merged with the British Cooper Bros. and Co. to form Coopers and Lybrand. In 1978, Deloitte, Plender, Griffiths and Co. merged with Haskins and Sells to become Deloitte, Haskins and Sells and one year later Ernst and Ernst merged its practice with Whinney, Murray and Co. to become Ernst and Whinney. As 1980 arrived, the Big Eight were known as the following:

 * Arthur Andersen
 * Arthur Young
 * Coopers & Lybrand
 * Deloitte, Haskins & Sells
 * Ernst & Whinney
 * Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Co.
 * Price, Waterhouse and Co.
 * Touche Ross

In the 1980s the Big Eight, each with global branding, adopted modern marketing and grew rapidly. They merged with many smaller firms. KPMG was the result of one of the largest of these mergers. In 1987, Peat Marwick merged with the Klynveld Main Goerdeler group (which included the aforementioned MMLI) to become KPMG Peat Marwick, rebranding in 1995 to simply KPMG.

Big Six
Competition among these firms intensified, and the Big Eight became the Big Six in 1989. In that year, Ernst & Whinney merged with Arthur Young to form Ernst & Young in June, and Deloitte, Haskins & Sells merged with Touche Ross to form Deloitte & Touche in August.

The Big Six after both mergers occurred were:

 * Arthur Andersen
 * Coopers & Lybrand
 * Deloitte & Touche
 * Ernst & Young
 * KPMG
 * Price Waterhouse

There has been some merging of ancestor firms, in some localities, which would aggregate brands belonging to the Big Four today, but in different combinations than the present-day names would otherwise suggest. For example, the United Kingdom local firm of Deloitte, Haskins & Sells merged instead with the United Kingdom firm of Coopers & Lybrand. The resulting firm was called Coopers & Lybrand Deloitte, and the local firm of Touche Ross kept its original name. It was not until the mid-1990s that both UK firms changed their names to match those of their respective international organizations. Meanwhile, in Australia, the local firm of Touche Ross merged instead with KPMG. It is for these reasons that the Deloitte & Touche international organization was known as DRT International (later DTT International), to avoid use of names which would have been ambiguous, as well as contested, in certain markets.

Big Five
In July 1998, the Big Six became the Big Five when Price Waterhouse merged with Coopers & Lybrand to form PricewaterhouseCoopers.

The Big Five at this point in time were:

 * Arthur Andersen
 * Deloitte & Touche
 * Ernst & Young
 * KPMG
 * PricewaterhouseCoopers

Big Four
Finally, the insolvency of Arthur Andersen stemming from their involvement in the 2001 Enron Scandal produced the Big Four:

 * Deloitte & Touche (now known as Deloitte)
 * Ernst & Young (now known as EY)
 * KPMG
 * PwC

The Enron collapse and ensuing investigation prompted scrutiny of the company's financial reporting and its long time auditor, Arthur Andersen. The company was indicted for obstruction of justice for shredding documents related to the audit of Enron. The resulting conviction, although later overturned, doomed Arthur Andersen, because most clients dropped the firm, and the company was not allowed to take on new clients while they were under investigation. Most of Arthur Andersen’s international practices were sold to members of what is now the Big Four – notably EY globally; Deloitte in the United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, and Brazil; and PwC in China and Hong Kong.

Big Four merger history
The Big Four were all derived from a series of global mergers. The charts below show year of formation through merger, or adoption of single brand name.

Revenue comparison
In 2010, Deloitte, with its 1.8% growth, was able to outpace PricewaterhouseCoopers' 1.5% growth, gaining "first place" in revenue size, and became the largest firm in the professional services industry. In 2011, PwC re-gained first place with 10% revenue growth. In 2013, these two firms claimed the top two spots with only a $200 million revenue difference, that is, within half a percent. However, Deloitte saw faster growth than PwC over the next few years (largely due to acquisitions) and reclaimed the title of largest of the Big Four in Fiscal Year 2016.

It was estimated that the Big Four had about a 67% share of the global accountancy market in 2012, while most of the rest was divided among so called mid-tier players, such as BDO, Crowe Global and Grant Thornton.

Note: Consulting & Advisory includes the following service lines reported by each firm. Further, columns may not cross-add due to rounding in numbers reported by each firm.
 * Deloitte: Consulting, Financial Advisory, Risk Advisory (F2023 financial statement categories)
 * PwC: Advisory (F2023 financial statement categories)
 * EY: Consulting, Strategy and Transactions (F2023 financial statement categories)
 * KPMG: Advisory (F2023 financial statement categories)

Revenue comparison charts
Big Four Accounting Firm Revenues (US$ bn)

Revenue gap to largest firm (%)

Revenue gap to largest firm (US$ bn)

Audit & Assurance Revenue (US$ bn)

Tax Revenue (US$ bn)

Consulting & Advisory Revenue (US$ bn)

Audit quality and ethics
A 2019 analysis by Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) in the United States observed that the big four accounting firms bungled almost 31% of their audits since 2009. In another project study on government oversight, it was seen that while the auditors colluded to present audit reports that pleased their clients, the times they did not resulted in a loss of business. Despite this large-scale collusion in audits, the PCAOB in its 16-year history has only made 18 enforcement cases against the "big four". Although these auditors have failed audits in 31% of cases (808 cases in total), they have only faced action by PCAOB in 6.6% of the cases. KPMG at that point had never been fined despite having the worst audit failure rate of 36.6%.

As per the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) none of the Big Four – Deloitte, EY, KPMG, and PwC managed to surpass the 90% target of its audits. The inefficiency in audit was resulting in a loss of investors' money, people's pension plans, stakeholders' livelihoods and was putting a question mark on the credibility of audited financial statements. "At a time when the future of the audit sector is under the microscope, the latest audit quality results are not acceptable," said Stephen Haddrill, the FRC's Chief executive. Multiple ethics scandals and questionable practices across the globe led to multi-million dollar fines and subsequent settlements by all the Big Four firms.

Despite repeated sanctions from regulators, the Big Four have seen continued challenges to audit quality and ethics as the 2020 decade comes to a close.
 * 1) In May 2018, KPMG was accused of being "complicit" in signing off Carillion's "increasingly fantastical figures" before Carillion ultimately collapsed.
 * 2) In January 2020, PwC faces allegations of potential conflict of interest in its audit of Sonangol, given its dual roles of both auditor and consultant.
 * 3) In September 2020, Deloitte was fined £15 million (US$19.4 million) by the FRC for failing to apply sufficient professional skepticism in its audits of Autonomy's 2009 to 2011 financial statements prior to Autonomy's acquisition by Hewlett-Packard.
 * 4) In June 2020, EY was accused of poor auditing for failing to discover that €1.9 billion in cash was missing at Wirecard AG, precipitating Wirecard's collapse and eventual sale to Santander Bank for €100 million in November 2020.

Tax avoidance
According to Australian taxation expert George Rozvany, the Big Four are "the masterminds of multinational tax avoidance and the architects of tax schemes which cost governments and their taxpayers an estimated US$1 trillion a year". At the same time they are advising governments on tax reforms, they are advising their multinational clients on how to avoid taxes.

The PwC tax scandal is one example where PwC sold advice to clients on tax avoidance, and did so using information obtained from PwC tax experts consulting for the Australian Tax Office and Department of Treasury.

Market concentration and alleged collusion amongst the Big Four
In the wake of industry concentration and the occasional firm failure, the issue of a credible alternative industry structure has been raised. The limiting factor on the expansion of the Big Four to include additional firms, is that although some of the firms in the next tier have become quite substantially large, or have formed international networks, effectively all large public companies insist on having an audit performed by a Big Four network. This creates the complication that smaller firms have no way to compete well enough to make it into the top end of the market.

Documents published in June 2010 show that some UK companies' banking covenants required them to use one of the Big Four. This approach from the lender prevents firms in the next tier from competing for audit work for such companies. The British Bankers' Association said that such clauses are rare. Current discussions in the UK consider outlawing such clauses.

In February 2011, the Irish Director of Corporate Enforcement Paul Appleby said that auditors "report surprisingly few types of company law offences to us", with the so-called "big four" auditing firms reporting the least often to his office, at just 5% of all reports.

In 2011, the House of Lords of United Kingdom completed an inquiry into the financial crisis, and called for an Office of Fair Trading investigation into the dominance of the Big Four. In September 2019, Bloomberg News reported that The Big Four controlled 95% of the FTSE 250 audit market by client numbers and 96% by market capitalization in August 2019, according to Adviser Rankings.

In 2018, an Australian parliamentary committee was told that the heads of the Big Four firms have met regularly for dinner. The revelation was among issues which led to an inquiry by the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission into possible collusion in the selling of audit and other services. However, Ernst & Young told the inquiry that the dinners, which were held once or twice a year, were to discuss industry trends and issues of corporate culture such as inclusion and diversity.

The January 2018 collapse of the UK construction and services company Carillion raised further questions about the Big Four, all of which had advised the company before its liquidation. On 13 February 2018, the Big Four were described by Member of Parliament (MP) and chair of the Work and Pensions Select Committee Frank Field as "feasting on what was soon to become a carcass" after collecting fees of £72m for Carillion work during the years leading up to its collapse. The final report of a Parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of Carillion, published on 16 May 2018, accused the Big Four accounting firms of being a "cosy club", with KPMG singled out for its "complicity" in signing off on Carillion's "increasingly fantastical figures" and internal auditor Deloitte accused of failing to identify, or ignoring, "terminal failings". The report recommended the Government refer the statutory audit market to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), urging consideration of breaking up the Big Four. In September 2018, Business Secretary Greg Clark announced he had asked the CMA to conduct an inquiry into competition in the audit sector, and on 9 October 2018, the CMA announced it had launched a detailed study. In July 2020, the UK Financial Reporting Council told the Big Four that they must submit plans by October 2020 to separate their audit and consultancy operations by 2024.

title: Big Four accounting firms