Thought-provoking and well written. But be warned, O&G has an odd way of dealing with his subject matter. Sometimes he seems to skirt the title of a chapter altogether. For example, one of the early chapters simply expounds at length upon the "credentials" of two early hunters (a Greek and a Roman). To what end? The gist of the chapter seems to be that if two very solid historical figures both liked hunting, that ought to be good enough for us. Hm. The chapter titled The Ethics of Hunting seems to say - as best as I could decipher it - that the ethical questions that underlie the matter are way too deep, tangled and just plain incomprehensible to even talk about. Philosophically, this can be a frustrating read sometimes. Still, what isn't? Like I said, the book does not fail to be well written and thought-provoking even though it asks more questions than it answers. If you are comfortable reading philosophy and you are interested in hunting, don't pass it up.