Ban the unnecessary hunting, inhumane trapping and shooting of animals!

Some humans and other beings, such as predatory animals, hunt in order to survive. If they didn't hunt, kill and eat other animals and, in some cases, use the skins, they would die.
In the U.K., however, hunting, for the most part, is done either for sport, for meat and/or fur that is not technically needed, for "population control" and/or "vermin" control by farmers. For the most part, we do not need to hunt nowadays, in this country.
Hunting and shooting for "sport" are both cruelty to animals. If the hunter misses the target part of the animal, the animal may not be killed outright, and the hunter may not bother to shoot again, and the animal may then suffer in agony and die later on due to blood loss, infection, thirst, starvation, disease or predation. Even if the hunter does kill the animal outright, if it is done unnecessarily, it is still a life taken unnecessarily.
Trapping, too, can cause immense suffering to the poor animals. If the animal is "lucky", the trapper will abide by the law and check the traps frequently and death will come sooner for the animal. If the animal is unlucky, however, the animal may be left to suffer in agony, hungry, thirsty, sick and/or infected for a longer time before the trapper comes to kill them by suffocation, shooting or by breaking their neck.
Fox hunting with hounds, according to Wikipedia, is still legal in Northern Ireland. This involves pack of hounds chasing and sometimes killing a fox by either breaking their neck or ripping them apart. The humans who are involved in fox hunting, either through riding the horses, driving the vehicles, walking or acting as "terrier men/women" do all of this for "sport", so-called "pest control" or simply for pleasure. And what about the hounds and horses? Because of the fact that hunts ride out across land with hedges, roads and other potential hazards, and because of foxes' defence against the attackers, there are risks to the horses and hounds, too. Also, apparently, when fox hounds are only about six years old (half of their natural life expectancy), they are sometimes shot to be replaced by younger hounds.
Hunting for "pest control" is unnecessary. Foxes could be sterilised in annual, controlled sterilisation programmes. Foxes can also be kept out of "livestock" areas by the use of humane electric fences, and by the careful use of guns to scare them away. Rabbits could also be dealt with using similar methods.
Grouse, pheasants and partridges are all, as far as am I aware, shot for their meat (which is not typically needed in countries like the U.K. and Ireland) and for "sport". Native birds of prey are also killed by shooters and/or gamekeepers in order to "protect" birds like pheasants, partridges and grouse, so banning the unnecessary shooting and hunting of animals could play a big part in the protection of our native birds of prey, allowing their populations to recover.
Yes, hunting and shooting may employ a lot of people but, in my mind, this does not justify unnecessary hunting and shooting of animals. Slavery and a certain genocide from history employed a lot of people, but that doesn't mean that those practices were right, does it?
Yes, hunting and shooting may be industries that are worth a lot of money to these governments, but that still doesn't justify the unnecessary killing of sentient beings, in my mind. All sentient beings, be they human or of any other species should be afforded at least some kindness.
Thank you.