I Wear Pants;1568508 wrote:I'm assuming you're excluding ocean fishing from your "can help save" bit because we have and are overfishing the hell out of the ocean.
I'm not up to speed on ocean or deep sea fishing. I cannot say one way or the other there. I do agree there are issues with what is being harvested out of the ocean.
But, State Fishing and Game departments are huge with wildlife conservation. Those same departments are also the ones who issue the state hunting and fishing licenses. Without those departments and all they do, there would be major issues with how animal population and their survival would impact the rest of the country.
Fly4Fun;1568523 wrote:Hunting is needed for population control because we've gotten rid of a lot of the predators in the US that would normally keep animal populations in control. So it's really just a fix to a problem we created to begin with. Not that I'm against hunting.
How did we actually create it? What predators did we rid the country of that would make a big impact?
I am actually curious to hear this one. Outside of bears, coyotes, bobcats, wolverines, and the like, what predators were native to America? One I could think of is the wolf. I guess I could do the research, but don't feel like it. I don't know what types of predators we have that ensure deer population is down. What will ensure pheasant, rabbit, groundhog, raccoon, opossum, prairie dog, goose, duck, and others are healthy and thriving in their existence? There was no regulation on buffalo, and not many predators would've ensured their population was manageable -- but, our ancestors sure did ruin a beautiful animal's future.