French hunters react angrily to drinking ban plan to reduce accidental deaths
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33100432
(21 days ago; 14 points, 8 comments)
There is an artificial imbalance in the ecosystems introduced by hunters who feed specific animals at certain times in order to have more, and thus easier to hunt, preys. Because of that, there is a need to restore a viable ecosystem in some areas.
This kind of thing should not be let to the "elite", but to professionals...
A state has an asset. They can assess the population of a certain animal, assess its growth rate, assess the impact it can have, both to human populations and to the ecosystem, and determine how many need to be culled each year to prevent negative impacts.
Now it has a choice. It can get people to pay to do it for them, or of can tax you and pay someone to do it. They can consider the animals assets or liabilities.
A government that would turn something very valuable from a source of revenue to an expense is an incompetent government full of bumbling idiots that have no business governing a territory of natural resources or a population of human beings.
and if you think deer are bad try feral hogs... nasty, can kill you, aggressive, tear up anything and everything.
In general you're correct, most hunters don't. But some hunters -- particularly the ones that hunt the most -- do feed prey. On the high end of that histogram are people that acquire property in communities that are designed to accommodate hunters. They feed a lot of game.
That is likely the case. General farming on behalf of human consumption is likely to be an order of magnitude greater impact on whatever "ecological imbalances" you care to measure.
Humans have been "imbalancing" ecologies thus for a long time.