Also species dying out because of another species consuming their resources or hunting them is part of evolution. The problem starts when humans start to impose artificial considerations on which animals are worth to be protected and which should be eradicated.
The first thing a wolf pack does when it moves into a new area is hunt and eliminate the coyote and fox population - but it ignores the feline predators such as mountain lions. Selective culling by species is practiced by every predator in the world - not just humans. It IS natural. We aren't doing anything other predators don't, we are just the only species that feels a need to rationalize the action.
Of course we do. We eliminate animals that are dangerous to us, or our livestock. The "industrialized" nature (factory meat farms) rely on an absence of predators even more than "tamed" nature - because the livestock is penned in and has nowhere to run. I have yet to see a fence that can keep wolves out - they will dig under even an electrified chain link fence in a matter of minutes. Not to mention that those fences impede the movement (and thus the survival) of almost every other wild land animal larger than a squirrel.
Hunting for food is ok, but we rarely do it in the western world,
Let me fix that for you. "Hunting for food is ok, but we rarely do it in the
urban community where I live. Where I live, hunting is common. Hunter Safety is available as an elective at the High School. Archery is a standard part of "Physical Education" class, right along side running, basketball, swimming, etc. Hunting and fishing are vital to this area, and the community wouldn't survive without them. St. Croix (makes fishing poles - based here in town) employs quite a few people - and is the best place to work in town. There are over a dozen people here who make their living custom winding poles, and these poles are in demand worldwide. Not far away, New Archery Products employs quite a few more people (and also provides steady business for a local plastics firm), and their products are also sold worldwide.
Those hunters I have in my neighborhood would need to be round and fat, considering how much they boast with what they have shot last week. They can't have eaten that all, and even including what they sell to restaurants, it should have been a lot.
Hunting tales are like "Fish Tales". The claims these people make are highly exaggerated. Divide the claims by 4 (both in quantity and size) and you'll be closer to the truth.
I can't speak for Germany, but here in the US selling wild game and fish is extremely restricted for safety reasons. It's also hard to find a restaurant that will sell true "wild" game, for liability reasons. When you see rabbit or venison in a restaurant it is almost always "farm raised".
I don't support "trophy hunting", but that is illegal most places. You are required to "pack out" a certain percentage (varies with state and species) of the animal - or pay exorbitant fines and potentially serve time. Since most trophy hunters use guide services they may not even be aware of this - the guide service handles the dirty work. The meat is professionally processed and tested (and the cost of this is "included" in the guide package right along with lodging, etc.) A few of the "select" cuts may be sold, but the vast majority of the meat is donated to food pantries.
In the US, over 95% of the money spent on conservation either comes from fees paid by hunters, or is donated by hunters. Groups like Whitetails Unlimited and Ducks Unlimited spend several hundreds of thousands of dollars on conservation. Members donate time to perform heavy manual labor improving habitat.
Even if everyone became vegetarians, some form of hunting would be required. Whether performed by "hobby" hunters or paid snipers. I've seen what even a small herd of deer can do to a crop - if you don't keep the population under control you'll never be able to produce enough food to feed everyone.
"Game animals" like deer and rabbits are vital to a forest. They keep the undergrowth down, without which new trees would be choked out and the forest wouldn't replenish itself. Large and healthy forests are VITAL to air quality and oxygenation. While the oceans provide much of the O2, they do very little filtration - only forests do that.
I've heard every argument against hunting that you have made, several times, and always by college educated city dwellers who think they know far more than they do. They read a couple articles, or a chapter of a textbook, and think they know a lot.
I grew up in a National Forest. My father was a forestry supervisor for the Department of Natural Resources, and I spent countless hours watching, talking with, and working with forest and game managers. I have an intimate first hand knowledge of the things you have read a little about. I know why the "wolves" that were re-introduced both here in Wisconsin and in Germany aren't "true" wolves (they are a wolf - dog hybrid).
Ahem... humans have been "infringing" on animal habitat since before we even evolved, and certainly since before we numbered in the some 350 million.
350 million sounds like a lot, but it's a big planet. With a population that small (or better yet smaller) there would still be many large areas with almost no people in them. Sure, we would still be infringing on habitat, but the animals could move to someplace we aren't. At our current population level there simply isn't enough land left undeveloped, and the animals simply have nowhere left to go. The available habitat is already carrying as much wildlife it can support - in many cases more, which is why CWD is becoming an issue among wild deer, where before it was almost exclusive to "farm" deer.
If you own a gun against a criminal that is used to use it, but you are not, and you have maybe just knowledge about firing at inanimate targets or targets that don't move in a surprising way, while firing at you, you will be much faster dead, than if you are not armed and relying on calling the real experts.
Yes, I'm sure that the criminal will be happy to wait for the police to show up and even the odds for you! If not, perhaps they will arrest the person who killed you. That won't make your grave any less cold and dark, but it make everyone else FEEL safer - even though they won't actually BE much safer (chances are he wasn't the only bad guy around). By the time you know you are in danger it's probably too late to call for help. If you are armed, you can at least try to fight back. If you aren't armed, you will be just another statistic.
Your safety is your own personal responsibility - not the government's. A good police force reduces the chances you will be attacked, but it does not eliminate the chance. Having a gun is not the only way to ensure your safety, but it can be a part of a successful strategy (along with good locks on your doors, not flashing wads of cash, avoiding the "wrong" part of town, etc.)
