Yes.

Yellowstone is a national park and should be left pristine and with as minimal of impact from humans as possible. Of course animals that live within the park will expand beyond the borders, but that is a reasonable to anticipate if you choose to hunt or recreate in the areas bordering the park. It could at times be more or less filled with game or predators depending on how the populations are swinging at the time.

National forests. State lands, timer lands, private, etc that are much closer to urban/suburban areas should allow for hunting as a tool for wildlife management, particularly for predators. Not only because it allows humans (also predators and a part of the ecosystem) to hunt and recreate but to also create safer areas for people to live and not have predators encroach on populated areas. This is a reasonable balance.

But that isn’t what this is about. This is more about catering to one vocal minority group that doesn’t like hunters or hunting by taking away opportunities. This is not reasonable. These people are enamored by the romanticized idea of all animals being cute, cuddly and loving, which is obviously not true. A lot of these people know very little about animals at all. They are political idealists and can’t see anything outside of their views. Yet, policies and regulations always seem to swing in their favor.

Hunting is being taken away as a management tool under the guise of “alternative strategies” that are proposed as being better while forgetting that hunting also serves a purpose of recreation for humans and not being just a wildlife management tool.



Streamer