The difference between natural selection and hunting is that natural selection always takes the weak and vulnerable, hunters always take the best of the best. I feel the genetics of wildlife has suffered greatly because of this. Am I wrong?
I’d say the only issue I’d have with that statement is that you’re grouping 12 million people into 1 category as many people hunt specific species for different reasons. Some people only deer hunt and some only Predator hunt and some may only duck hunt. Some hunt for food, some have other intentions. I believe there is a balance in everything and to much of anything is bad. To many deer, bear, Mt lion, hawks, raccoons etc in an area is bad. I’d say most hunters aim for the oldest animal in said species. But that excludes many species like duck or coyotes for example. Those you shoot to eat or to manage a population that otherwise has no natural predators. But for the majority of hunters, that help the overall herd and wildlife while taking maybe 1-2 deer/year I believe most hunting is good. As a hunter, there’s a lot of styles and methods that I personally disagree with but everyone has their own values they follow in life
Get off your high horse. Humans are highly evolved apes. Are we not part of nature? As such, when we select animals for harvest how is that NOT a form of natural selection?
@@jakepeters2497 i personally bow hunt whitetail deer in southern Wisconsin. Free range animal. No baiting. Just a lot of hours in stand. I understand what you are saying but, not all hunting and not all hunters are the same.
Not all hunting is the same, Compound guys break balls of crossbow guys all the time, baiting vs non baiting, trapping, trailcams etc, I believe each hunter follows certain values and as we are all hunters all though we may disagree we have to in a way still respect it as it’s a part of hunting
