The consequences of not hunting

This is a reply to Kate Knowles’ letter about bear hunting on Oct. 31 titled “Sad that ‘gorgeous’ bear was hunted, killed.”

I respect Ms. Knowles’ opinion on hunting, but feel I need to speak on behalf of the other side of this issue. Do you realize the consequences of “no hunting allowed”? If our sportsmen weren’t allowed to hunt bear, deer and other wild animals, their populations would grow and grow and grow – a no-brainer, right?

Then, all these increased numbers of wild animals would have to eat – another no-brainer, right? What if they couldn’t find enough food? Some would become diseased and die, while others would seek food wherever they could, and perhaps that would be in our towns, our farms, our hiking/biking trails, even our backyards – places where people, and especially children, are.

As we humans continue to build buildings and encroach on areas once inhabited by wildlife, we must continue the effort to control the population of these animals – for their own good as well as our own. With all the bad, unhealthy activities people are involved in these days, I much prefer my sons and grandsons to be out there hunting (responsibly, I might add) than to be sitting in a bar somewhere, or doing drugs, gambling and the like.

I might add that all of the wild animal meat taken by my family that is not consumed by us is donated to a local food pantry.