The concept of a “professional hunter” has a different meaning now, in the age of television, than it did in the historical era of hunting and trapping for the fur trade and open markets.  But if some members of the Wildlife Society – an organization that exists “to ensure that wildlife and habitats are conserved through management actions that take into careful consideration relevant scientific information” – get their way, then a new hunting profession might become feasible once again.  These wildlife scientists are proposing that deer populations, and damage caused by those deer, can be controlled more effectively if it becomes legal for hunters to sell venison.

There is a rich historical tradition of hunting and trapping for the sale of game as food and commodity, but this largely unregulated activity resulted in the near extinction of several species, and hit North America’s whitetail herd especially hard.  From the time that the “New World” was discovered, to the end of the 19^th Century, it is estimated that America’s deer population dropped from upwards of 30 million, to just a few hundred thousand.

Will the selling of wild game meat for profit lead to more game laws being broken in order to make more money?

In the early 20^th Century, the modern philosophy of science-based conservation models became prevalent, and culminated to what we now call the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.  The foundation of this ideal is that America’s wild game belongs to the people – not to a specific individual, corporation, or government entity.  Therefore, our wild game isn’t a commodity to be traded on the open market, and the sale of dead wildlife is strictly prohibited. But some scientists are now arguing that our conservation efforts have been too successful, and our deer population is becoming uncontrollable.  These scientists are trying to match the problem of over-abundant deer populations, with the ever-increasing demand for quality meat.

Jim Sterba raises this question in the Wall Street Journal, “What explains the fact that we have a glut of white-tailed deer in this country, yet an estimated 85% of the venison sold in restaurants and at meat counters is imported from farms in New Zealand?” Venison from domestic deer farms, or the “Cervena” venison that comes from New Zealand’s red stag, is an increasingly in-demand and in-vogue product.  Why not meet this demand, while at the same time allowing hunters to control the over-population of deer?  That’s a win-win.  Or is it?

David Drake, a University of Wisconsin wildlife ecologist, who is a scientist behind this proposal, says that he is advocating for commercial harvest to work alongside of, and not in place of, the way we currently manage deer populations.  He is hoping that a state government will agree to implement a pilot program that would issue a commercial hunting permit – enabling a specific number of deer to be killed from a specific area, and then allowing the meat of that harvest to be sold in a controlled manor.

Are you for, or against this proposal?  I’m sure that many of you would agree that hunting is a solution to controlling deer populations; but what about commercial hunting?  Do you see commercial hunting as a “black and white” issue, or is there a middle and mutually-beneficial ground to be found?