So many assumptions from you pro-hunters in this thread! Who said we don't understand ecosystems? If you still believe that populations would be out of control without hunters, then I would argue that you don't properly understand how ecosystems work. But again, not relevant to this thread.
Actually, we have affected the ecosystem so much with fences and roads and such that hunting is needed to help control the populations to prevent massive die offs from starvation for such species as deer.
They can go through boom and bust cycles. Left alone without as many natural predators in the wild (as has been a side effect of what we've done that is not easily undone) most prey animals left to breed on their own naturally tend to procreate at a rate higher than what the flora can support because they have evolved to breed at a rate that is typically higher than the carrying capacity in response to predatory pressures (most animals' breeding rates are affected by evolution to usually be at or slightly above the carrying capacity of their environment). Remove the natural predatory pressures as we have, and there's not enough for the extra bambis to eat. So they starve to death instead.
That's more humane?
So the following year the population isn't as strong. These up and down cycles continue. In an up population weakened by lack of food (plus let's remember epidemiology, epidemics are more likely in overcrowdng), or in a down population, these animals are at greater risk of various diseases that can decimate a local population.
If you removed the fences, the cow pastures, etc, and brought the wolves etc back, the natural predator-prey relationship tends to keep both populations at a steady state and then will be affected mostly by environmental forces such as drought which affects flora for grazing. I don't mean to imply there isn't a natural up and up and down of the populations in the wild.
It's an imperfect solution, but since we're not likely to remove human civilization, roads, fences, pasture, and such, hunting serves a purpose for these animal populations.
Also, keep in mind, if the deer population goes up, so does the population of predators such as cougars. As they spread out their hunting territories, this places them at greater risk of coming into rural and suburban areas. Sadly, if a cougar starts to hang around too close to an elementary school let's say, they will typically be killed. I've seen this happen. Argue all you want, if it comes down to kids or cougar the cougar goes in these situations. These animals often can't be relocated, as I've said there's only so much land.
Also in another thread, a gun thread, in my post history, I mention hunting as part of subsistence nutrition. Notice I said SUBSISTENCE. I talk about having iron deficiency anemia myself as a child due to poverty and how our family hunted to supplement our diet out of nesscesity.
@Mad Jack raised that a shocking number of families rely on hunting for food in this country, maybe he'll pop over and give the number again.
If we don't like that some poor families hunt for a source of protein and iron, maybe try to get increases on SSI/SSDI, food stamps, or donate protein and iron rich foods to local food box places.
Lastly, as mentioned, the money that goes for hunting permits is frequently reinvested by the gov't for preservation efforts. Don't like that either? Vote to increase such monies and taxes for that. Support animal rights or preservation effort groups or lobbies with your money or volunteer.
I'm sorry if the realities of what human civilization has done to the natural ecology, plus the need to eat, has created these problems whereby humans take over the the role of predator and to feed themselves, bothers you.
Propose solutions and enact them as I have here. Or, accept that there's worse realities than a quick death for a prey animal and its consumption by a human animal.
How does this help OP?
Because maybe this will help him not sound less like a douche to any interviewers with anti-hunt bias if this comes up. He can show thoughtful analysis at least, as
@Goro said, someone may not agree with hunting despite all of this, but maybe they can respect the thought and need that goes into this for some.
This discussion displays an application of an understanding of basic ideas in epidemiology, populations, cultural competency, nutrition status in underserved/impoverished people, etc that are actually relevant knowledge to a future physician. So there's that too.
