One point others have touched on, but not addressed directly, is that in many areas, deer are getting out of control. Yes, predators occasionally cause property damage (in the form of lost livestock), but deer cause property damage, too, and I suspect it’s a lot more than the predators do. If the goal is to minimize the total property damage, then we should introduce more predators to keep the herbivores down.
Thank you, Ivorybill. 
Personally I am against reintroduction but not against the natural return of these animals. Wolves are returning to Washington state, I just read an article about a grizzly that was accidentally shot in Idaho and recently I spotted (and photographed) a rare moose in my usual hunting area.
Yes this sometimes this means that the animals are being pushed out their habitat and striving to find new haunts but these recent examples are telling me the animals are doing well and expanding to new areas. Why reintroduce when they’re taking care of things themselves?
According to a book I got at the, ahem, California Wolf Center, grizzlies can pretty much stroll up and take a kill away from wolves anytime they want.
With the Selkirks on one side of me and the Yaak on the other, I’m situated right smack dab in bear/wolf, mountain lion country.
I’ve never begrudged their presence, their arrival here was much earlier than mine. This time of year black bears are frequent visitors to the orchard, gleaning apples. I just wish they’d eat the ground falls and quit climbing into the trees breaking them down. Every couple years I’ll have to chase one away that’s wandering around the chicken coop with lust in their eyes, but other than these minor irritations, we seem to co-exist peacefully and I am thankful for their presence.
In years past we’ve seen the occasional lone wolf loping through, but a new pack took up residence here last year so I do keep a closer eye on the cattle though we’ve had no problems. As mentioned above, they have cut into the coyote population some. It’s somehow thrilling to hear the 'yotes start their yapping and hear the wolves join in. The coyotes shut up immediately and make themselves scarce for the rest of the evening.
By and large, the complaining comes from the ranching lobby, who’ve lapped at the federal trough with their cheap federal grazing leases for too long, along with hunters who claim that their inability to find any elk, moose or deer is the fault of wolves, rather than their inability to get their fat asses out from behind the wheels of their wilderness assault vehicles to actually hunt them.
And participating in an activity [bow-hunting] that is banned in many countries because of its cruelty is rather vile in my opinion. I really don’t care if such people get attacked by the wildlife they are trying to kill. I have no qualms about being happy when bad things happen to people who do vile things.
I, for one can’t believe native American’s were so cruel for so long. Good thing us white folks gave them firearms (and small pox) so they could subsist like civilized humans. :rolleyes:
Well, I had hoped that someone clearly as passionate about animal welfare and safety would be equally passionate about having facts about the activities you wish to see curtailed. Possibly naively I thought that you’d remember that humans are animals too, and it seems to me that a person who is against pain and suffering would be against pain and suffering for all creatures.
Perhaps if you wish to learn more about bow hunting’s environmental impacts, you could direct your browser to this study, which states:
(1) “Hunting with bow and arrow is practiced in a majority of the nations of the world.”
(2) “Regarding the capacity to harvest middle-large class 1 game, the efficiency of the bow and arrow is fully comparable to the hunting tools presently permitted today.”
(3) “Toxic impact on the environment is non-existent. All projectiles except one were recovered during the study and these can generally be reused. Modern arrows are manufactured of aluminum, which is one of the earth’s most common elements, as well as carbon fiber. Hunting arrowheads are generally made of aluminum and steel.” There’s no lead, in other words, to poison other creatures.
(4) “No other hunting form accepted today that has been scientifically studied has yielded a lower wounding frequency.”
Or this site, which summarizes a study that proved that “87 percent of deer hit by bow hunters were recovered.” This study has received a great deal of positive and negative attention, but my professional opinion (BS in Natural Resources, MS in Forest Ecology, Ph.D. in Forest Policy; work experience with The Nature Conservancy and with the US Forest Service; years spent hunting) the numbers generated fit with my experience.
I live in the city now and don’t get to hunt like I used to, but let me share with you this personal anecdote: of the many hunters I’ve known over the years, every single one has consistently expressed sincere interest in (1) not wounding game, (2) not losing game, and (3) not causing undue or unnecessary suffering to game. Also, in my experience, bow hunters are among the most diligent hunters, since they have to get to within 20 to 30 yards of an animal for an effective shot. Compare this with rifle hunters who may take low percentage shots in excess of 100 yards.
Finally, IMHO, even in the absence of man, nature is cruel. Cougars kill deer. Coyotes kill fawns. Wolves hunt down sick or inured animals. Brown bears take advantage of opportunities to kill other animals when they can. Not a single one of those carnivores is worried about reducing the potential pain or suffering their act of killing will cause.
Now, I admire the dedication and compassion of animal rights activists and I believe in your constitutional right to present your ideas, wishes, and dreams for a better world. I would hope that in doing so you’ll not persist in wishing pain and suffering on people who choose to participate in an activity you perceive to be vile.