Am I missing something or are not bans on hunting and fishing necessary?

[NtharotepDragon]

We are having fighermen up in arms here in Florida about the fishing ban saying certain areas can't be fished based on the level of the population of the fish.
We had a protest some years back by seafood restaurants against the ban of Alaskan snow crab.

If you just allow folks to hunt animals or fish them without restrictions will that not lead to extinction of the species or, at the very least, making them so rare that you have to charge exuberant prices for them?
I understand the folks make a living off of this fishing or crabbing or hunting and such but is the answer really promote the industry now and damn the future?
Thoughts?

 

[desecrator]

Some creatures are in abundance, some are rare. In most cases, they need to be regulated to ensure not only the survival of the species but also the survival of the entire ecosystem, as everything is interdependant on one another.
There are many cases of overregulation though. Too often do I hear of deer starving to death because they did not allow enough of them to be hunted during season, which not only causes them to have an incredibly drawn-out and painful death, but also causes other deer a great deal of distress, as some of the food they could have eaten (which is in short supply,mind you) was eaten by one that should have been shot, and then eventually starved (basically wasting that food).
Then there are the places which do not even care about the animals, they just get protested by "animal rights activists" and threatened with hunger strikes by hippies and whatnot. I think Hank Hill said it best, "So you're telling me my boy can't go on his first hunt because some twig boy won't eat?"