But fish, are they or aren't they wildlife? It would seem not according to a recent laudable agreement drawn up between the Balton Group company that fishes tuna on behalf of the well-known brand "Rio Mare" and WWF-Italy in order to make fishing "more sustainable". But then, how not to ask, why the same association places an almost absolute veto on a "sustainable hunting" and in particular to deer, roe deer and wild boar, especially nowadays invasive (not to mention the wolf), for which a selective and reductive control of the populations should also be part of a logic of "sustainability", moreover also for the preservation of competitive or unsuccessful species of fauna and flora? Ethically speaking, what is the difference between the tuna animal and the wild boar, roe deer, deer and wolf?
Why can tuna be caught "sustainably" for food purposes and not "sustainably" game? Isn't it all explained by the fact that behind these choices there is, as it often seems, a business to justify everything? Doesn't Rio Mare catch tuna for legitimate commercial and profit-making purposes? What distinguishes this group from Japanese whale hunters, when they had to (and perhaps already do!) Hunt them in a "sustainable" way, ie at fixed quotas so that the populations do not become extinct? Or is business enough to justify it all?