If an animal has a history and a heritage of artificial selection, then we have to discuss why did we (as a presently top predator) originally get ourselve involved with husbandry.
I get torqued off mostly at the wanton killing of any threatened or endangered wild species for reasons that transcend just mere dietary reasons. QWE kill black rhinos and white rhinos and SUmatran Rhinos for their HORNS, We almost drove Bison to extinction for their tongues and their coats, we kill bears for their gallbladders. These folk med reciped are just ludicrous and have no bases in evidence.
NOW, hunger that drives indigenous people to kill and eat endangered primates and birds is not a matter of dietary selectivity and tradition . Its more a matter of necessity. Weve seen that in WWII, the ALLIES fed many aboriginals in the Phillipne, Borneo and SUmatran jungles and they took to non"bushmeat foods" quite well.
Today, several of the populations of aboriginals in the Subasian archipelagos hve taken to our kinds of diets (and suffered our infirmaties also).
The eating of passenger pigeons in swank cafes of the post Civil war US led to the extinction of these little birds for no real logical reason that was dictated by dietary preferences.
When we exercise some Biblical vraisemblence in regards to "dominion over all animals" I find that concept just packed with hubris and shortsightedness. WE can easily adjust our diets to conform to what we raise for meat or grow as a crop.
Even dogs, there is a breed, The Chinese Crested dog, that has been developed and raised as a food meat in China. The breed is also translated to mean "Edible Dog "
My disdain of the Jaqpnese explanation that they enjoy whale meat as part of their culture and are killing these target whale species in a sustainable manner is , to me, such a bullshit cynical argument made up just to satisfy the liberal "Occidental mind" that they are justified in carrying out this barbaric practice.
I reluctantly accept Innuits taking whales, but I dont buy the fact that all bowheads are doing "fine" several populations in the Greenland herds are being hunted in a non sustainable fashion because the Greenland herd seems to be plummeting from IWC numbers. The Beringean herds seem to be doing better because the Innuit are limited to the open sea capabilities of their motorized Umiaks.
We can selectively stress a population of animal that had been used for food and now , because the population crashed because of over hunting or fishing, we should attempt to stop all harvesting and study what the hell happened. The Grand Banks, once the source of much of the worlds codfish, is now a barren con shelf with entire other populations , who used cod fry as part of their food chain, also crashing. The cod may not come back at all.While there are cod in the Banks, theyneed proximity to other cod to get em "in the mood" to breed. The removal of cod density to a su critical population density has resulted in aha by fisheries biologists using simple two dimensional models and have discovered that pop densities, instead of rebounding are staying the same with cod going in and being removed by predators and pollution. I dont think that theres a MORAL distinction, but there is one of whats ETHICAL in handling natural populations.