Hard to say-- here in the USA, for instance, a lot of our conservation & conservation research funding comes from the hunting permits and hunter groups. Depending on the context, hunters can be a really good contingent for sustainable wildlife management- because it's in their best interest to keep wildlife around. (I'm saying all of this as a vegetarian/pescatarian, by the way). It also depends on who is making the decision - are there people who rely on hunting for sustenance or to help their families get by? How are they being involved? A great example of what *not* to do is in all of the dialogue right now about trophy hunting in Africa- a very polarized issue, but most of the anti-trophy hunting folks are actually not Africans at all and are from the Global North. They should not have any decision making power over what goes on elsewhere.

In short, to answer your Q such a decision would need to be very deeply community-involved and science-informed.