[@WilsonTurner] I've been puzzling over this for a bit, and I think my conclusion has to be along the same line as Shorticus':
First, "hunter" is just a single-point trait. It covers being able to hunt, skin, clean, etc. animals. You could probably interpret this to being able to cook them, too, but notice that the chef trait mentions being able to cook at an [i]above average[/i] quality -- anyone can char some meat over a campfire. Your character's ranged weapons trait, then, covers their skill with a bow or crossbow or what-have-you. A person might be an excellent shot with a crossbow on the battlefield, but terrible at hitting deer in dense and unfamiliar foliage.

My problem with upping the trait to include a bunch of facets of being a hunter is that it kind of opens the way for a bunch of very traditional-class-oriented traits, i.e. "why not make a 'Warrior' trait for ten points that includes weapons, armor, toughness, etc?" The reason is that all of these things already exist, you just have to pick the traits out yourself. By having it be more modular than that, the system allows for variability, and for people to stray a bit outside of traditional RPG "classes".

Anyways, I will be adding more traits to cover a wider spectrum soon, so maybe that will solve the problem. OOC most likely goes up in, oh, ten hours or so? Gotta go to school.