Is Hunting morally OK or an unnecessary evil?

[El_Machinae]

Undesirable evolutionary consequences of trophy hunting

 

[Cutlass]

Access

To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).

 

[trader/warrior]

What? People don't hunt the weakest puniest deer they can find?

Declines in mean breeding values for weight and horn size therefore occurred in response to unrestricted trophy hunting, resulting in the production of smaller-horned, lighter rams, and fewer trophies.

Also pff the horns are useless anyway. Who cares if the sport hunter don't get a huge decapitated head to stick on their wall...

As I said we will have small nimble ninja deer.

 

[El_Machinae]

Dammit. I was hoping the abstract would get through.

The nutshell is that if there're hunting seasons, the animals will select for breeding before the hunting season starts (i.e., earlier breeding). If there's hunting for size, then the animals will select to become smaller.

We're already noticing size changes in hunted animals due to natural selection

 

[warpus]

That's very interesting El Machinae. Wouldn't this have been going on for thousands of years?

Or are today's hunters having a much greater impact on wildlife than the hunters of 1,000 B.C.?

edit: while our ancestors didn't trophy hunt as much as some of us do these days, there must have still been some evolutionary effects of hunting in the past.

 

[MobBoss]

That's very interesting El Machinae. Wouldn't this have been going on for thousands of years?

Or are today's hunters having a much greater impact on wildlife than the hunters of 1,000 B.C.?

edit: while our ancestors didn't trophy hunt as much as some of us do these days, there must have still been some evolutionary effects of hunting in the past.

Actually, there is a lot of evidence to indicate that ancient hunters were far, far more wasteful and had greater impact than the hunters of today. Consider for example the concept of the buffalo jump - driving an entire herd of buffalo over a cliff killing the whole herd? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

http://www.videojug.com/expertanswer/unlikely-ways-to-die/how-many-people-have-died-from-toothpicks

Thats not bubblegum.

 

[cardgame]

But buffalo haven't exactly developed anything against that, have they?

I'm pretty sure if some people who knew what they were doing did it the buffalo would all go over again.

I mean, the herds were all the same, right? No particular herd was different from the others. So the buffalo would have just gone extinct like the bananas before today's did.


On the topic of evolution being furthered by our hunting, this has indeed happened with fish. Tons of fish everywhere are getting smaller and smaller, because the fishermen toss them back if they're small...

 

[MobBoss]

Otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to post

Either way, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

edit: btw it depends on what kinda bear we're talking about - black bears are pretty safe to be around, unless you annoy them. grizzlies are far more dangerous.

Actually, warpus, your pretty bad on this topic. More than half all the attacks in the last decade were black bears. Your more likely to be attacked by a black bear because a) their range is larger and they are more of them b) they are more likely to scavage off human areas.

Griz are indeed larger and more dangerous....but your not going to run into them very often.

your list of bear deaths is pretty short - and it dates back to the 1800s. Kinda proves my point..

Why do you assume its exhaustive? Most likely there are plenty that bears have killed that are not on that list as well. I think it proves my point very well indeed. Bears of all types are very dangerous creatures.

But buffalo haven't exactly developed anything against that, have they?

I'm pretty sure if some people who knew what they were doing did it the buffalo would all go over again.

I mean, the herds were all the same, right? No particular herd was different from the others. So the buffalo would have just gone extinct like the bananas before today's did.


On the topic of evolution being furthered by our hunting, this has indeed happened with fish. Tons of fish everywhere are getting smaller and smaller, because the fishermen toss them back if they're small...

The point of the comment was to show the impact of ancient hunting vs the impact today.

 

[JollyRoger]

Hunting is morally ok, although canned hunts as practiced by Dick Cheney and various other upscale "sportsmen" are pretty pathetic.

 

[MobBoss]

Hunting is morally ok, although canned hunts as practiced by Dick Cheney and various other upscale "sportsmen" are pretty pathetic.

Not sure what you are referring to, but the Cheney hunting accident wasnt a 'canned' hunt.

 

[El_Machinae]

That's very interesting El Machinae. Wouldn't this have been going on for thousands of years?

Or are today's hunters having a much greater impact on wildlife than the hunters of 1,000 B.C.?

edit: while our ancestors didn't trophy hunt as much as some of us do these days, there must have still been some evolutionary effects of hunting in the past.

Sure, but that is more tooth & claw hunting. The modern trophy hunter has an overwhelming advantage over the animal, and is driven mainly by the trophy. Subsistence hunting caused problems, to be sure, but it wasn't so targeted like the modern hunting.

There's also a problem with fishing & marine harvesting, since lobsters are 'tossed back' if they're too small (e.g.,): additionally, fishing nets are for a specific sized fish (encouraging smaller fish)

Not sure what you are referring to, but the Cheney hunting accident wasnt a 'canned' hunt.

Of course it was. They brought the old, tired lawyer with them, even.

 

[JollyRoger]

Not sure what you are referring to, but the Cheney hunting accident wasnt a 'canned' hunt.

I'm referring to this 2003 "hunt":

Dick Cheney is under fire for shooting birds. The Vice President has come under attack from an animal rights group for participating in a “canned hunt” in which he reportedly killed pheasants that were released for the purpose of being shot by hunters.

The increasingly low-profile V.P. was taken to Pittsburgh by Air Force Two earlier this week where his “security detail loaded him and his favorite shotgun into a Humvee,” and went to Rolling Rock Club in Ligonier Township, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. There, he and nine other hunting buddies shot at 500 ringneck pheasants, killing 417 of them. The V.P. was credited with offing 70 of the birds, as well as an unknown number of mallard ducks.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3675813

Perhaps that explains his 2006 failures as a hunter - he never was accustomed to real hunting.

 

[.Shane.]

I'm referring to this 2003 hunt:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3675813

Perhaps that explains his 2006 failures as a hunter - he never was accustomed to real hunting.

Any veteran MobBoss reader knows that this is the fault of the pheasants, they most likely had a book deal in the works and therefore the story has no credibility AND they deserved it for being media elitists. They may even have been ACORN operatives?

AM I RITE?

 

[MobBoss]

I'm referring to this 2003 "hunt":


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3675813

Perhaps that explains his 2006 failures as a hunter - he never was accustomed to real hunting.

From MSNBC entertainment and gossip blog?

ok. /shrug.

But in looking this practice up, it seems its quite common in Europe...especially in the UK. Perhaps Cheney was just trying to be more progressive and EU-esqe.

Any veteran MobBoss reader knows that this is the fault of the pheasants, they most likely had a book deal in the works and therefore the story has no credibility AND they deserved it for being media elitists. They may even have been ACORN operatives?

AM I RITE?

Actually, shane, they do this at Fort Lewis every year, where they turn a lot of these pheasants loose to be hunted on certain areas on the post. They still have to go out and use dogs and hunt the birds, so its not a typical 'canned' hunt were an animal is usually tethered or restrained and cant get away. Its not an uncommon practice.

But thanks for your totally unbiased viewpoint of how I would react. TK surely agrees.

@EL_Mac. That was a good one!

 

[JollyRoger]

From MSNBC entertainment and gossip blog?

ok. /shrug.

But in looking this practice up, it seems its quite common in Europe...especially in the UK. Perhaps Cheney was just trying to be more progressive and EU-esqe.

It's quite common among a certain segment of American "sportmen" these days. Many elite law firms do this kind of thing with the high level executives of their clients. Cheney likely got into the habit as head of Halliburton. Nevertheless, I'm sure you agree that the practice is a sorry excuse for hunting though, right?

 

[warpus]

Actually, there is a lot of evidence to indicate that ancient hunters were far, far more wasteful and had greater impact than the hunters of today. Consider for example the concept of the buffalo jump - driving an entire herd of buffalo over a cliff killing the whole herd? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

But those hunters did not target specific traits that current hunters might - which might have a different evolutionary effect - I'm wondering what kind.

Actually, warpus, your pretty bad on this topic. More than half all the attacks in the last decade were black bears. Your more likely to be attacked by a black bear because a) their range is larger and they are more of them b) they are more likely to scavage off human areas.

*shrug* When we were camping @ Algonquin, which is full of black bears, the park rangers didn't seem to be too concerned about all the black bears running around. Sure, they were *concerned*, but they weren't panicking, nor were they telling people that their lives are in danger. They just kinda took it in stride.

I suppose we'd need some sort of a bear expert to settle this dispute - but the park rangers we ran into told us that the bears would be way more afraid of us than we'd be afraid of them - and that we shouldn't really worry, and just be smart about it. (e.g. no poking bears with a stick, etc.)

Why do you assume its exhaustive? Most likely there are plenty that bears have killed that are not on that list as well. I think it proves my point very well indeed. Bears of all types are very dangerous creatures.

Oh, they can be dangerous, sure.. But they will not attack humans unless they are desperate.. or, unless you provoke them. (talking about black bears here)

Either way, your suggestion that a hunter hunting in the wild is playing on an even playing field of some sort (with the animals he's hunting) is not very short of ridiculous.

 

[MobBoss]

It's quite common among a certain segment of American "sportmen" these days. Many elite law firms do this kind of thing with the high level executives of their clients. Cheney likely got into the habit as head of Halliburton. Nevertheless, I'm sure you agree that the practice is a sorry excuse for hunting though, right?

Its not that different than hunting feral birds. Same fields, same tactics, same everything.

I dont see it as any real different than fishing in a lake with stocked trout. /shrug.

Try more angst...maybe it will convince its actually worse than it really is.

 

[JollyRoger]

I dont see it as any real different than fishing in a lake with stocked trout. /shrug.

Well, depending on the level of stocking, I might not consider that real fishing either. The Cheney 2003 trip and many hunting trips that the law/exec elite go on are not real hunting in my book.

 

[MobBoss]

Oh, they can be dangerous, sure.. But they will not attack humans unless they are desperate.. or, unless you provoke them. (talking about black bears here)

Your assumption here is false. Try reading some of the specifics on that list I gave. Some were indeed simply predatory attacks because a human can be an easy meal ticket.

Either way, your suggestion that a hunter hunting in the wild is playing on an even playing field of some sort (with the animals he's hunting) is not very short of ridiculous.

I never said it was equal...I was just countering your ridiculous idea that the animal were helpless. They arent. Even a deer will gore and kick a hunter and can hurt him bad if the hunter isnt careful. Even in a situation where a human has all the advantages, nothing is ever guranteed.

Well, depending on the level of stocking, I might not consider that real fishing either. The Cheney 2003 trip and many hunting trips that the law/exec elite go on are not real hunting in my book.

Hard to tell without the specifics....which we dont have.

 

[Ecofarm]

Shooting a lawyer in the face with birdshot is real hunting. That guy could defend himself (he had a gun, right?) - in a court of law too.



ps. I've heard rumors of Cheney for Pres '12. I swoon, I swoon...