Shrinking Animals
Trophy hunting causing "reverse evolution"
"Survival of the smallest is not exactly what Darwin had in mind, but in some animals species, humans may be forcing a smaller-is-better scenario, and the ultimate outcome may be species demise.
Among some species of big game, hunters are limited by lottery systems that allow only a select few to take just one animal each. Another approach is to sell or auction trophy hunting permits for thousands of dollars. The schemes encourage hunters to be picky, passing up smaller males in search of those with the biggest antlers or the largest tusks or the most beautiful manes, so the creature can be stuffed and displayed on a wall.
This unnatural selection, a practice that dates back decades and more to hunters like Teddy Roosevelt who sought trophy animals before there were restrictions, is forcing "reverse evolution," according to a recent article in Newsweek."
I was an active hunter for several decades, I would hunt again if necessary but for the time being meat is plentiful in ther supermarkets and relatively healthy if you pick and choose. I have always been a meat hunter.
Some hunting practices have always made me puke. Game farms, trophy hunting and "predator control" are absolute abominations from my point of view. Stuffing a head with the largest antlers/horns/teeth and nailing it to your wall is one of the sickest practices in the shooting community, to me on par with riddling highway signs with bullets. It's all about advertising your big dick rather than relishing your time spent in nature and filling your freezer.
I know all the excuses. No one can bamboozle this lifetime NRA member with the crap meant to justify slaughter for shit reasons, with shit results. Yeah, we're told of all the money spent and jobs created when outfitters are hired, the problems created by underground critters in farmers' fields, livestock supposedly lost to predators, necessary culling. In each and every instance mentioned the money could come from other sources or solutions had to be created to fix unnatural problems caused by, you guessed it, other shitty hunting practices. Kill the coyotes, too many prairie dogs. Instead of pandering to bloodlust, outfit a photo safari and you'll have more animals to see. Don't get me started on game farms where for thousands of dollars you can blast a pen raised trophy elk that you could basically walk up to and bean with a baseball bat. Or benchrest shooting to see how far off you can turn prairie dogs into misty red clouds. For nothing.
So now finally there's some talk about trophy hunting weakening some species, where going after the biggest, most robust and healthy males will result in runtier generations, something I've always known, or at least suspected. It flies against millennia of natural selection where the most easily taken were the young, the sickest, the old, and the unwary. Hunting laws have mostly been asinine patchwork attempts at catching up to stupid earlier attempts of game regulation. And most of the time they stipulate you have to bag the biggest and best chance for that species to procreate in natural ways. In hunting, we're reaping what we sow.
"Survival of the smallest is not exactly what Darwin had in mind, but in some animals species, humans may be forcing a smaller-is-better scenario, and the ultimate outcome may be species demise.
Among some species of big game, hunters are limited by lottery systems that allow only a select few to take just one animal each. Another approach is to sell or auction trophy hunting permits for thousands of dollars. The schemes encourage hunters to be picky, passing up smaller males in search of those with the biggest antlers or the largest tusks or the most beautiful manes, so the creature can be stuffed and displayed on a wall.
This unnatural selection, a practice that dates back decades and more to hunters like Teddy Roosevelt who sought trophy animals before there were restrictions, is forcing "reverse evolution," according to a recent article in Newsweek."
I was an active hunter for several decades, I would hunt again if necessary but for the time being meat is plentiful in ther supermarkets and relatively healthy if you pick and choose. I have always been a meat hunter.
Some hunting practices have always made me puke. Game farms, trophy hunting and "predator control" are absolute abominations from my point of view. Stuffing a head with the largest antlers/horns/teeth and nailing it to your wall is one of the sickest practices in the shooting community, to me on par with riddling highway signs with bullets. It's all about advertising your big dick rather than relishing your time spent in nature and filling your freezer.
I know all the excuses. No one can bamboozle this lifetime NRA member with the crap meant to justify slaughter for shit reasons, with shit results. Yeah, we're told of all the money spent and jobs created when outfitters are hired, the problems created by underground critters in farmers' fields, livestock supposedly lost to predators, necessary culling. In each and every instance mentioned the money could come from other sources or solutions had to be created to fix unnatural problems caused by, you guessed it, other shitty hunting practices. Kill the coyotes, too many prairie dogs. Instead of pandering to bloodlust, outfit a photo safari and you'll have more animals to see. Don't get me started on game farms where for thousands of dollars you can blast a pen raised trophy elk that you could basically walk up to and bean with a baseball bat. Or benchrest shooting to see how far off you can turn prairie dogs into misty red clouds. For nothing.
So now finally there's some talk about trophy hunting weakening some species, where going after the biggest, most robust and healthy males will result in runtier generations, something I've always known, or at least suspected. It flies against millennia of natural selection where the most easily taken were the young, the sickest, the old, and the unwary. Hunting laws have mostly been asinine patchwork attempts at catching up to stupid earlier attempts of game regulation. And most of the time they stipulate you have to bag the biggest and best chance for that species to procreate in natural ways. In hunting, we're reaping what we sow.
posted by nolocontendere at 7:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home