Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Fishing Talk
jhocking:
--- Quote from: Orbert on 14 Jan 2008, 10:57 ---
--- Quote from: Inlander on 13 Jan 2008, 06:52 ---Humans are the only predators on the planet that, when faced with a situation in which one of their prey animals is becoming increasingly depopulated and difficult to catch, will continue hunting for that animal regardless, rather than switching to another animal and giving the first one a chance to get its numbers up again.
--- End quote ---
You're kidding, right? You think that a hungry wolf will see a rabbit and think "I better let that one go. Rabbits are getting pretty scare around here. Maybe I'll hold out for a raccoon or something."?
Animals, especially hungry ones, function on instinct alone. Hungry + food = eat. That's it. There is no fucking way that a predator other than man ever thinks about passing up a meal because its numbers are getting low. There are at least some humans out there who do.
--- End quote ---
Exactly. Harry, as a fellow biology degree holder you should know better than to confuse statistical environmental processes with conscious intentionality. The fact that a community of predators as a whole switches to new prey isn't because anyone has decided to help out old prey but because everyone still hunting the old prey has died of hunger.
This isn't to say your argument is wholly without merit, but rather that you are misleading people about the details. We shouldn't look to other predators in the animal world for examples of how to behave, but rather as cautionary examples of how not thinking things through when killing others can come back to bite you.
ADDITION: @verergoca+calenlass - There is a big difference between hunting going down because the hunters are choosing to exercise restraint, and hunting going down because the population of hunters has gone down. Note that the first paragraph of my post assumes people already know about what you posted, but points out how that is a separate issue.
PacoSees:
Way to put the Mod with a scarf in his place.
I tried fishing a couple years ago. Didn't catch anything for two days, and my uncle caught two trout. Fresh fish is pretty damn delicious, but I couldn't put myself through that emotional gauntlet again.
I'll stick to hunting rabbits.
a pack of wolves:
--- Quote from: Linds on 14 Jan 2008, 09:56 ---The part I have difficulty with most is that as soon as they are taken out of the water, they are suffocating. And if you don't throw them back or put them in a bucket soon enough, they die. Fishing when you don't plan on keeping what you catch to eat it is pretty much cruel.
--- End quote ---
I'm unsure why it's seen as less cruel if you eat them afterwards, a view that seems to have come up a few times in this thread. Genuinely, I don't get the difference, they're both just doing it for fun basically. It's not like anybody needs to be eating fish. What am I missing here?
calenlass:
--- Quote from: jhocking on 14 Jan 2008, 11:32 ---ADDITION: @verergoca+calenlass - There is a big difference between hunting going down because the hunters are choosing to exercise restraint, and hunting going down because the population of hunters has gone down. Note that the first paragraph of my post assumes people already know about what you posted, but points out how that is a separate issue.
--- End quote ---
Yes, but the reason for the hunting population dying off is the same, at least in the example I used, where the wolves have very limited choices of prey: scarcity.
jhocking:
EDIT: Has anyone ever provided a good explanation for why this forum doesn't have a delete function?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version