Would you intervene to save a wild animal from a predator?

Gruffalux · 19-10-2020 11:24am

El Tarangu wrote: »

What's the difference between those hunters shooting those deer, and you allowing your cats to roam, killing all of the smaller wild creatures?

One is a dumb creature who doesn't know any better. The other is a poor wee pussy just doing instinctual things. :pac:

I don't go round stopping hunters or whatever. Despite my own personal feelings I somehow managed to give birth to avid fishermen who terrorise the lakes, rivers and seas of Ireland. I don't like it but I cannot disown them.

bb1234567 · 19-10-2020 11:26am

No, predators have to eat too. The animal you save will be eaten by the same type of predator months later ,and the predator now just has to go find another animal of same species to eat because you stole it's dinner. It's just postponing the natural cycle of life by a bit at best, and causing disorder in a very efficient natural food chain at worst. And it is deeply hypocritical to say you would unless you yourself are vegan.

Having said that I would stop for example my house cat or dog killing a bird for sport. They are an invasive species, the killing does not contrubute to the natural cycle of life , it's disorder introduced by humans essentially.

Gruffalux · 19-10-2020 11:31am

bb1234567 wrote: »

No, predators have to eat too. The animal you save will be eaten by the same type of predator months later ,and the predator now just has to go find another animal of same species to eat because you stole it's dinner. It's just postponing the natural cycle of life by a bit at best, and causing disorder in a very efficient natural food chain at worst. And it is deeply hypocritical to say you would unless you yourself are vegan.

That little antelope in the OP might live to be a wise old antelope who tells tales at the water hole, to all the baby antelopes who have sprung from her lineage because she survived, about the day they were freed from the mighty Boa Constrictor's grip. It is a tale that will go down in Antelope Mythology. They might even name a constellation after that antelope in antelope language. Things can work out good.

dxhound2005 · 19-10-2020 11:34am

Deleted User wrote: »

There was a BBC nature series using live cameras. Summer watch or something it was called? Is it still going?

Anyway one day after they had been following some chicks for awhile a lizard came in and decimated them all. The BBC got complaints from the public saying they should have intervened. The hosts had to explain why they would not do that.

They did it for penguins, different circumstances.

https://www.thejournal.ie/emperor-penguins-dynasties-4349792-Nov2018/

El Tarangu · 19-10-2020 12:04pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

One is a dumb creature who doesn't know any better. The other is a poor wee pussy just doing instinctual things. :pac:

I don't go round stopping hunters or whatever. Despite my own personal feelings I somehow managed to give birth to avid fishermen who terrorise the lakes, rivers and seas of Ireland. I don't like it but I cannot disown them.

The point I am making is that the cat that you are responsible for has probably laid waste to a lot more local wildlife than even the most proficient deer hunter, but you don't seem terribly troubled by this.

19-10-2020 12:06pm

dxhound2005 wrote: »

They did it for penguins, different circumstances.

https://www.thejournal.ie/emperor-penguins-dynasties-4349792-Nov2018/

Not really - as it was not a case of predation there. It was something else. When I said they had to explain why they would never intervene - I meant in a predation event.

But having said that no rule should be 100% steadfast. It is nice to know that even long held rules and principles are open to interpretation and exception if circumstances warrant it.

amadangomor · 19-10-2020 12:07pm

Cat constantly bringing in live Shrews and mice and always do my best to save them. Shrews a lot slower than the mice so easier to catch.

If a wild predator, would be my instinct to let nature take it's course.

Gruffalux · 19-10-2020 12:11pm

El Tarangu wrote: »

The point I am making is that the cat that you are responsible for has probably laid waste to a lot more local wildlife than even the most proficient deer hunter, but you don't seem terribly troubled by this.

It is true they are hunters. My cats are extremely old now and had bells on them when younger. The cat has the excuse of being an animal. The deer hunter however is a conscious human being killing a really beautiful animal - I meet deer regularly, they are really gorgeous almost mystical creatures. The hunter does not need it for food - he has plenty of food. They are killing for sport. Personally - and fcuk it, I am allowed have a personal opinion - I do not see anything sporty about it.
If the apocalypse comes I will kill and eat a deer if needs be, though it will be sad. It the meantime there are plenty of things to eat that I can grow and buy.

bb1234567 · 19-10-2020 12:18pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

It is true they are hunters. My cats are extremely old now and had bells on them when younger. The cat has the excuse of being an animal. The deer hunter however is a conscious human being killing a really beautiful animal - I meet deer regularly, they are really gorgeous almost mystical creatures. The hunter does not need it for food - he has plenty of food. They are killing for sport. Personally - and fcuk it, I am allowed have a personal opinion - I do not see anything sporty about it.
If the apocalypse comes I will kill and eat a deer if needs be, though it will be sad. It the meantime there are plenty of things to eat that I can grow and buy.

I agree, I don't like the simplistic comparison between human behaviour and any animal. We don't live in an animal world, we created one for ourselves with it's own sets of rules and need for things like hunting for food is one means of survival that has been eliminted due to advancements in our wolrd . We were blessed with big brains and a conscience and we have a responsibilty and some might say privilege of being able to use them to inform whether we should do things such as kill deer. And an ability to weigh up whether the benefits to our race outweigh the pain/cruelty it causes.

A cat may be causing destruction by sport killing but they don't know that they're doing that, just following instinct. It's unnecessary and it's cruel and we can overcome those 'instincts' (if you want to argue humans have these instincts) we know that, and that's why we shouldnt be compared to a feckin cat even if we are both carnivores

statesaver · 19-10-2020 12:18pm

No.

19-10-2020 12:26pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

The deer hunter however is a conscious human being killing a really beautiful animal - I meet deer regularly, they are really gorgeous almost mystical creatures. The hunter does not need it for food - he has plenty of food.

No one "needs" any meat for food however - so I am not sure what that point actually says. Farmed or Wild. Whether you go and hunt and eat deer - or you go and select a prepackaged steak off a supermarket shelf - you are choosing to eat meat you do not "need".

Also beauty is subjective. I too find deer beautiful. I happen to think the same about pigs and cows too however. I still eat them all. And if I am in a restaurant what has cow pig and deer on the menu my selection will be based on taste not my personal ideas of beauty.

I try to source my meat ethically. This is not the easiest thing in Ireland so I do not always succeed. But what you write off as mere "sport" I would say produces more ethical meat than some of the things many of us eat off farms. The wild rabbit I capture and kill is probably many times more ethical meat than - say - what people in KFC are eating.

Hunters that hunt _purely_ for sport and do not eat what they kill however - well there we would be more in agreement. But even that is open to argument too as quite often they hunt animals that need to be culled - and their target selection can be such as to remove the weakest or most sickly individuals from the herd.

But if I get to go bow hunt as I hope to I will be ensuring every part of the kill is eaten or used for something where possible.

bb1234567 · 19-10-2020 12:35pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No one "needs" any meat for food however - so I am not sure what that point actually says. Farmed or Wild. Whether you go and hunt and eat deer - or you go and select a prepackaged steak off a supermarket shelf - you are choosing to eat meat you do not "need".

Also beauty is subjective. I too find deer beautiful. I happen to think the same about pigs and cows too however. I still eat them all. And if I am in a restaurant what has cow pig and deer on the menu my selection will be based on taste not my personal ideas of beauty.

I try to source my meat ethically. This is not the easiest thing in Ireland so I do not always succeed. But what you write off as mere "sport" I would say produces more ethical meat than some of the things many of us eat off farms. The wild rabbit I capture and kill is probably many times more ethical meat than - say - what people in KFC are eating.

Hunters that hunt _purely_ for sport and do not eat what they kill however - well there we would be more in agreement. But even that is open to argument too as quite often they hunt animals that need to be culled - and their target selection can be such as to remove the weakest or most sickly individuals from the herd.

But if I get to go bow hunt as I hope to I will be ensuring every part of the kill is eaten or used for something where possible.

This conversation is a bit of a mine field and agree with some of your points. But I don't agree it's the same thing as supermarket meat , deer are part of a large interconnected wild food chain that we chose to opt out of long ago. Wild animals have packs, dependants and hierarchies that they rely on for survival and our choice to hunt messes with that natural order unnecessarily. Cows and farm animals have packs and social hierarchies but even if some are killed within the packs their survival is never jeopardised by that as we feed and shelter them .We have our own food chain separate from nature , it consists of us and the farmed animals we breed for consumption. It doesn't justify us killing the farm animals, but they are not like for like situations with the same impact or effect imo

gozunda · 19-10-2020 12:38pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

It is true they are hunters. My cats are extremely old now and had bells on them when younger. The cat has the excuse of being an animal. The deer hunter however is a conscious human being killing a really beautiful animal - I meet deer regularly, they are really gorgeous almost mystical creatures. The hunter does not need it for food - he has plenty of food. They are killing for sport. Personally - and fcuk it, I am allowed have a personal opinion - I do not see anything sporty about it.If the apocalypse comes I will kill and eat a deer if needs be, though it will be sad. It the meantime there are plenty of things to eat that I can grow and buy.

Well no. Deer populations in Ireland are routinely culled to prevent excess numbers over which the areas they populate cannot support. If not done - deer will die of starvation and lead to overgrazing in the areas the inhabit. And yes the culled deer are used for food. And very tasty they are too.

We may not like it. But it serves a function.

On another note I've no problem taking out rats and other pests where they are causing problems with hygiene or food.

19-10-2020 12:40pm

bb1234567 wrote: »

deer are part of a large interconnected wild food chain that we chose to opt out of long ago.

In Ireland? The post above mine suggests that we kill them more often than people might think. However I would not have much interest in hunting them here. The chance I have been given to bow hunt them is in a location where it is more the done thing.

Gruffalux · 19-10-2020 12:42pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No one "needs" any meat for food however - so I am not sure what that point actually says. Farmed or Wild. Whether you go and hunt and eat deer - or you go and select a prepackaged steak off a supermarket shelf - you are choosing to eat meat you do not "need".

Also beauty is subjective. I too find deer beautiful. I happen to think the same about pigs and cows too however. I still eat them all. And if I am in a restaurant what has cow pig and deer on the menu my selection will be based on taste not my personal ideas of beauty.

I try to source my meat ethically. This is not the easiest thing in Ireland so I do not always succeed. But what you write off as mere "sport" I would say produces more ethical meat than some of the things many of us eat off farms. The wild rabbit I capture and kill is probably many times more ethical meat than - say - what people in KFC are eating.

Hunters that hunt _purely_ for sport and do not eat what they kill however - well there we would be more in agreement. But even that is open to argument too as quite often they hunt animals that need to be culled - and their target selection can be such as to remove the weakest or most sickly individuals from the herd.

But if I get to go bow hunt as I hope to I will be ensuring every part of the kill is eaten or used for something where possible.

We agree on a lot.
I don't eat any meat but when my vegetarian children asked for it I sourced local organic that was meat raised with care. I also somehow seem to have reared hunters. And reserve the right to tease them. It is unnecessary as a sport. But they do not use guns.

ShatterAlan · 19-10-2020 12:48pm

El Tarangu wrote: »

Tbh, that sounds like you prolonged the suffering of one bird, denied a meal to two other birds (and who knows, that pigeon could have been the difference between life and death for either of them), to serve no end other than assuaging your squeamishness.

I don't think the ravens eat pigeon meat. They were probably just killing it.

NickNickleby · 19-10-2020 1:04pm

Three times that I've donned my cape come to mind:

Years ago, I was in the back garden and heard a high pitched calling. Went down the garden, and there was the neighbours cat, tormenting a tiny little mouse. So, I shoo-ed away the cat and bending down, picked up and empty flower pot and caught the mouse in it. When I stood up, the neighbour's cat ran up my back and onto my shoulder, and tried to get its paw into the flower pot. I flicked the mouse over the back wall and chased the cat around the garden, waving the flower pot. By the time the cat realised the pot was empty, I'm sure the mouse was well on his way.

Another time, one of my children came running in from the local park to say there was a bird trapped in the park. Little gang of eight year olds, all worried for the MAGPIE (I HATE them). Anyway, it was trapped in a load of nylon thread or tape or something, and pecked viciously as I carefully worked to release it. I saw it later with a mouse in its mouth :eek::pac::pac:

Last one. Heard a loud buzzing in our conservatory, and had to climb onto a chair to be able to see into a corner. There I spy a large bumble bee being wrapped up by a spider. I got a fork and parried with the spider then picked out the tightly wrapped bumble bee on the fork. I brought it out the back, and put it on the ground. Using a stiff stalk of grass, I picked all the spider thread off the bee. after a few minutes of composing himself, the bee eventually flew off. This was the only one that I consider 'interfering with nature' .

To be honest, I think we all respond to distress calls, as its in our DNA (isn't it??).

I have bird feeders in the back garden, and the amount of arm waving and shouting I do to scare away the magpies (they bully the small birds) the neighbours must think I'm nuts (probably Peckish !). On the other hand I've seen a bird of prey flash in and catch something, he probably thinks I've set up a take-away for him, but I see that as nature in the raw.

19-10-2020 1:05pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

It is unnecessary as a sport. But they do not use guns.

Just like no meat is really necessary I would also say no sport is "necessary" either. So for the same reason saying they do not "need" the meat I would also question whether this is a point that says anything either.

But actually for me "sport" has always been the wrong word for hunting. Not sure what the right word is but "sport" never sat right for me. But that would just be linguistic pedantry on my part.

I got lucky that someone I know is able to teach me and my daughter (10) and later my son (now 6 so soon enough) to use and fire rifles. But I would not use guns for hunting I think. Except maybe pheasants. But if I get to hunt land animals I would only have an interest in doing so with a bow.

No judgement on those that do! It just doesn't interest me at all.

Gruffalux · 19-10-2020 1:12pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Just like no meat is really necessary I would also say no sport is "necessary" either. So for the same reason saying they do not "need" the meat I would also question whether this is a point that says anything either.

But actually for me "sport" has always been the wrong word for hunting. Not sure what the right word is but "sport" never sat right for me. But that would just be linguistic pedantry on my part.

I got lucky that someone I know is able to teach me and my daughter (10) and later my son (now 6 so soon enough) to use and fire rifles. But I would not use guns for hunting I think. Except maybe pheasants. But if I get to hunt land animals I would only have an interest in doing so with a bow.

No judgement on those that do! It just doesn't interest me at all.

The words sport and survival do distinguish between very different motivations for the same activity, which is useful. Use 'non-survival hunting' perhaps?

I don't care if people hunt. Ernest Hemingway is my favourite writer and he was hardly ever without a gun. I just don't fancy it.

ShatterAlan · 19-10-2020 1:17pm

statesaver wrote: »

No.

Would you intervene to try and save a child from a shark/lion/wolf/crocodile?

The predator in this case doesn't know what is anymore than he knows what a chimpanzee is. He just knows that it's dinner.

Jaysus Christ. · 19-10-2020 1:21pm

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Would you intervene to try and save a child from a shark/lion/wolf/crocodile?

The predator in this case doesn't know what is anymore than he knows what a chimpanzee is. He just knows that it's dinner.

Remember that famous picture from Ethiopia. The vulture stalking the child. Photographer didn’t intervene and couldn’t live with himself after.

partyguinness · 19-10-2020 1:23pm

Save a wild animal in the wild and go home and eat a chicken dinner. Interesting.

partyguinness · 19-10-2020 1:24pm

Jaysus Christ. wrote: »

Remember that famous picture from Ethiopia. The vulture stalking the child. Photographer didn’t intervene and couldn’t live with himself after.

That's an urban legand. The pic was taken in such a way to make it look like the vulture was stalking the infant. To be clear the vulture did not eat the child.

Harrowing pic all the same.

An Ri rua · 19-10-2020 1:27pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYP1Vd4dM_U

This clip got me pondering - would I intervene to help an animal in the natural world in this situation?

I don't know. It's nature at it's wildest extreme at the end of the day and it's an essential way the ecosystem works.

I mean yeah there's bambi but that snake might not get grub for a while due to that guy.

P.S that particular situation is also extremely dangerous to the guy interfering with the snake's brunch. What if it had anger management issues?

My natural instinct would be to intervene, particularly where the predator kills for sport, as humans do. It meets with variable success. A successful incident was frog marching two 'hunters' off our land which they thought they could shoot up (only if I get to hide and shoot back).

Niallof9 · 19-10-2020 1:35pm

partyguinness wrote: »

That's an urban legand. The pic was taken in such a way to make it look like the vulture was stalking the infant. To be clear the vulture did not eat the child.

Harrowing pic all the same.

The photographer took his own life nearly a year later.

Tom Stoddart took something similar. An emanciated boy crawling after locals begging. Photographs like these help light a fire under the arses of the World. the Bang-Bang Club weren't really an urban myth.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/kevin-carter

Tom Mann Centuria · 19-10-2020 1:36pm

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Some people want to feel like a god, or at the very least a hero. I'd say we shouldn't be imposing our own personal morality tales on mundane acts of nature.

I think where invasive species have been introduced by humans then intervention is absolutely fine and I don't see it as imposing our mortality, merely trying to correct our ancestors idiocy.

AllForIt · 19-10-2020 1:38pm

No I would not.

This question reminds me of my what my naive mother used to say when I was a kid watching African wildlife programs with her. So the lion is chasing and catches the Zebra and and my mother says "Why don't the cameramen do something to stop this?" It's supposed to be the kids saying this and the parent rolling their eyes, not the other way around. I mean what did she think those big teeth were for?

bb1234567 · 19-10-2020 1:39pm

partyguinness wrote: »

That's an urban legand. The pic was taken in such a way to make it look like the vulture was stalking the infant. To be clear the vulture did not eat the child.

Harrowing pic all the same.

Doesn't say anything about it being staged or misleading on Wikipedia. Although the photographer did step in to scare away the vulture. It is not known what happened to the young boy but he didn't die in that spot anyway, he moved on from where the photo was taken towards a food aid centre.

The photographer also did take his own life after his traumatic experience in Sudan

Hector Savage · 19-10-2020 1:42pm

The BBC wildlife teams never interfere, and you can see the camera lads sometimes crying, but nature is fearce cruel ...
Having said all that, I'm glad that guy saved the deer from the snake, where was it filmed ?

I suspect it's an area where these ****ers are an invasive species ... kill the c*nts!!

partyguinness · 19-10-2020 1:45pm

bb1234567 wrote: »

Doesn't say anything about it being staged or misleading on Wikipedia. Although the photographer did step in to scare away the vulture. It is not known what happened to the young boy but he didn't die in that spot anyway, he moved on from where the photo was taken towards a food aid centre.

The photographer also did take his own life after his traumatic experience in Sudan

I recall reading an article in The Guardian about him a few years back (not unreliable internet sources..;)) which specificially mentioned the pic. The pic was not staged as such but rather the camera angle made it look more harrowing but I guess anything to drum home the seriousness of the situation.

Would you intervene to save a wild animal from a predator?

Comments