From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: Closure on Sport Hunting.
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:22:39 GMT

In article <Bt7qCs.Aro@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>
>rl> Is it true that natural predators, wolves for instance, prey on
>rl> diseased and sick animals rather than healthy ones?
>
>ja> Absolutely not.  They are opportunistic, and will prey on 
>ja> whatever they can get their fangs on.  Do you really think they 
>ja> stop and say "Wait a minute!  That's a healthy animal!  Let's go 
>ja> find a sick one!" 
>
>Why do wolves "test" their prey, instead of just diving in 
>willy-nilly?  Why do wolves ignore animals that appear to be fit 
>and/or pass the "tests" instead of simply attacking, as humans 
>with guns might do? 
>

I am not an expert on wolves. I have heard of them "testing" their prey. 
I would venture a guess that the answer to whether they attack a healthy 
mature animal depends on the situation. I have seen films of them driving
apparently healthy moose and elk into deep snow, then eating and killing
(not always killing then eating) them. I suppose it depends on how hungry
they are and the relative availability of weaker prey.

>Human hunters are just as likely to bring down healthy deer
>as sick ones...  perhaps even more likely, since humans are sight 
>hunters and sick deer often remain immobile in secluded, 
>hidden spots.  Would you say that wolves are just as likely to 
>bring down healthy caribou as sick caribou?  Would the hooves of 
>a healthy caribou present the same hazard to humans as they might 
>present to wolves?  
>

I suppose I could make a weak argument that hunters kill the least wary 
animals, but if gun hunting at long range this wouldn't hold water. Personally
I prefer the challenge of traditional bowhunting. I like to think I'm woodsman
enough to get within 20-30 yards of my prey. If not, I don't deserve to kill 
it. For some people, I suppose getting within 100 yards is difficult. Hunters
have the ability to be more selective in their killing than other predators. 
Whether they chose to do so (beyond the legal restrictions) is a personal
choice. For example, I used to enjoy duck hunting. Duck numbers are down in
most regions for a variety of reasons. Much as I love to eat duck, I won't 
hunt them unless and until the population recovers. I realize loss of wetland
habitat is a major cause of the problem, but only ducks can make more ducks.
Habitat will be worthless without breeding pairs. I will not kill a species
in decline, legal or not. However, as long as the responsible agencies feel
that limited hunting is okay, I am not qualified to make this choice for
other duck hunters.
   As far as hunting being dangerous to the hunter. I don't have any experience
with caribou. I have, however, spent time bowhunting for wild hogs. I haven't
gotten one yet. People tell me I'm crazy to go after hogs on the ground with
a bow. I find the risk acceptable. If I get hurt by a hog, so what? I'm out to
kill him! Would I get angry at a hog that attacked me? What's the point? He's
just being a hog. As I am just being a human. 

Jeff Achenbach
achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com