From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Self Regulating Populations
Organization: WP Group
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:40:41 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> It seems to me that it takes a lot of courage for an animal to 
rl> stand and kick rather than turn tail and run away.  Yet this same 
rl> courage not to run away is regarded as a sign of stupidity among 
rl> human hunters.  Why is it "courageous" for a deer to stay-put in 
rl> confrontations with wolves, but "stupid" for a deer to stay-put 
rl> in confrontations with humans?  

Joe Semrad writes:
js> Projecting those human qualities on to the deer, eh Russell? 
js>
js> What makes you think that fear and courage are uniquely human 
js> qualities?  

In article <21677@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>, by jsemrad@ems.cdc.com (Joe Semrad):
js> What makes you think deer understand the concept of "courage" or 
js> "stupidity"?

I didn't claim that deer understand the concepts of "fear", 
"courage", or "stupidity".  Whether a feeling/thinking individual 
understands such concepts or not, however, doesn't diminish their 
capacity to experience fear, or to overcome fear by acting 
courageously, or to respond either intelligently or stupidly to a
given sequence of events.  

js> (These were the terms, supplied by you, that we were discussing, 
js> though fear would probably fit in as well.) I hardly think a deer 
js> feels it is being courageous if/when it stays put to challenge a 
js> predator.  Deer are interested in surviving, not in defending 
js> principles against all odds or some other situation that humans 
js> would say calls for courage.  

I didn't say that deer were interested in defending principles, nor
did I say that deer had a "self-image".

js> When faced with a threat a deer (or any animal) will evaluate its 
js> options and choose the one it thinks will give it the best chance 
js> of surviving.  It doesn't pick a defense option based on which 
js> one will make it look less stupid, or which one will make it look 
js> more courageous.  If you feel that deer (not people talking about 
js> deer) understand these concepts please cite your evidence.  

Why did you assume that any animal would need to have an image of 
himself as fearful in order to experience fear?  Or for that matter,
why would an animal need to have an image of himself as intelligent
in order to behave intelligently?

> ...
rl> Can deer see bullets as they move through the air?  If not, please
rl> explain how a deer is supposed to learn from the experience of
rl> being targeted and missed.

js> I was at the shooting range this weekend, so from firsthand 
js> experience I can report that guns make noise, and that bullets 
js> slamming into wood or the ground make noise and kick up debris.  
js> There may also be a whining sound and/or a rush of air from a 
js> near miss.  Depending on wind direction there may also be the 
js> unnatural smell of gunpowder in the air.  All of these things are 
js> unnatural to the deer.  

When it suits your convenience, it seems to me that you'd have us 
believe that deer are incapable of analyzing situations and 
responding fearfully or courageously or intelligently or 
stupidly.  In the passage above, however, you seem to be saying 
that Sherlock Deer, the four-legged master of deduction, is 
supposed to experience the sound of a remote explosion, the smell of 
gun powder, and a small quantity of dust kicked up by some invisible 
cause and subsequently conclude that he's the fatal target of a man who's 
100 yards away.  

> ...
js> Why do you feel that deer are incapable of learning from near 
js> miss encounters with hunters?  

I'm sure that deer may, indeed, have the intelligence to learn from
some forms of human contact, but the notion that deer are supposed
to know that gun-bearing humans are dangerous doesn't appear to be 
well-supported.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ