From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Self Regulating Populations
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 05:00:39 GMT

In <BtxtAw.B6K@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>Dan Sorenson writes:
>ds> I'd wager that it would take very little time for you to 
>ds> determine the difference between inbound and outbound fire, so 
>ds> why should deer not?  

>I'd wager that you and I could learn lots of things in very 
>little time, thanks to the fact that we have at our disposal
>a sophisticated set of symbols to communicate ideas (aka 
>language) as well as a vast cultural storehouse of information.  
>It's foolish, however, to ignore the fact that non-human animals 
>don't have such resources at their disposal. 

	Ah, but they do, Russ.  You're conveniently forgetting that
animals often communicate with non-verbal signals.  White-tail deer
have that nifty white flag on their butts that tell everybody "follow
me -- I'm running away from danger!" and rabbits have similar.  A
snort or grunt is the only vocabulary you need when your two most
often-thought things are "Food?" and "Yikes!"  Let's also remember how
much scent (including phermones) plays a part in this.  It is hardly a
great leap of thinking ability to go from "smells like bear scats =
danger" to "sounds like gunfire = danger."  It hardly takes a spoken
language to communicate such a simple thing as impending danger.

>Without conditioning, I suspect that most humans wouldn't know 
>if/when they've been the target of a gunman.  I realize that you 
>watch a lot of television, and have actually been shot with a bb 
>gun, and spend a lot of time thinking about guns, but surely 
>you're not suggesting that your experience has prepared you to 
>know what sort of thoughts run through the minds of deer when
>they hear the sound of thunder or the sound of gunfire.  

	Um, actually I can make a claim like this.  The two times I've
been shot, I was playing Army, so to speak, and was expecting it.  There
have been numerous other times I've been shot at, and it never took more
than one shot for me to know I was targeted.  Furthermore, it would have
made no difference if I wasn't being targeted -- survival instincts don't
require much proof before they kick in, and I certainly required little.
The sound of a bullet or shot flying close by is enough.  If it's a distant
shot, I get wary, but not afraid.  BTW: I watch about two hours of TV per
week, mainly Home Improvement and the occassional new episode of Firepower
or Wings on the Discovery Channel.

>ds> Can you distinguish between gunshots and thunder?  How about a 
>ds> 12ga and a .22?  We're not exactly prey animals, either, and 
>ds> hence our abilities in this area probably haven't been increased 
>ds> through evolution to the same extent that those of deer have.  

>Please explain how/why you think evolution would help an animal
>distinguish between the explosions produced by 12 gauge shotguns
>and the explosions produced by 22 rifles.

	They sound different, they have different threat potentials, and
in states like Iowa a rifle signals plinking, while a shotgun signals
deer season.  I find it difficult to believe this distinction is lost on
the deer any more than the distinction between the squeal of brakes and
a slipping fan belt would be lost on you.

	Evolution merely provides for superior sound distinction
capabilities.  Interpreting those sounds is still up to the animal,
but they stand a much better chance of knowing which sound they heard.
If sound isn't the animal's strong point, then vision or smell can fill
in quite well.  To a deer, I suspect humans stink pretty badly.

>Why should the smell of humans be associated with danger by default?

	I'll answer this question with a question: why should it not,
given that deer are a prey animal and not a predator?  Would this not
be the reaction that most favors survival?  Humans are predators, Russ,
and while I won't claim smell can differentiate this attribute, I'd
say survival makes everything unidentified a predator until confirmed.
I wonder, how would you explain the fear my ferrets and the cat have of
the vacuum cleaner, given that it's obviously never harmed them and
thus can only be associated with danger by default?

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >

Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals