I find it sad to think that one day we will refer to the "Tusked Elephant" the same we way we now refer to the "Sabre-Toothed Tiger". Evolution may have found a way to survive humanity in this case, but it's reason for needing to do so is absolutely stupid.
Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
51–60 of 90 posts
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#52Offshoot topic I've been wondering. Why aren't deer evolving to stay away from roads?
Here in Seoul, the feral cats seem to have evolved a phenotype to be afraid of open spaces.The result is that they cross roads very quickly.
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#53Those poor elephants :(
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#54This is the saddest example of "natural" selection I've heard of.
Why sad? Why should elephants have tusks. Elephants perhaps evolved tusks because they were useful weapons and tools in the past, but for generations of elephants now the tusks are the reason they are killed. So, they are evolving without tusks to counter the biggest threat for their survival, humans.
It's sad that an species has to give up to a part of themselves because of human greed.
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ivory's a beautiful, extremely useful substance; outlawing it makes as little sense as outlawing alcohol, marijuana or beef. What needs to be done is to create the appropriate legal framework and property rights to give Africans an incentive to ranch elephants. Cattle will never go extinct because people like hamburgers; the idea of elephants going extinct solely because people like ivory is mad. Elephants are going…
> Ivory's a beautiful, extremely useful substance; Beautiful maybe, useful, not really. > outlawing it makes as little sense as outlawing alcohol, Not really, prior to 2008 when the CITES relaxed ivory sale regulation, poaching was minimal. The current poaching crisis is a result of this relaxation. Not every good behaves the same way as alcohol. > What needs to be done is to create the appropriate legal framework an…
> Elephants take at least 20 years to start growing tusks but the 'big tuskers' are ~50 years old.
Trees also take decades to grow, and yet tree farms are a viable economy.
> Also, you won't be able to produce ivory cheaper than a poacher who doesn't have to invest into the elephant.
So the elephant rancher shoots the poacher. That's what we used to do when cattle rustling was a thing, and it worked pretty well.
> Also they are an extremely intelligent and social species and one of the species that come up in "non-human personhood" discussions.
Frankly, I don't care. Pigs are pretty damned intelligent too, but bacon tastes wonderful. Neither pigs nor elephants are men, and I'm find with killing them.
> Establishing legal frameworks and enforcing laws in Africa is very easy.
It was easier when Africa was better-run, but it can be done again.
> > Elephants are going extinct because no-one has an interest in keeping them alive. Give someone a reason to keep them alive, and the species will last forever.
> It's a lot more complex than that.
No, that is exactly the problem. Species which are useful to man survive; species which are not die; species which are inimical to man are destroyed. We're talking about exterminating mosquitoes, for Pete's sake!
If you want an animal to survive, figure out a way for it to be in someone powerful's interest. The rest will follow as day follows the night.
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ivory's a beautiful, extremely useful substance; Beautiful maybe, useful, not really. > outlawing it makes as little sense as outlawing alcohol, Not really, prior to 2008 when the CITES relaxed ivory sale regulation, poaching was minimal. The current poaching crisis is a result of this relaxation. Not every good behaves the same way as alcohol. > What needs to be done is to create the appropriate legal framework an…
> Elephants take at least 20 years to start growing tusks but the 'big tuskers' are ~50 years old. Trees also take decades to grow, and yet tree farms are a viable economy. > Also, you won't be able to produce ivory cheaper than a poacher who doesn't have to invest into the elephant. So the elephant rancher shoots the poacher. That's what we used to do when cattle rustling was a thing, and it worked pretty well. > Al…
> Trees also take decades to grow, and yet tree farms are a viable economy.
How much does it cost to grow a tree? It costs quite a bit to raise an elephant.
> So the elephant rancher shoots the poacher. That's what we used to do when cattle rustling was a thing, and it worked pretty well.
You are implying that in your plan there would be no elephants in the wild right? Also can you tell me a bit about your knowledge of animal and in particular elephant husbandry?
> Frankly, I don't care. Pigs are pretty damned intelligent too, but bacon tastes wonderful. Neither pigs nor elephants are men, and I'm find with killing them.
Well not everyone is a psychopath so there's that.
> It was easier when Africa was better-run, but it can be done again.
I like your detailed plan. Also what African countries in particular are you talking about?
> We're talking about exterminating mosquitoes, for Pete's sake!
Idk how that's related? Do you have some device that turns poachers into mosquitoes? Do you?
> If you want an animal to survive, figure out a way for it to be in someone powerful's interest. The rest will follow as day follows the night.
Fuck yeah, fuck ethics, fuck empathy for intelligent beings, fuck ecosystems, libertarianism fuck yeah! On some level I envy you that you have one belief system you think works for everything.
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#57Offshoot topic I've been wondering. Why aren't deer evolving to stay away from roads?
And possums too
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#58Offshoot topic I've been wondering. Why aren't deer evolving to stay away from roads?
And possums too
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#59There's an interesting comment about a similar thing happening with rattle snakes. It seems they evolve into silent snakes to better avoid human predators: http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoen...
Cats are slowly becoming undomesticated because humans sterilize most of the nonstray cats.
Re: Elephants without tusks are a response to the selective pressure of poaching
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Elephants take at least 20 years to start growing tusks but the 'big tuskers' are ~50 years old. Trees also take decades to grow, and yet tree farms are a viable economy. > Also, you won't be able to produce ivory cheaper than a poacher who doesn't have to invest into the elephant. So the elephant rancher shoots the poacher. That's what we used to do when cattle rustling was a thing, and it worked pretty well. > Al…
> Trees also take decades to grow, and yet tree farms are a viable economy. How much does it cost to grow a tree? It costs quite a bit to raise an elephant. > So the elephant rancher shoots the poacher. That's what we used to do when cattle rustling was a thing, and it worked pretty well. You are implying that in your plan there would be no elephants in the wild right? Also can you tell me a bit about your knowledge…
> libertarianism fuck yeah
Not libertarianism. But don't let that stop you from pathetic political pandering.