Why guns should not be carried in the wilderness!!

[santaman2000]

The irony is, in areas where these round ups are repeated year after year, the rattlesnakes seem to be evolving NOT to rattle anymore to give their presence away. This obviously makes them more dangerous to people and children now. Quite a few herpetologists are studying this phenomena, and the snakes within these areas are very reluctant to rattle, even when touched and moved. It seems Darwinism is in favour of the rattlers there. Kinda tells you something about the humans doesn't it

That's actually not a new trait. Rattlers have been known to not always rattle for as far back as our recorded history. It's only in the movies and popular culture that rattling was a given.

 

[santaman2000]

Rattlers are eaten by other snake species, and other animal species too. On top of their control on rodents, their importance in the food chain and in maintaining the natural balance is huge.

Yes, Kingsnakes eat rattlers as do raptors and crocodillians (when they infrequently wander near water) but this one was too big for that to be a consideration. Yes they are a part of the balance but there are other species that overlap their role enough that while it is important, it is not paramount.

 

[JonathanD]

That's actually not a new trait. Rattlers have been known to not always rattle for as far back as our recorded history. It's only in the movies and popular culture that rattling was a given.

To the extent that they are unwilling to rattle now, and within those areas only, it is a very new trait, which is why herpetologists and evolution experts around the world are studying them so much. In my experience, when touched, a rattler will rattle 95% of the time in the cases where they are not already doing so. The snakes within these areas don't rattle even when touched a few times or moved with a hook or tongs.

 

[santaman2000]

Again, that's not true. The snakes I saw skinned and pinned were 100% alive. There was no skill or correct placement whatsoever, it was a case of banging it in anywhere quick and then ripping the skin off as quick as possible while laughing at the snake still being alive. I know the difference between a live and dead snake and correct placement of a nail to kill one. No one cared about killing it, it was all about suffering and the appeasement of a hate filled mob.

I won't argue the "hate". I've already conceded that. What's your point?

 

[JonathanD]

I won't argue the "hate". I've already conceded that. What's your point?

The point is, the people skinning and pinning the snakes were not killing them with the nail and they were still alive whilst being skinned.

 

[santaman2000]

To the extent that they are unwilling to rattle now, and within those areas only, it is a very new trait, which is why herpetologists and evolution experts around the world are studying them so much. In my experience, when touched, a rattler will rattle 95% of the time in the cases where they are not already doing so. The snakes within these areas don't rattle even when touched a few times or moved with a hook or tongs.

Usually when they do rattle (and as you said, they USUALLY do) it's not a deliberate action but a nervous reaction that twitches the tail. If the change is as common as you suggest, then I would suggest that they're simply becoming accustomed to being handled and thus not as nervous as previous. It is an interesting question though.

I would like to correct something here. I have mentioned my hatred of rattlers several times in this thread. Please realize that in my case at least that is not a personal hatred but a deep seated part of rural American culture. I didn't grow up in a sterile environment but rather in the woods and farms and am extremely proud of that culture. It's a culture where bushcraft is only a part of the lifestyle and not a seperate entity practiced as just a hobby.

You'll think quite differently when you grab a fresh a bale of hay to load it on the truck and feel a rattler in the bale. Granted it wasn't his fault but that's irrelevant at the time. Encounters with rattlers, moccasins and copperheads was common. Even the occassional coral snake. That included a pigmey rattler that wandered into our house and was only caught before doing harm because when crossing the hallway he slithered into a cold spot and was unable to move.

 

[santaman2000]

Again. What's your point?

 

[santaman2000]

The point is, the people skinning and pinning the snakes were not killing them with the nail and they were still alive whilst being skinned.

Just like a catfish is. Again, What's your point?

 

[JonathanD]

Usually when they do rattle (and as you said, they USUALLY do) it's not a deliberate action but a nervous reaction that twitches the tail. If the change is as common as you suggest, then I would suggest that they're simply becoming accustomed to being handled and thus not as nervous as previous. It is an interesting question though.

That's incorrect, it is a deliberate action made by the snake. Just as deiberate and intentional as a cobra flattening it's ribs to form a hood or a cat that snarls. In other parts of the world, vipers have adapted numerous ways of using their scales or tails to make a very obvious warning noise. Wild snakes don't get accustomed to being handled to that extent. Come to that, a lot of captive species don't either, especially rattlers and other vipers. This study is a controlled one. All the results so far have been carried out to minimise these possibilities anyway.

Personally, I would call this event an adaptation rather than an evolution. But it is taking place nonetheless.

 

[mrcharly]

I would like to correct something here. I have mentioned my hatred of rattlers several times in this thread. Please realize that in my case at least that is not a personal hatred but a deep seated part of rural American culture. I didn't grow up in a sterile environment but rather in the woods and farms and am extremely proud of that culture. It's a culture where bushcraft is only a part of the lifestyle and not a seperate entity practiced as just a hobby.

Look, laddie, I have a deep loathing of snakes and grew up in the woods and on farms too. I've never killed a snake, never seen the need to kill a snake and never been bitten or know of anyone bitten by a snake. I've turned over woodpiles and found 4-5 poisonous snakes in them.
Many people bitten by snakes are done so when trying to kill them.
Eradication of rattlers is bloody stupid, you'll end up overrun by rats and mice.

My figure of 150m people in the US was totally wrong - it's double that (blimey, must be remembering something from my school days). My figure of 10 deaths per year seems to be correct. Doesn't quite make rattlesnakes a serious health risk, does it?

 

[JonathanD]

Just like a catfish is. Again, What's your point?

The point is, you said that they were professionals and the snakes were dead through profficient nailing. You are wrong, there was no profficient nailing and quick death.

 

[santaman2000]

The point is, you said that they were professionals and the snakes were dead through profficient nailing. You are wrong, there was no profficient nailing and quick death.

No. I said they were experienced. Not the same as pros but I suppose that is splitting hairs. And I do still believe they were dead but my point is, I'm not overly concerned if they aren't so why bring it up anyway.

 

[JonathanD]

You brought up round-ups. You are just being deliberately obtuse now, so I'll leave you to it.





.

 

[santaman2000]

All seems a bit arrogant to me personally! To actually "hate" this "resource" and to "celebrate" the death of something that shares this earth with us is akin to being brainwashed...you said your usual definition is to come as close as possible to the early mountain men who trapped fur etc. Can i ask you a question? Do you think they celebrated the deaths/hated the creatures they caught and killed? or did they harvest a resource because it was needed and it made them money? just food for thought...

Like I said, kill for food or protection...

To some extent, Both. They harvested some species with an indifferent attitude that it was just a trading commodity. The more valueable furs however came from beaver which were despised as semi vermin because of their competitive tree harvesting. In fact in most states where timber is a driving part of the economy, beaver tails still bring a bounty from the agricultural authourities. And the beaver is a cute, furry creature. Even I like it.

 

[santaman2000]

You brought up round-ups. You are just being deliberately obtuse now, so I'll leave you to it.

Yes I brought up the roundups. That was meant to illustrate the difference in culture and the attitudes you described are part of that culture. I don't mean to be obtuse, and while I disagree with you regarding those roundups I appreciate your concern for the ecology as a whole and don't want to offend you. Realize however that your comments early on were also offensive until we settled into calmer debate. I hope you post more. For my edification as well as the other passive readers of this thread.

As for me, I have to leave now and do some actual work. I'll be back to check this thread again though.

 

[Bothwell_Craig]

Just like a catfish is. Again, What's your point?

That both practices are unnecessarily cruel maybe?

It's one thing hating the species for whatever reason, valid or otherwise, quite another to go out of your way to commit an act thats going to cause suffering when there are obviously other ways to dispatch it quickly.

Amazing that a great many spree / serial killers have started out as torturing animals (I see no difference here). Helps them build there lack of respect for life I suppose.

 

[Neumo]

The guy in the article wasn't a 'hunter'; he was a bloke in an orchard who disturbed an animal. The animal tried to get away, and the bloke shot it.

I think you missed the point of him having a sidearm. In some places they are needed to get you out of trouble as opposed to being used for hunting or getting food. So they are often only used when someone is in trouble, like stepping on a big rattler that is longer than you are. That would have been a moment of danger for those involved, so it's no surprise that it ended like it did. Same thing happens a lot in Africa when you go on safari; the guides dont walk round with rifles but you can be sure one would appear pretty quickly if it was needed, when a customer's life was in danger. Having a gun does not always mean someone is actively out hunting; a point that may be lost on some. So in many of the wilder places on this planet having a firearm is not about getting dinner, it is often about having something that can stop you becoming a predator's dinner...

I think the people in the story had a serious brown trouser moment when 6 feet of hissing rattle snake appeared in front of them & given what I said above, the result is not unexpected. That is just the way it is in some places.

 

[sandbender]

"...I do still believe they were dead but my point is, I'm not overly concerned if they aren't..."

The 'Ignore List' you just joined mine!

 

[santaman2000]

That both practices are unnecessarily cruel maybe?

It's one thing hating the species for whatever reason, valid or otherwise, quite another to go out of your way to commit an act thats going to cause suffering when there are obviously other ways to dispatch it quickly.

Amazing that a great many spree / serial killers have started out as torturing animals (I see no difference here). Helps them build there lack of respect for life I suppose.

Granted. I'm not advocating going out of the way to be cruel and it's not how I would do it. Just don't rank this with something innordinate. Especially with catfish. Realisticly there is no other practical way to clean them. At least not in a private setting. There might be something more practical at a commercial catfish farm where they clean hundreds per hour but as I remember those farms are actually crueler. They feed the live fish into mechanized skinning knives. I don't like the idea but I'm not going to lose sleep over it and I'm not giving up fried catfish or blackened catfish. Consider the way crawfish, lobsters and crabs are prepared. They're dropped live into boiling water. Who's to say how painful that is? It seems horrendous but it also seems that death would be nearly instantaneous. I really don't know. For That matter I really don't know if they're capable of feeling pain as we think of it. In any case I'm still not going to lose sleep over what is essentially a water breathing bug. Would you think twice about stepping on a small land bug on the floor? Crushing seems an equally horrendous way to die.

All that aside I'll repeat something I said in another thread. "I wish it were mandatory for everyone who eats meat or wears leather to have to prepare that meat or leather themselves at least once beggining with slaughtering the animal." It's one thing to buy the product and I'm all for that but doing it themselves just once would give them a truer sense of where the product comes from and not just a vaque concept that it's only a commodity on the store shelf.

 

[rik_uk3]

I think the guy saw the snake, his pants got the 'stain of shame' and he shot it.

Its difficult for many Brits to understand American gun culture, its ingrained in their society so who are we to criticise? One of the stove collectors used to camp a lot in Bear country and he and his wife carried powerful handguns and rifles and for them the weapons were as much a part of their camping kit as a tarp would be for many here.

I'd be happier if I knew he had eaten/shared the snake, not such a waste then.