[SC] Wild Canines

[Phoebe]

- written as an argumentative essay rather than an unbiased look at the science, but an unbiased look at the science backs it up - about the failures of our (collective, human) approach to wild coyotes, dingoes, and wolves. As a means of population control and keeping the various canines from interfering with livestock, killing them willy nilly is a bad plan for a number of reasons that may be counterintuitive, especially to the rancher who is concerned about not only losses but the stresses on the animals. Nevertheless, ecologists have demonstrated quite convincingly that "just shoot them" is an ineffective strategy. The author of this article also makes the moral argument that it's strange for us to keep animals as pets that we are somehow okay with torturing in other contexts, given the close similarity between dogs, coyotes, and wolves, and even moreso between dogs and dingoes.

I don't buy the moral argument though I do agree with the ecological argument, especially given the very clear evidence we've seen about the management of wolves in the western U.S. I have a relative who has worked on this issue and helped inform me about a lot of details and studies. In short, you can't really blame people whose instinct is to protect their families or animals by shooting at wolves, but as an overall strategy it's important for the whole surrounding ecosystem to find a way for the wolves to coexist with humans and livestock, and that can be done very successfully. Most people know this, so now the whole wolf hunting thing has become politicized in the ways one might expect. This is what happens when we ignore science, I guess. You actually cause more problems shooting at them - the linked article explains how this happens with dingoes, too. Biodiversity protection is important to keep in mind as well: for instance, feral cats are a major threat to other species when their own populations aren't kept in check normally, and the dingos help accomplish that.

Anyway, I'm curious about the moral issue even though I don't accept that part of the argument. It is especially interesting to me perhaps because not only have all my dogs been part dingo, in the history of their breed, but my current dog was a completely feral dog before being captured and essentially forced to live with us. Luckily he seems to like living with us, though his background presented unanticipated challenges for training! I have moral questions about what it means for us to capture and force the dog to live with us; on the other hand, it's clear that he would have either had to win a terrible battle for survival of the fittest out there, or he would have died early without being the pampered poochie he has become today. Even if he had survived, he would have suffered a lot of bad experiences. On the other hand, his young life made him incredibly smart and self-sufficient. For a long time he treated walks as an occasion to find water and food in other areas - I was intrigued by how effectively he does that. [Now he seems to trust he's getting his next meal and water here, so he focuses his energy on the endless battle of wills called "stealthily manipulate her into going faster".] If he were still a feral dog, he would be the same smart and resourceful little person he is today, but I don't think humans on the whole would have the same obligations to him. I'm personally responsible for all kinds of good treatment for my dog; I don't extend that responsibility to all dogs. I don't think it's okay to kill them for any reasons less than it would be okay to kill pet dogs, but on the other hand, when a dog repeatedly bites people or other dogs, that's exactly what we do. The sport hunting? No, I really don't understand it, but that's the easier part of the argument to make.

[Eliahad]

I actually have thoughts on this, but I need to collect them and formulate them into a coherent structure. I think a lot of people are going to think I'm crazy after I share these thoughts, too, but what are you going to do. The tl;dr version is going to indicate that I think we have a very human-centric view of sentience and that we should at least consider, as a species, what it means when we: hunt, experiment, domesticate, raise animals for our entertainment, use and consumption. I will say things that I believe about animals as food that will in no way be a judgment on other people's beliefs. Um...there's something else, too, but I can't remember right now.

[Phoebe]

I wish you would post your thoughts on this! I definitely want to hear all of it!