Brother From Another M…mutant?

[PANTHER TRACKERS]

Masatoshi Nei is a Japanese born American evolutionary biologist accredited with numerous scientific publications including; the statistical theories of molecular evolution and the theory of mutation-driven evolution.

A Professor at the Temple University, former Director of the Institute of Molecular Evolutionary Genetics, and accomplished author.

His 2013 manuscript, Mutation-Driven Evolution, conclusively outlines how Darwin’s theory of natural selection was not proven as fact –

“Darwin never presented evidence that natural selection is really the factor of evolution” Masatoshi Nei (taken from an interview conducted by Charles Carlini April 12, 2014). In his book, Nei contests that mutation, not natural selection, drives evolution. Experimentation of variables along an ongoing process – discard what does not work and adopt the successes.

Cut and paste this into the realm of the predator and we can better understand the complex variety of hunting tactics on display in the natural world. Why do some snakes constrict their prey while others have developed intricate venoms? Now, note how the possession of these various tools determine the corresponding hunting strategy, or vice versa.

This example can be overlaid on all predators, for instance a Peregrine falcon can reach speeds exceeding 300km/h in a vertical dive whereas the Lanner falcon hunts on a horizontal plane. Physically both very similar. Taxonomically only diverging at the Species level. Yet their predation strategies and accompanying traits are notably different.

Very nice, now get to the point…

Well, diversity is inevitable, it is present in all of God’s design.

My take is that the human predator is successful because we can combine every strategy, in all environments, disabling all obstacles.

We can mimic the patient Adder and ambush a thirsty Warthog on a game trail leading to water…

Copy the athletic Wild dog and chase a Kudu in the middle of the day causing it extreme heat fatigue…

Duplicate the Orb spider and lure a cunning Coyote into a baited foothold trap…

Parallel the pack hunting Dolphin and cooperatively drive a secretive Wild boar to the waiting guns…

The examples are endless, as are the displays of our appreciation of animal hunting prowess. In art, literature, music and storytelling we eternalise our admiration for the Bears strength, the Lions courage…the Wolfs endurance.

When I was a 20 something-year-old man I discovered hounds, this single event changed the course of my life and who I was to become.

While my friends and peers were stalking up steep hills to vantage a view of distant Kudu flashing sunrise reflections off their curling horns, I was fighting through invasive lantana thickets, burning lungs and muscle fatigue in the single purposed drive to reach the point where I last heard my determined hounds in full Bushpig pursuit.

They took me to places I ordinarily would never have entered, countless times, over many, many kilometres. They forged in me durable characteristics that I so greatly value, I am duty-bound to pass them to our 3 children.

In 2004 I completed my Professional hunter’s license. In South Africa it is a 2-week course that educates the student on game laws, best practise and industry knowledge. One of the memorable subjects was ethics. Yes, we were taught ethics. Actually, indoctrinated.

At that time hunting with dogs was disregarded in mainstream South Africa. Determined by the lawmakers to be an unethical method of pursuit. So, no blame directed at the competent assessors or criticism for my familiar colleagues, but they were ignorant to the committed lifestyle a dedicated hound hunter leads. Non the less my demanding hunting style was outlawed.

Still, my resolute contention was that the ordinances were complex and contradicting. For instance, directing trained Gundogs to point and flush cryptic gamebirds was decided a legal pursuit yet directing trained hounds to flush and bay cryptic Bushpig was not.

Another, shooting a Leopard lured to feed on a secured bait in a tree was a legal and industry accepted practise, yet shooting a Leopard pressured to tree by a canine team was not.

Contradictorily, it was unethical to shoot an antelope drinking water from a man-made pan but legal and acceptable to use a canine team to recover a wounded animal.

Many adventurous years have passed since then, close on a couple decades, filled with experiences that have cultivated a global perspective.

I’ve made the acquaintance of long-distance marksmen, deer stalkers, bow hunters, spear hunters, fur trappers, bear hunters, wing shooters, native gatherers, fox hunters, pig hunters…man! the list of personal description is almost endless.

Collectively, we now face a threatening mass of public opinion that hunting, particularly trophy hunting, is morally unethical and should be made illegal.

In response the hunting community has actioned a decisive rebuttal.

The time for division is gone.

Swimming against the current has often placed me outside the campfire circle, but never changed my mind.

Ethics are personal. Find yours and be comfortable with them.

Generously consider others and respect their individuality remembering that We are all just modern mutations of the original design.

 

[rookhawk]

The problem with both hypothesis is inferior intermediary forms. Whether selection or mutation, there are some intermediaries that are horrifically compromised. Systems of flight in animals are one such scenario where crawling up cliffs and jumping off them to initiate flight seem to be perilous intermediary states.

Also, it’s easy to point to progressive change in species but novel systems and structures are more difficult to explain through iterative improvement across diverse phylum and classes. (E.g. the eye)

Evolution beyond the micro-level is far more complex than we can yet understand. I don’t have any answers, just questions and a fascination about the topic.

 

[Sabre]

Mutation-driven evolution and natural selection are not mutually exclusive. You could have mutations that are more favorable in the environment you are living in. In that case, the individuals with that mutation would then be naturally more adept at surviving and would spread their genes more readily as a consequence. This would cause that gene mutation to be more abundant in the population. As long as it stays beneficial in the environment, it would continue to proliferate.

 

[Aaron N]

Mutation-driven evolution and natural selection are not mutually exclusive. You could have mutations that are more favorable in the environment you are living in. In that case, the individuals with that mutation would then be naturally more adept at surviving and would spread their genes more readily as a consequence. This would cause that gene mutation to be more abundant in the population. As long as it stays beneficial in the environment, it would continue to proliferate.

This is how I understand it. Mutation causes the change, and natural selection determines it’s viability.

 

[MS 9x56]

This is how I understand it. Mutation causes the change, and natural selection determines it’s viability.

Finally a succinct reply that actually makes sense.

 

[Michael70]

Although the analogy used, being the theory of evolution is a useful and fascinating topic, I believe the point of the post is that we are many variants on the same theme.

We are all hunters, but our ethics and methods may differ. It is time to unify under the fellowship of hunters and disregard the class structure or misbelief that one man's methods are somewhat more noble or ethical than another's. It is time to unite against the common enemy, who is anyone or anything that attacks our way of life.

For me I personally cringe when I hear of any other hunters describe what they do as sport. Football is sport, golf is a sport; hunting is a way of life. Something that permeates everything we do touch, feel or see. I go on a pleasure boat cruise on the river and while the other guests are enjoying a cold beer and tasty finger foods; I am looking for sign of pigs coming down to water, buffalo creating wallows and the numbers of waterfowl that are breeding up for next season.

I do not judge other hunters chosen methods of pursuing game and if I do not agree with them simply don't do them. Would I stop them? Only in the instances of unsafe practices for other hunters and users of the bush or wanton waste of game through indiscriminate killing and wounding. This would be the limit of my ethical bias against other hunters and even then, understanding the reasons behind the behaviours and if required provide education and commence a discussion to positively influence the hunter(s), which could be parties on both side of the conversation.

Thank you, Panther Trackers, for an interesting and insightful post.