• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Alpha-male bear facing castration as sexual dominance threatens population

Underseer said:
Potoooooooo said:
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...rown-bear-pyros-sexual-castration-segregation

Officials in the Pyrenees are considering how to curb the sexual appetite of Pyros the bear to give his rivals a chance to mate
Click to expand...

Uh, if he's beating out his rivals, why should man interfere? That competition exists for a purpose.
Click to expand...

1 People don't typically breed for intelligence, dominance or belligerence in our "subject" animals, we breed for docility and ease of handling.

2 In any captive program we go for genetic diversity, trying to preserve as much variation within the species as possible.

He would do a great job in the true wild. Under human management, his progeny would have less unrelated choices to breed with (nature doesn't care, but we do) and would be more likely to create problems..
 
Boy, if he's aggressive now, imagine how pissed off he's going to be after he's castrated! ;)
 
spikepipsqueak said:
Underseer said:
Potoooooooo said:
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...rown-bear-pyros-sexual-castration-segregation

Officials in the Pyrenees are considering how to curb the sexual appetite of Pyros the bear to give his rivals a chance to mate
Click to expand...

Uh, if he's beating out his rivals, why should man interfere? That competition exists for a purpose.
Click to expand...

1 People don't typically breed for intelligence, dominance or belligerence in our "subject" animals, we breed for docility and ease of handling.

2 In any captive program we go for genetic diversity, trying to preserve as much variation within the species as possible.

He would do a great job in the true wild. Under human management, his progeny would have less unrelated choices to breed with (nature doesn't care, but we do) and would be more likely to create problems..
Click to expand...

Wild animals on managed land aren't the same as animals in captivity. If this male's mating dominance isn't the result of human intervention, then we should not get involved.
 
Underseer said:
spikepipsqueak said:
Underseer said:
Potoooooooo said:
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...rown-bear-pyros-sexual-castration-segregation

Officials in the Pyrenees are considering how to curb the sexual appetite of Pyros the bear to give his rivals a chance to mate
Click to expand...

Uh, if he's beating out his rivals, why should man interfere? That competition exists for a purpose.
Click to expand...

1 People don't typically breed for intelligence, dominance or belligerence in our "subject" animals, we breed for docility and ease of handling.

2 In any captive program we go for genetic diversity, trying to preserve as much variation within the species as possible.

He would do a great job in the true wild. Under human management, his progeny would have less unrelated choices to breed with (nature doesn't care, but we do) and would be more likely to create problems..
Click to expand...

Wild animals on managed land aren't the same as animals in captivity. If this male's mating dominance isn't the result of human intervention, then we should not get involved.
Click to expand...

Th inbreeding due to being geographically constrained by human-caused habitat loss is the result of human intervention. Normally, a single extremely successful male would not have a global impact on the bear population, but this one does. The resulting loss of genetic diversity would almost certainly be worse for the bear population than intervening in this case.

All-in-all, I think I agree with the laissez-faire camp, but the other side does have a point.
 
I think the best, but politically difficult option would be to shoot the bear. That way it would allow another bear to eat the food he would otherwise eat. He would also pose no further threat to any other animal.
 
The problem with both of those options (and I'm ignoring the interests of the bear) is that you probably do want him doing most of the breeding, just not all of it.
 
Underseer said:
Potoooooooo said:
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...rown-bear-pyros-sexual-castration-segregation

Officials in the Pyrenees are considering how to curb the sexual appetite of Pyros the bear to give his rivals a chance to mate
Click to expand...

Uh, if he's beating out his rivals, why should man interfere? That competition exists for a purpose.
Click to expand...

Purpose in the above, that makes it sound like you believe in God.

Either there is purpose in nature or there is not. Those who belive in God tend to belive that there is.

In this case the purpose you talk about will threaten the species' survival in the region by limiting genetic diversity.

Is that the purpose here then?

Man as an ethical being should definitley interfere in this case as it is for the good of the species.

Man has power over most of nature and can do whatever the heck he wants, not the other way round.

If atheists believe that things just happen to happen as opposed to being purpose driven then it follows that nothing exists for a purpose.

Personally, I would be uncomfortable with castrating the poor guy and would prefer it if he could just be moved.
 
How about a vasectomy instead of castration? Rare is the situation where an alpha is the only one getting sex. Or they could as per the other thread, teach him to suck dick instead.

It also dawns on me that such a solution would also help the population by rewarding genetics of bears sly and brave enough to cuckold the big-nuts-on-campus, preventing future genetic shutout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom