Remember this: Every living thing has value
but it’s in error that humans think that animals are objects of value for
their use only without any consideration for life itself. Ownership is a false
reality. Co-existing is more relevant and valuable because it perpetuates life
for mutual benefits.
In the book, Man & Beast Revisited,
Norman Myers writes an article entitled Man’s
Future Needs the Beasts that argues proactively for using untapped wildlife
as potential food sources. I zoned in on the following passage for their
relevance to the thoughts I was having being a woman who hunts on wild game
being farmed indefinitely anywhere in the world. On the timeline this book was
published in 1991. Considering the concept Myers put forth years ago I wondered
what the progress for foul or fair was doing its work in the present day. The
passage was as followed:
“A good number of wild animal species offer
potential as sources of new food. Several dozen wild antelopes and other
herbivores of African savannas are prime examples, as are certain species of
Amazona. The kouprey is a secretive cow like creature that inhabits the forest
of the Thailand Kampuchea border. The animal is believed to have been one of
the wild ancestors of the humped zebu cattle of southern Asia, suggesting that
fresh crossbreeding between two bovids could boost cattle raising throughout
the entire region. Regrettably, the kouprey’s survival is doubtful, due to
military activities within its habitats during the past 20 years. Other wild
bovids of Southeast Asia’s forest, such as the selatang, the tamarau, and the
anoa, could help cattle husbandry. Like the kouprey, their numbers have been
severely reduced through human disruption of their life-supporting systems.
Cattle breeds elsewhere can likewise be improved through hybridization with
related species from the wild.” (Myer 320).
I take into consideration wild animal
species being potential sources of food as long as they aren’t high
contaminants for reservoirs of disease that can transfer to humans. I also
believe that when you are taking a wild species to farm that it is regulated
for sanitary and ethical practices. I have noted that most of the farmed ‘wild’
animals are selective such as buffalo that were previously hybridized with farm
cows, deer are being farmed, ostriches, emu, and several other species. There
is also the excuse for smoothing over public worry over deviation from regular
farm animals is to save a species. My thoughts are not overexploit the
availability of the species.
Take the now extinct kouprey (Bos sauveli).
Extinct in the way there is so low a number to be consider not a viable
population or completely wiped from the Earth. By nature the creature was
secretive and hide in the Thailand forest. I can only guess that it used the
forest for cover and like most wild beasts did not like being stressed. After
watching the video I can see they blend into the forest and disappear quite
easily. Hiding in a forest is soon to be limited if agriculture and human
progress start eating away at the perimeter. The habitat becomes a smaller
island to drift on. I looked for information but the only known observation of
this Kouprey was made in 1957 by a zoologist named Charles Wharton who actually
studied and filmed it. I thought this odd seeing how I saw a video that looked
pretty current. The WWF comments on their internet page that hunting for
subsistence, trade, low gene pool, and disease contributed to the decline of
the kouprey. Myers contends that there was military occupation in that area. In
war the animals are among the first to go because of starving soldiers that
have to live off what is available or burning large tracts of land to war
against the enemy. There are several military tactics that are detrimental to
local habitat and wildlife when war is a consideration.
I also looked into the Tamaraw (Bubalus
mindorensis) which is also on the critically endangered list at a whopping
population of ~300 which most are adults but the expected outcome is to lose
about 25% over the next 30 years. This doesn’t sound like good odds.
The Lowland (Bubalus depressicornis) and Mountain
Anoa (Bubalus quarlesi) are both on the endangered list.
The selatang I guessed to be the Gaur
because google as I may could not find a specie of bovid by that name. The Gaur
is endangered.
As I browse these different bovids it
becomes clear that in consideration of Myers previous statements made 22 years
ago, prospects are looking bleak because over half are in the critically endangered
zone well on their way to truly being extinct. If hopes were high not so long
ago, what happened? Then again, what didn’t happen? Could this be one of those
golden opportunities where a near extinct species can be pulled back to grow
into its previous glory?
Maybe these bovids were just not that
important for sustainability of populations on the part of the country or lands
they occupied.
For hunters that love to hunt bovids this
has to be a challenge and worrisome while they receive news that game animals
can no longer be hunted or even exist due to ignorance, negligible, and the
idea of the creature being thoughtlessly expendable.
The only bovid that seems to be working on
survival is the N’Dama in West Africa.
This kind of thought makes you wonder how
many other species fell along the wayside to disappear quietly from radar.
Could this be a working example that can be applied to other species in terms
of early detection, forming plans of specie re-establishment without
crossbreeding? Or do they need to ship animals to a foreign country to save
them such as the African game in Texas ranches that were eventually targeted
because of the canned hunting of the animals.
A video is available here of a sighting of kouprey (looks current):
Further Reading:
http://www.globalwildlife.org/projects/research/kouprey
http://www.asianwildcattle.org/
