It’s Survival of the Weak and Scrawny

Yep, it happens. Look at the human race. All the working people have to donate a portion of their checks so that lazy people can support their 8 kids. Of course if you have to work you can't have 8 kids as its too much work to raise kids, work and support some lazy welfare famiily's kids too.

This is poor journalism, irresponsible even, and reports bad science. Ms. Huang's subtitle refers to 'hunters', yet the circumstances she notes are the result of poaching (twice), commercial fishing, and poor game management practices. Most telling and accurate is her statement beginning the third paragraph, " When hunting is severe enough to outstrip other threats to survival..." Yet she only notes the situation on Ram Mountain. So we are to generalize from a sample of one? Using this process, all reporters are as inept as Ms. Huang. Here are some known facts: overpopulation generates more inferior animals than trophy hunting, most hunters do not harvest trophy animals, rather 'average' animals are the norm, 30% of hunting license holders actually harvest deer and there is a precipitous decline in hunting license sales. So if, as Ms. Huang notes so accurately, the 'alarm about these trends are based on theories that are hard to prove', why is the article titled as if it were fact? And why is the scarcity of data and veracity of the conclusions not questioned and noted on the next to last paragraph? Even a newbie journalist knows most people won't read that far and will have formed their opinion in the first few paragraphs. Ms. Huang had an agenda, and found a way to make the 'facts' fit it. This is Newsweek??

Evolution is a stupid theory that has no facts (really none). Animals inherit a portion of their parents genetic make-up (they don't create any "new" make-up. This article is yet another piece of proof as to why the theory of evolution does not hold water - species are becoming extinct left and right; however, no new species are being created. We are not getting bigger and better... we are getting smaller and weaker.

This is a terribly misinformed article. Check the record books for trophy animals and you will see that the records are being broken at an unprecedented rate. Herd management is being practiced across the globe. Animals are being allowed to grow to maturity, which allows for genetic diversity and natural selection usually by the biggest and best. The overharvest of the trophy animals may be occuring in limited areas, but as a whole, that is a falsehood. Refer to the records of the Boone and Crockett Club; the Pope and Young Club; and Safari Club International and the trend opposite of the one this article suggests will be readily apparent. Many categories have had to up the minimum entry standards on species because of an inundation of entries. What was once considered big, is now considered mediocre. Herd management practiced and promoted by hunters and hunting organizations has generated a huge reservoir of mature breed stock that continues to grow. This is being accomplished by balancing male to female ratios within a herd; culling subpar mature animals; and, most importantly, allowing animals to reach full breeding maturity. Anyone who is unaware of the intense trophy management being practiced in the US as well as across the globe to Africa and other places, is simply out of touch with the times.

This just explains the mentality of MSN, MSNBC, and Newsweek. They don't, and never will have a clue. By far, the dumbest piece of journalism. Hunting is NEVER going away- GET USED TO IT!! No wonder this country's going to crap. Thanx Westhunt for hitting this story right between the eyes.

It is amazzing how uneducated these people are. The genetic pool may be as good as it ever has. Game management programs throughout the US have produced record number of animals that haven't been seen in many decades. Right now there are more trophy bull elk being taken than ever before. In fact, the world record was taken this year. This is all due to proper game management that is support by hunters money. The only way to ensure there won't be genetic reversal is through proper game management which is happening right now. There are numerous areas throughout the US that restrict the size or sex of the animals the hunter can harvest. But apparently these game managers don't have a clue what they are doing according to this article. This is another classic case of writing an article without doing any research.

survival of the weak and scrawny... Humans no longer need to be physically strong, so maybe similar evolutionary processes have already taken place with mankind, although the process probably didn't specifically de-select the physically dominant but instead favored the mentally dominant. While Obama and Gates might represent possible proof of this theory, I wonder how Arnold Schwarzenegger fits into all this...

Please research the truth even a little bit before you throw this garbage at us. Teddy is posing with two Eland and one Kudu. You are about as far off on that as you article is on the truth. craighuff and westhunt are completely right. While we have donated literally thousands of our dollars in licenses and Tag fees I bet you have never donated a dollar to any state wildlife agency( who are the only ones who attempt to manage our wildlife). Open your eyes and get a life.

Your member comments are exactly correct, and expose this as a misleading "story" without science. One need only look at the "Project Green" header to find the hidden agenda. Hunters have done more directly for game than any other group by funding habitat, restoration, and reintroductions accross the country. You only need to look at population trends of various hunted species for the answer. Thank you.

This ain;t evolution. tThis is just that the more bigger more badder trophy hunts have more fur, meat , and in some cases tusks. More people want the bigger game and thats wat they do causing the smaller, quicker, and even probably the weaker to survive. Not only this you also have to notice the cutting down of forests and jungles and the contimination of river may cause strange defects in animals that we usually bigger or with more tusk. this ain't evolution people, this is just simply unentional hunting. People want bigger game so that wat they do leaving the rest behind.

You would think that garfield108, being a "former genetics instructor" would understand that animals that are taken when they are older and ususally larger, have already passed on their genetic traits to the next generation. It's the exact reason we see no natural improvement in diseases of old age, because it is not usful to nature to improve the circumstances of those who have already bred. Random killing of younger animals, however, does in fact prevent them from passing on their genes. So once again, someone who doesn't know what they are talking about is agreeing with the writer of an article who has no idea about his chosen topic. You gatta love the internet.

Of all that I know and hunt with, only one has ever harvested what we would consider a trophy. The rest of us certainly would like to but are happy for the opportunity to harvest a legal animal. Legal as determined by the department of fish and wildlife, who issues our tags, to be the most beneficial "targets" for the overall health of the population.

Pete Im not sure what you mean by the worng angle. Humans are part of the environment and the food chain, therefore a factor in evolution. As this article states, it is this factor that is causing the unintentional breeding. They are not separate, one follows the other.

I would tend to agree. There are individual exceptions to the rule, just as very tall people occassionally crop up from very short parents. When we throw the genetics of two sets of parents into a mixer we pick up some information from their ancestors from several generations back. As a former genetics instructor and hunter I would tend to agree strongly with the article. It will be very difificult to change perceptions and habits but we need to head in that direction. Ideally we should harvest the inferior animals and give the good genetics a boost (as I do as much as the laws will allow, which are not set up to facilitate this). As an alternative complete random harvest and allow the most strong to dominate the weak. Trophy hunting is not good for much except generating conservation dollars.

If each year all "trophy" animals were harvested (and only trophy animals) this theory may hold water. This is not the case as populations of say whitetail deer are increasing and the harvest is not keeping the herds in check. When a trophy is taken there is the chance that 1). it has already bred and 2). it's replacment is not inferior but only younger. Look at harvest reports and you will see that only a small portion of deer taken are of trophy class. Yes, a lot of hunters strive for the biggest rack, but fall short of that goal 9 times out of 10.

As a "Hunter", I can tell you this.
There are different types of hunts, or hunting that is done.
Trophy Hunting and Subsistence Hunting.
I have always been more of a subsistance type of a hunter and when the opportunity arises, to harvest an older, mature animal, I have harvested them as well.
There are tags alloted to be bought and sold in every state of the Union. These are regulated and not oversold. There is scientific data used and recorded to determine how many tags of every species is to be sold.
Now for the kicker!
Popultations Game animals are at an all time high!!! Thats right, check with the Department of Natural Resources in the state you live in, and check other states in the Union. It is a fact!
Money raised for taxes on Huntiing supplies (Guns, ammo, etc....) is used to keep lands "WILD", in other words, for the protection of habitat, Wildlife Officers, protection of "Protected Species"!!!
All of this is FACT, you can read it for your selves, in the State that you live in or check on other states!!!
Game animals populations are through the roof, thank your local hunters!

Go get yourself a Starbucks & take a walk across Central Park to the Natural History Museum. With a little bit of unbiased research, you'll then realize that those are eland, not kudus.

Of course evolution works in reverse, we have living proof of this on our planet today with the personality calling himself George W. Bush, He is so oblivioius to the natural wolrld and its precariousl positiion, that the probelms are simply invisible to him, It's not that he is evil, its just that his brain is incapable of understanding what is obvious to most others today, Pity him, but give him time, everything eventually evolves, it just takes some people longer than others.

This is classic "garbage journalism", written by people who don't have a clue about hunting rules and regulations, and frankly don't care. Their agenda is simple: Outlaw hunting. BTW, this same group of people are the ones who pushed re-introduction of wolves in the Western US, where they have become over-populated, and have wiped out tens of thousands of deer and elk. State fish and game departments regulate the taking of game animals by such techniques as "Elk - spike only , or cow only" restrictions, to protect the mature bulls. Evolution is well protected. Hunters are the only real means of protecting animals, since they are the ones financing the conservation efforts. The "greenies" that write this crap are typically urban dwellers who rarely set foot off the pavement.