23 resultados para Rockaway Hunting Club.
Resumo:
Conflicts between field sports, animal welfare and species conservation are frequently contentious. In Ireland, the Irish Coursing Club (ICC) competitively tests the speed and agility of two greyhounds by using a live hare as a lure. Each coursing club is associated with a number of discrete localities, known as preserves, which are managed favourably for hares including predator control, prohibition of other forms of hunting such as shooting and poaching and the maintenance and enhancement of suitable hare habitat. We indirectly tested the efficacy of such management by comparing hare abundance within preserves to that in the wider countryside. In real terms, mean hare density was 18 times higher, and after controlling for variance in habitat remained 3 times higher, within ICC preserves than the wider countryside. Whilst we cannot rule out the role of habitat, our results suggest that hare numbers are maintained at high levels in ICC preserves either because clubs select areas of high hare density and subsequently have a negligible effect on numbers or that active population management positively increases hare abundance. The Irish hare Lepus timidus hibernicus Bell, 1837 is one of the highest priority species for conservation action in Ireland and without concessions for its role in conservation, any change in the legal status Of hare coursing under animal welfare grounds, may necessitate an increase in Government subsidies for conservation on private land together with a strengthened capacity for legislation enforcement.
Resumo:
Hunter-gatherers are often ascribed a “monistic” worldview at odds with the nature-society dichotomy. The centerpiece of this claim is that they view hunting as similar to sharing within the band and prey animals as part of a common sphere of sociality. This article challenges this thesis. An examination of the work of its main proponents shows that it conflates two different senses of “animal”—the flesh-and-blood animals of the hunt and the animal Spirit that is said to control the animals. The sharing motif in hunting makes sense with respect to the anthropomorphic Spirit but not to the animals hunted. The conditions of the hunt as a spatiotemporal event provide further grounds for skepticism toward the idea of hunting-as-sharing. Drawing on biologist Robert Hinde’s model of relationships, I argue that hunting represents an anonymous one-off interaction that cannot develop into a personal relationship, in stark contrast to the durable forms of personalized sociality associated with the hunter-gatherer band. This is not to deny the possibility of human-animal cosociality in the form of personal relationships but rather to redirect the search away from the hunt to the interface with domesticated animals.
Resumo:
According to the axiomatic literature on consensus methods, the best collective choice by one method of preference aggregation can easily be the worst by another. Are award committees, electorates, managers, online retailers, and web-based recommender systems stuck with an impossibility of rational preference aggregation? We investigate this social choice conundrum for seven social choice methods: Condorcet, Borda, Plurality, Antiplurality, the Single Transferable Vote, Coombs, and Plurality Runoff. We rely on Monte Carlo simulations for theoretical results and on twelve ballot datasets from American Psychological Association (APA) presidential elections for empirical results. Each of these elections provides partial rankings of five candidates from about 13,000 to about 20,000 voters. APA preferences are neither domain-restricted nor generated by an Impartial Culture. We find virtually no trace of a Condorcet paradox. In direct contrast with the classical social choice conundrum, competing consensus methods agree remarkably well, especially on the overall best and worst options. The agreement is also robust under perturbations of the preference prole via resampling, even in relatively small pseudosamples. We also explore prescriptive implications of our findings.