vBCms Comments
Welcome To Hunting Country
General Hunting Forums
Archery & Bowhunting
Shooting Sports
Manufacturers' Corner
Firearms
Classifieds
Not Hunting / General Chit Chat
1.) Bob Peck - 12/30/2015
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. Saw this on FB somewhere ...
"A wolf pack: the first 3 are the old or sick, they give the pace to the entire pack. If it was the other way round, they would be left behind, losing contact with the pack. In case of an ambush they would be sacrificed.
Then come 5 strong ones, the front line. In the center are the rest of the pack members, then the 5 strongest following.
Last is alone, the alpha. He controls everything from the rear. In that position he can see everything, decide the direction. He sees all of the pack. The pack moves according to the elders pace and help each other, watch each other."
"A wolf pack: the first 3 are the old or sick, they give the pace to the entire pack. If it was the other way round, they would be left behind, losing contact with the pack. In case of an ambush they would be sacrificed.
Then come 5 strong ones, the front line. In the center are the rest of the pack members, then the 5 strongest following.
Last is alone, the alpha. He controls everything from the rear. In that position he can see everything, decide the direction. He sees all of the pack. The pack moves according to the elders pace and help each other, watch each other."
2.) bluecat - 12/30/2015
Ah, it makes sense now. Leading from behind...
3.) Bob Peck - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=bluecat;37704]Ah, it makes sense now. Leading from behind...[/QUOTE]
Behind, ahead ... it's a matter of perspective isn't it? He's leading in a position he can see everything to decide the direction. I'd say as predators wolves would be considered by most to be efficient. Man on the other hand?
Behind, ahead ... it's a matter of perspective isn't it? He's leading in a position he can see everything to decide the direction. I'd say as predators wolves would be considered by most to be efficient. Man on the other hand?
4.) bluecat - 12/30/2015
It is interesting. I wouldn't have guessed those positions initially. Thanks for posting.
5.) DParker - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;37707]I'd say as predators wolves would be considered by most to be efficient. Man on the other hand?[/QUOTE]
6.) Wild Bob - 12/30/2015
That is interesting. Good post!
It kind of reminds me of an age old argument that is always been playing out in my work. The argument between 1) a 'Working Foreman' on a construction crew (talking civil / utility construction here...not carpentry) and 2) a 'Non-working Foreman.'
The premise behind the 'Non-working Foreman' is very similar leadership rational in Bob's initial post: If the Crew Foreman is not busy hands-on working (not occupied by the immediate task being worked on by the rest of the crew) then he is free to observe to direct and improve the actions of the crew, as well as over see splitting up the crew for times of multitasking duties. Whereas the 'Working Foreman' is busy and his view and oversight less broad, but many company owners can't stand the idea of paying someone that spends the majority of their time observing, so often the owner likes to see everyone ass-holes and elbows!
It is interesting seeing this play out...my personal take on it is that it depends on the crew and especially the individual foreman. All too often good hard workers are moved up into foreman positions that have little or no leadership skills...so they often end up trying to drive the crew by doing everything themselves. Not a great scenario either, IMHO. Just as the Alpha couldn't direct the pack if he was busy chomping on an adversary at the front; neither can a Foreman make changes to avoid a problem with what ever if he is busy running the chute on a concrete truck. The larger the crew, the more critical direction and leadership becomes IMO.
It kind of reminds me of an age old argument that is always been playing out in my work. The argument between 1) a 'Working Foreman' on a construction crew (talking civil / utility construction here...not carpentry) and 2) a 'Non-working Foreman.'
The premise behind the 'Non-working Foreman' is very similar leadership rational in Bob's initial post: If the Crew Foreman is not busy hands-on working (not occupied by the immediate task being worked on by the rest of the crew) then he is free to observe to direct and improve the actions of the crew, as well as over see splitting up the crew for times of multitasking duties. Whereas the 'Working Foreman' is busy and his view and oversight less broad, but many company owners can't stand the idea of paying someone that spends the majority of their time observing, so often the owner likes to see everyone ass-holes and elbows!
It is interesting seeing this play out...my personal take on it is that it depends on the crew and especially the individual foreman. All too often good hard workers are moved up into foreman positions that have little or no leadership skills...so they often end up trying to drive the crew by doing everything themselves. Not a great scenario either, IMHO. Just as the Alpha couldn't direct the pack if he was busy chomping on an adversary at the front; neither can a Foreman make changes to avoid a problem with what ever if he is busy running the chute on a concrete truck. The larger the crew, the more critical direction and leadership becomes IMO.
7.) billy b - 12/30/2015
Hmmmm, I guess our country leader considers himself as dominant cuz he's definitely not up front where the problems are. Could a wolf pack survive with a leader like we have?:cf:
8.) bluecat - 12/30/2015
9.) luv2bowhunt - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=Wild Bob;37711]All too often good hard workers are moved up into foreman positions that have little or no leadership skills...so they often end up trying to drive the crew by doing everything themselves. Not a great scenario either, IMHO. Just as the Alpha couldn't direct the pack if he was busy chomping on an adversary at the front; neither can a Foreman make changes to avoid a problem with what ever if he is busy running the chute on a concrete truck. The larger the crew, the more critical direction and leadership becomes IMO.[/QUOTE]
Bingo. The key is putting someone into a supervisory position that has the skills to carry it out. I am in an industry that more often than not, when it needs to fill a position, just grabs the best available person and hopes for the best.
Good leadership, very hard to find. The key is to be overseeing everything, but also available to fill in to a vacant position when necessary. Not only does this keep the job on course but it earns the respect of the rest of the crew.
Our President thinks he is leading and is convinced he knows what's good for you more than you do.
Bingo. The key is putting someone into a supervisory position that has the skills to carry it out. I am in an industry that more often than not, when it needs to fill a position, just grabs the best available person and hopes for the best.
Good leadership, very hard to find. The key is to be overseeing everything, but also available to fill in to a vacant position when necessary. Not only does this keep the job on course but it earns the respect of the rest of the crew.
Our President thinks he is leading and is convinced he knows what's good for you more than you do.
10.) bluecat - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=billy b;37713]Hmmmm, I guess our country leader considers himself as dominant cuz he's definitely not up front where the problems are. Could a wolf pack survive with a leader like we have?:cf:[/QUOTE]
Can we put our leader with the wolf pack and see?
Can we put our leader with the wolf pack and see?
11.) Swamp Fox - 12/30/2015
I'd like to see the research on this pack behavior, if any, because I'm having a hard time thinking of any situations where anything follows the old or sick. Certainly not the old AND sick. LOL
If there is, in fact, any consistent pack position for the old or sick, I expect it is immediately behind the wise, middle-aged and confident animals who are not dominant, but may be thought of as strong. They (the old/sick) then would be followed by other members of the pack. If we want to assign reasons for this, it could be so that they "would be" pulled AND pushed along, while being protected at the same time. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, and from my experience around animals both domestic and wild, I think this is a more likely theory than one that positions the old and/or sick up front to "set the pace."
I think it's slightly more believable that a dominant animal brings up the rear, but I doubt it's because it (he? she?) is taking a leadership or directive position from there. More likely it is to put the scouts and pioneers in front to take the arrows, and because in the dominant position, there is no need to rush into anything.
The idea of alpha animals is changing, perhaps, from what most people understand and how the term is commonly used. The way I think it's understood by the biologist/behaviorist types these days is more connected to status as parents than it is to some type of hard-won position of dominance and leadership that emerges independent from that parentage dynamic.
If there is, in fact, any consistent pack position for the old or sick, I expect it is immediately behind the wise, middle-aged and confident animals who are not dominant, but may be thought of as strong. They (the old/sick) then would be followed by other members of the pack. If we want to assign reasons for this, it could be so that they "would be" pulled AND pushed along, while being protected at the same time. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, and from my experience around animals both domestic and wild, I think this is a more likely theory than one that positions the old and/or sick up front to "set the pace."
I think it's slightly more believable that a dominant animal brings up the rear, but I doubt it's because it (he? she?) is taking a leadership or directive position from there. More likely it is to put the scouts and pioneers in front to take the arrows, and because in the dominant position, there is no need to rush into anything.
The idea of alpha animals is changing, perhaps, from what most people understand and how the term is commonly used. The way I think it's understood by the biologist/behaviorist types these days is more connected to status as parents than it is to some type of hard-won position of dominance and leadership that emerges independent from that parentage dynamic.
12.) Bob Peck - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;37724]I'd like to see the research on this pack behavior, if any, because I'm having a hard time thinking of any situations where anything follows the old or sick. Certainly not the old AND sick. LOL [/QUOTE]
You sir are clearly an empiricist.
If there isn't scientific or empirical data to support a conclusion, you question it. This is commonly referred to as being a "Doubting Thomas". This is good to some degree and quite necessary for survival and balance. However, I suspect you would question the existence of wind because you can't see it even though you can observe the effects. This is a podunk forum where all bets are off and where hijacks occur within a nanosecond as opposed to milliseconds in the other forums.
The statements come from research conducted by L. David Mech (Lucyan David "Dave" Mech). Google him before DParker beats you to it. :-)
You sir are clearly an empiricist.
If there isn't scientific or empirical data to support a conclusion, you question it. This is commonly referred to as being a "Doubting Thomas". This is good to some degree and quite necessary for survival and balance. However, I suspect you would question the existence of wind because you can't see it even though you can observe the effects. This is a podunk forum where all bets are off and where hijacks occur within a nanosecond as opposed to milliseconds in the other forums.
The statements come from research conducted by L. David Mech (Lucyan David "Dave" Mech). Google him before DParker beats you to it. :-)
13.) Swamp Fox - 12/30/2015
I've actually heard of Mech. Do you have a link to where this comes from? (The research and conclusion about this behavior, I mean.)
14.) DParker - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;37726]The statements come from research conducted by L. David Mech (Lucyan David "Dave" Mech). Google him before DParker beats you to it. :-)[/QUOTE]
Too late: [URL="http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/"]http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/[/URL]
Sneaky Italians.
Too late: [URL="http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/"]http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/[/URL]
Sneaky Italians.
15.) Swamp Fox - 12/30/2015
LOL...
Damn Facebook...LOL
Damn Facebook...LOL
16.) Bob Peck - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=DParker;37729]Too late: [URL="http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/"]http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/[/URL] Sneaky Italians.[/QUOTE]
You're good. Really good. lol!
You're good. Really good. lol!
17.) Swamp Fox - 12/30/2015
"Watch 'im, Abe! I seen 'im do some *things*!"
:-)
:-)
18.) DParker - 12/30/2015
Bonjour.
19.) Swamp Fox - 12/30/2015
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
20.) Wild Bob - 12/30/2015
[QUOTE=bluecat;37721]Can we put our leader with the wolf pack and see?[/QUOTE]
:laugh:
Nice! :tu:
:laugh:
Nice! :tu:
21.) Bob Peck - 12/31/2015
[QUOTE=DParker;37729]Too late: [URL="http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/"]http://www.snopes.com/wolf-pack-photo/[/URL][/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.davemech.org/news.html[/url]
What Mech (pronounced Meech) says in his own words:
[I]"The concept of the alpha wolf is well ingrained in the popular wolf literature at least partly because of my book "The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species," written in 1968, published in 1970, republished in paperback in 1981, and currently still in print, despite my numerous pleas to the publisher to stop publishing it. Although most of the book's info is still accurate, much is outdated. We have learned more about wolves in the last 40 years then in all of previous history.[/I]"
If you're interested in volunteering (as I wish I could) [url]http://www.davemech.org/volunteering.html[/url]
[url]http://www.davemech.org/news.html[/url]
What Mech (pronounced Meech) says in his own words:
[I]"The concept of the alpha wolf is well ingrained in the popular wolf literature at least partly because of my book "The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species," written in 1968, published in 1970, republished in paperback in 1981, and currently still in print, despite my numerous pleas to the publisher to stop publishing it. Although most of the book's info is still accurate, much is outdated. We have learned more about wolves in the last 40 years then in all of previous history.[/I]"
If you're interested in volunteering (as I wish I could) [url]http://www.davemech.org/volunteering.html[/url]
22.) DParker - 12/31/2015
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;37752][url]http://www.davemech.org/news.html[/url]
What Mech (pronounced Meech)...[/quote]
Well, that's disappointing. I was kind of expecting him to be this guy.
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;37752]...says in his own words:
[I]"The concept of the alpha wolf is well ingrained in the popular wolf literature at least partly because of my book "The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species," written in 1968, published in 1970, republished in paperback in 1981, and currently still in print, despite my numerous pleas to the publisher to stop publishing it. Although most of the book's info is still accurate, much is outdated. We have learned more about wolves in the last 40 years then in all of previous history.[/I]"[/QUOTE]
That pretty much matches what the Snopes piece says about it. What they found to be false were the claims about the lead being taken by the "old and sick", the nonsense about ambushes (what exactly is going to be ambushing the region's top predator?) the "alpha" bringing up the rear, etc.
What Mech (pronounced Meech)...[/quote]
Well, that's disappointing. I was kind of expecting him to be this guy.
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;37752]...says in his own words:
[I]"The concept of the alpha wolf is well ingrained in the popular wolf literature at least partly because of my book "The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species," written in 1968, published in 1970, republished in paperback in 1981, and currently still in print, despite my numerous pleas to the publisher to stop publishing it. Although most of the book's info is still accurate, much is outdated. We have learned more about wolves in the last 40 years then in all of previous history.[/I]"[/QUOTE]
That pretty much matches what the Snopes piece says about it. What they found to be false were the claims about the lead being taken by the "old and sick", the nonsense about ambushes (what exactly is going to be ambushing the region's top predator?) the "alpha" bringing up the rear, etc.
23.) Swamp Fox - 12/31/2015
[QUOTE=DParker;37753]
...What they found to be false were the claims about the lead being taken by the "old and sick", the nonsense about ambushes [B](what exactly is going to be ambushing the region's top predator?[/B]) the "alpha" bringing up the rear, etc.[/QUOTE]
Grumpy Cat? ----LOL
He's pretty much at the top of the internet food chain...or was...Is he still alive?
...What they found to be false were the claims about the lead being taken by the "old and sick", the nonsense about ambushes [B](what exactly is going to be ambushing the region's top predator?[/B]) the "alpha" bringing up the rear, etc.[/QUOTE]
Grumpy Cat? ----LOL
He's pretty much at the top of the internet food chain...or was...Is he still alive?
24.) Bob Peck - 12/31/2015
25.) Swamp Fox - 12/31/2015
Just a little off-topic, but not really:
DP, I know you'll like this one.
If you read the headline---[I]Four Secret Service Agents Guarding Hillary Clinton Die in a Car Crash
[/I]---you'd think four Secret Service agents who were guarding Hillary Clinton died in a car crash. Since I heard on the news last night that they were okay, I was shocked to see on Yahoo a few minutes ago that all four had suddenly croaked. Also, that they were guarding Hillary, as opposed to just being assigned to Hillary and driving around on the highway, with Herself nowhere in the vicinity (apparently).
Since the article says nothing about the deaths and the video says at least three were released from the hospital already, this is a pretty amazing example of "You can't believe everything you read on the internet."
I guess they have the jayvee team at the editing desk for New Year's eve...
Stupid Internet.
Here's a link to the headline as of 2:20 PM EST 12/31
[url]https://gma.yahoo.com/video/four-secret-agents-guarding-hillary-234220708.html[/url]
DP, I know you'll like this one.
If you read the headline---[I]Four Secret Service Agents Guarding Hillary Clinton Die in a Car Crash
[/I]---you'd think four Secret Service agents who were guarding Hillary Clinton died in a car crash. Since I heard on the news last night that they were okay, I was shocked to see on Yahoo a few minutes ago that all four had suddenly croaked. Also, that they were guarding Hillary, as opposed to just being assigned to Hillary and driving around on the highway, with Herself nowhere in the vicinity (apparently).
Since the article says nothing about the deaths and the video says at least three were released from the hospital already, this is a pretty amazing example of "You can't believe everything you read on the internet."
I guess they have the jayvee team at the editing desk for New Year's eve...
Stupid Internet.
Here's a link to the headline as of 2:20 PM EST 12/31
[url]https://gma.yahoo.com/video/four-secret-agents-guarding-hillary-234220708.html[/url]
26.) Swamp Fox - 12/31/2015
[QUOTE=Bob Peck;37761]
[/QUOTE]
LOL...That's one of my favorites! :grin:
[/QUOTE]LOL...That's one of my favorites! :grin: