Andrew,

I am not sure about this one. I think it is easier to
eat dead meat then to kill a prey, thus I would guess
that carnivory first evolved as scavanging, and
returning to primitive state is not very uncommon in
evolution. But all these notions of "exciting"
"defaming" are only human aesthetic judgements.
Predators have an obvious appeal as mighty animals,
but that is it, nothing to do with its importance for
its environment.

Cheers,

Paulino

--- Kay Lavalier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Andrew Vik
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Dear Nora:
>
> I agree with you 100%. Scavengers do a very
> important job on this planet. They
> just aren't as exciting as predators are. But we
> must realize, most scavengers
> have evolved from predators, not the other way
> around. I do not believe in
> de-evolution, the idea that life forms can regress
> to a more primitive state.
> Therefore, scavengers could be thought of as an
> improved predators.
>
> Yours, Andrew
>
> NORA BRYAN wrote:
>
> > Andrew
> > Interesting choice of phrase -  "defaming".  It's
> odd how we tend to think
> > of scavengers as somehow less worthy of our
> admiration.  I guess it's a
> > natural reaction (maybe we picture ourselves
> eating roadkill and get a
> > little grossed out at the idea!).   Of course we
> know logically that
> > scavengers are an extremely important part of the
> natural cycle.  Sometimes
> > when I see a dead animal I feel sad, but then I
> feel better when I see the
> > various birds and animals making use of the
> carcass to feed themselves and
> > their young.  Death feeds life.
> >
> > Nora
> > Calgary, Alberta
> > CANADA
> >
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com