You probably couldn't get your daughters to reproduce at 11 or 12. You can get them cycling that young, but most women have anovulatory cycles for some time after first menstruation. But, since modern hunter-gatherers don't start cycling until much later--like 17 or 18--and don't usually actually reproduce first until their early 20s, because they don't have access to as much food resources as women in industrialized societies. you might consider whether you've been feeding your daughters too much. It's
inarguably the case that all this feeding of offspring that we do in industrialized societies is growing them up and getting them to breeding age (both possible breeding, and often realized breeding) faster than what happens "in the wild." Additionally, the feeding that we do in industrialized societies shortens the interbirth interval (equivalent to double-clutching) compared to what happens "in the wild." You definitely could slow down your daughters' growth, thereby delaying their age at first reproduction (or age at menarche, or both) as well as keep their interbirth intervals much longer (rather than allowing them to pump out babies every 12-18 months) by feeding them less. So perhaps you should consider cutting back their dinner portions, or maybe the quality of their dinner portions.
But this isn't generally recommended is it? Generally, it's recommended that you feed your children enough to allow them to grow at their maximum potential, but not too much to make them fat.
As with snakes, there's no good evidence that maturing earlier shortens adult lifespan. On average, we still live longer than modern hunter gatherers because of access to medical care and because of low threat from predation by large cats and accidental death by venemous snakes, hypothermia, etc. Of course, our old age might be plagued more by health problems than their old age, but so far, your concern seems to be more about the length of life, not the quality of it. I let my cats go outside because I feel it increases the quality of their lives. You say I don't take my pets into consideration because I make choices for them that will likely decrease the length of their lives.
Duff said:
That's totally your call for yourself, but to be honest, if you don't take your pets into consideration... I just hope if reincarnation does actually happen, I don't come back as one of your pets.
Yeah. It'd be better to be a feral cat or dog than to be a sterilized one at our house with regular, good quality food and sling beds so you don't have to sleep on the concrete floors. I thought that just the other day when I stopped on my way to work on the side of I-10 to try to capture a stray pitbull that was walking down the offramp toward 4 lanes of traffic. I thought, "Well you know, I don't sweat it if my snakes reach breeding age at 2 instead of 3 and it makes them live one or two years less. I let my cats go outside when they want because it makes them happy, even though it is very well documented that indoor-outdoor cats have shorter lifespans than indoor-only cats. I let my dogs off-leash (where it's legal) when we go camping and hiking in the mountains because they love it so much, even though I know that a hundred dogs get lost every year by owners who let their dogs off-leash. Sheesh. I don't take my pets into consideration. This dog who seems to have made its home in the embankment on the side of I-10 is probably better off if I leave it be."
Duff said:
I must've missed that survey, cause I do care. And I don't need to be fun or sexy, as long as I'm doing right for myself, my family and my friends. And doing everything in my power to help my pets (read: also part of my family) reach their maximum life span is part of my responsibility by taking them under my care.
Uh huh. You care now, but you are now past the age at which reproducing will yield maximum benefit (just like you are past the age at which putting $100 a month into a retirement fund will yield maximum benefit). And in terms of the evolved human life history, you are nearing the end of the age of reproduction (just because men are physiologically able to reproduce for longer than women doesn't mean that they actually accomplish that at frequencies high enough to be meaningful in terms of selection--in most societies, they don't tend to). But I bet your actions when you were 16-25 weren't always consistent with caring most about your maximum lifespan. Maybe you're the exception to the general rule. But all of us people who smoke (I don't, but lots of people do), eat too much red meat or cheese and not enough vegetables, eat too much ice cream and not enough tofu, drink alcohol, ride motorcycles, and overfeed their pets (I don't, but millions of industrialized citizens have fat cats and dogs) all of us make decisions that are more about immediate gratification than they are about maximizing our/their lifespans. You value longevity over short-term gratification; I value short-term gratification (which I see as quality of life) over longevity, as long as the longevity reduction isn't drastic and isn't accompanied by a reduction in quality of life (like it will be if you let your pets be obese, because it's a lot less fun to play fetch when you're overweight). This is a philosophical choice, not a moral imperative.
So if I grow my snakes up faster than you because I think it's better to have a full belly than to live a year longer, you can't impeach my choice on ethical grounds. My opinion of what it best is simply different from yours (note that all my snakes are lean and healthy--none is the least bit overweight). I think maintenance diets are not in the best interests of the snakes. I think our pets should be allowed to grow on their own schedules (unless there's data to show that there are negative quality of life effects, like when Great Danes grow too fast and get bone spurs), not held back to ours. But hey, I know the snakes can survive on less food, and I know that if you're choosing something different for your snakes, they're not my snakes, and I know that not everyone shares my view, so as long as you're not STARVING your snake and seriously endangering its welfare and negatively impacting its quality of life, I don't get all high and mighty about it.
