Customer Reviews

The Raptor and the Lamb: Predators and Prey in the Living World

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The relationship between predator and prey is hard to explain without lapsing into inapplicable morality and/or sentimentality. This 'popular science' type book shows valient effort, but doesn't entirely manage to avoid the traps.

It does have good points, to be sure. It is approachable for the non-scientist, both in language and in concept. It does attempt to show some balance by presenting plants as victims of herbivores, as well as herbivores as victims of carnivores. It elucidates the various theories of the evolutionary backgrounds of predator-prey adaptations pretty clearly.

However, in an attempt to be gripping, the book delves into shameless anthropomorphism and value-laden language, especially in the narrative portions. Despite the fact (clearly stated in the explanatory portions of the book) that even a good predator on a good day succeeds in less than fifty percent of hunting attempts, a predator is 'shown' missing a prey animal only once (and even then the predator goes on to catch a different animal.) As a result, the 'story' parts of the book create a misapprehension that the more 'scientific' sections include an obligatory protest against - namely, that the predator is a killing machine with an almost moral quality, engaged in a daily slaughter of the innocents. Even the title plays into this misapprehension: No raptor is shown eating a lamb in the course of the book - indeed few raptors are even capable of preying on lambs - and no lambs are shown being eaten by any other predators either; but in our language the rapicious raptor and the innocent, fluffy lamb create a much greater emotional impact than, say, the shark and the seal or the lion and the wildebeast.

Overall, is a good survey of a huge subject: the tactics used by predators and prey in nature. It's comprehensive, accessible, and insightful. There are areas where I would have liked more exploration, but that's inevitable with a broad subject. The focus is mostly on predators, touching on nearly all major groups. Prey are discussed more in response, though a few sections deal with them specifically (e.g. plants).

The book is organized based on the type of animal rather than the strategies used. Although this is a logical approach, he does little to tie the book together with broader theories. The few cases where he does (for example, his occasional mention of pursuit vs. ambush predators) are notable for their rarity.

One caveat is that the author appears to misunderstand evolution. In the most egregious example he argues against the arms-race model:

"Nor is it necessarily an advantage for one of antagonists to respond to improvements in the other. Suppose a prey species evolved some improvement in its defensive strategies, perhaps better acceleration or more alertness to potential dangers. If the predator did not coevolve some corresponding improvement in its hunting techniques, it would catch fewer prey. The number of prey would therefore increase, but this could improve the predator's chance of catching them, so, it the long term, its hunting success might not suffer."

It's bad enough that a professor of zoology would assume species selection, but he seems unaware that he is saying anything controversial. Fortunately, such references are few, and they detract little from the book.

This is the best and I stress best book you can possibly get for someone that you believe or know enjoys biology or natural studies. However, it goes beyond that, this book is perfect for the person who likes cats and dogs and wants to know their specific differences and how they act in the wild. His writing style is very interesting and informative (not dumbed down but not highly scientific). A very excellent book for a plane ride or just a relaxing read (meanwhile you may learn something). Highly recommended. Hopefully some of his out-of-print books will be reprinted.

Author McGowan takes the reader through various groupings of life on earth in order to examine the relationship between predators and their prey. Mammals, reptiles, birds, fish, arthropods, plants, insects, plankton and dinosaurs all take their turn in the spotlight as McGowan selects some of the more interesting predator/prey relationships among them. The chapters each contain an italicized graphic illustration of a predator doing its thing, and a discussion of that predator along with others in its class. For the most part, the discussion describes the behavior and physical characteristics that contribute to the success of the predator, and also notes the strategies that the prey employs to foil the predator. While the writing breaks down the information into laymen's terms, McGowan occasionally delves into a slightly more technical issue, and defines vocabulary and scientific concepts accordingly.

The Good and the Bad:

I have a lot of negative feedback on this book, and I think that it generally comes down to the fact that the book was written and edited sloppily, as much as it pains me to knock the achievement of a likable English-Canadian gentleman who is obviously well-versed in the subject matter. But I noticed at least two or three word usage (such as team for teem, infection for infestation) errors, and, more glaringly, the italicized prose was just not consistently presented. I thought that McGowan was making up the scenes as exemplary of the typical predator foray, but in the chapter on plankton, the flowery writing is used to describe McGowan and a group of students collecting plankton from the sea. A final italicized section talks about a British man working on his garden and interacting with his wife and infant son. While I felt that the language in the sections was too flowery to be considered good writing, the bigger distraction was wondering where they came from, and why they weren't presented in a consistent format. If they are things that McGowan has seen with his own eyes, how can dinosaurs be included? If he's making them up as exemplary, then why are there atypical situations presented which then have to be corrected with the non-italicized writing? And why would he insert one, and possibly two stories from his own life? Further complicating matters is the fact that sometimes the non-italicized prose seems to serve the same function as the italicized prose, namely to provide a descriptive illustration of the concepts discussed. But even that definition doesn't hold, because the plankton-collecting story differs from the others in that there are no predators or prey being described. If there is some sort of logic involved in their conception and presentation, I still object to them based on their overwrought language and mysterious origins. Amusingly, McGowan gives a sort of disclaimer in the introduction, letting us know that the presentation of certain gory details may be off-putting, but is nevertheless necessary. When I read it, I expected that the discussion would be a little graphic. But, it seems like the disclaimer pertains to some very gratuitous choices of phrase in the italicized text that is not essential to any aspect of the book.

On the good end of it, the subject matter is fascinating, and the bulk of the text is both accessible and informative.

What I learned:

Sperm whales may stun their prey with sonic blasts before eating them. Plants have hairs in order to discourage insect predators; some of them serve to expose more of an egg sac to the air, which reduces the success of the hatchlings, and others might break off into a waxy substance that accumulates on the legs of aphids and other insect predators. Some bugs eat poisonous plants and then use the poison to protect themselves from bigger predators. Killer whales are smart enough to cooperatively splash the water in order to tip over an ice floe with a seal on it. Lions are slower than their prey, but compensate by having a better acceleration when they start; so, if a lion is within 50 yards of its prey, it has a good chance of taking it down.

This book read, in part, like a novel with good guys (nature's prey) and the bad guys (the predators)...it was a gruesome, at times, but realistic book about survival. I enjoyed it very much.