"Schooling Might Feel Good, But Really Make Sense?" Topic

Is there really safety in numbers for these little guys?

link

When I cast a net I aim at clumps of fish, not individuals. Whales concentrate the fish using nets made of bubbles, instead of going after the loner fish. Lions spend their energy on large game, not in seeking out the single mouse.

Survivalists always tell people that traveling in bigger groups makes you an easier target to spot. And that terrorists look for places where people congregate.

YouTube link
YouTube link

Desert caravans might have had large groups of people, but they also had paid armed guards.

QUESTIONS

- So, as a defense mechanism, what real benefit is there in lumping up? Does it outweigh the disadvantages? Can schooling get you killed?
- Does it all just come down to what size enemy you are trying to avoid? In other words, do you look for travel companions when the the enemy threat is small, but then you go alone when the enemy gang is large and you know fighting would be pointless, and that going unnoticed is best?
- Or does it all just depend on the terrain, as in how open and exposed?

Dan
PS. Anyway, what's the real difference, if any, between the terms "schooling" and "shoaling"? Or is it simply a matter of regional preferences?

I don't have to swim faster than the shark, CC, I just have to swim faster than the slowest member of the school!

More seriously, if it did not make sense overall, it wouldn't happen.

It's the same discussion that was/is used in naval warfare. The Convoy or not to Convoy. In military terms the data supports the idea that convoying lowers your chances of being blown to heck and back. This holds true then for pretty much everything. Travelling in bands, although making you a bigger target, improves your chances of survival by spreading out the threat and ensuring that mutual aid/defence is available.

Can you use the same argument for offensive actions? Is the idea of the Shwerpunkt the same clumping up as a convoy but in reverse?

Discuss.

In an invasion by another country scenario, as in "Red Dawn", I would rather head out into the woods on my own, or with a small but competent group, than try to survive with a large group of people that have no familiarity with weapons.

To follow on Shadow, doesn't schooling depend on the competence and species in the group? With small fish, there are *so* many fish, that predators get confused at which fish to target. That's not the case with humans. I also assume most fish don't care if another fish is eaten, which isn't always the case with humans. Then, there's also the case of swarms, where individual insects or even humans use overwhelming odds to attack and defend.

If you don't school then predators don't have to look very hard, there's prey everywhere.

If a submarine misses a convoy it is a long wait for the next. Single ships come past daily. You can even surface to sink them with your cannon.

A school of fish doesn't have a dedicated armed escort like a convoy or a large ancient/medieval caravan used to have.

It would be like if a large crowd of civilians were being accompanied by military units from one place to the next, like from a ravaged city to a safe camp far away.

Now, remove the armed escorts from the equation … does simply traveling in numbers really increase your chances of survival, or does it ring a dinner bell?

Dan

It's normal human nature to form up in bands; loners are looked at strangely for a reason in modern society (and in past societies).

"Survivalists" (said in the same tone that I use for "Alien Theorists") like to think that they are special and will survive whatever gets thrown at them. But what happens when they break their leg rummaging through the warehouse? or cut themselves on a rusty car? They have no-one to help you. Maybe that "guy that doesn't know how to use weapons" is an EMT or Doctor. Or a mechanic, library researcher (why do none of the post-apoc. shows deal with raiding the library?) or other "combat-useless", resource helpful type?

No one person can do it all, which is why we developed societies that rely on many people, not all of whom are warriors or hunters.

Oh, Dan, you mean like fish! When I read your title, I thought you were questioning the value of all the book larnin'.

Easy. It's "concentration of effort" if it works, and "bunching up and presenting an attractive target" when it doesn't. Going off by yourself is "relying heavily on individual initiative" when IT works, and "scattering and being picked off individually" when it doesn't.

Whether either one is optimum depends on a lot of information not available yet and subject to change--numbers, capabilities and intentions not least--which presumably is why some herbivores go around in big herds and some only see one another in mating season.

Some problems have real answers. This one only has situationally-dependent ones.

"This one only has situationally-dependent ones."

Like "how risk averse the attacker is or attackers are", or "how many casualties are acceptable to the attacking group"?

Duck

They are fish, using usally R strategists so there are lots of them. Not every fish has to survive. Also most predators, at least the ones the fish have evolved against, do not use cast nets. Whales with bubble nets are quite new and are not as efficient as human fishing. Schooling works very well against individual hunters who have to target individual fish, and the predators are not usually numerous.

JohnG

Read the first part of my comment Dan.

The vast number of moving fish make it hard for predators to focus. It's why school fish often have silver scales, so they flash.

Depends on the species and the predator. Grouping up by Fish may be to confuse predators but lots of land animals do it as well and they do not confuse predators. Reasons it is a successful survival strategy for the SPECIES include.

1 – More eyes and ears to spot predators.
2 – A group may be able to protect itself – like buffalo or Elephants protecting young.
3 – If the first two fail a predator will generally catch the oldest/youngest and weakest leaving the strongest and fastest to get away.
4 – Predators tend to stay in balance with their prey species – if predators get too successful they die off too eventually. So they stay just fast enough to catch the young/old/slow. Those that go out of balance are known as extinct species.