Re: chimps on the savanna? Nooooo.....

Phil Nicholls (
Wed, 01 Nov 1995 06:16:24 GMT (H. M. Hubey) graced us with the following

>David Froehlich <> writes:

>>Why can't youunderstand that savannah indicates an environment
>>intermediate between EF and G. If you continue to use savannah as an
>>equivalent statement for grassland


>If you don't like it write to the dictionary publishers.

Dictionaries provide information on word usage more than anything else
and word use changes and can be imprecise. Rather than use a general
dictionary might I suggest a biological dictionary.

Savannah's are not treeless. They are very different from steppes or
the American prairie.

>And if that weren't true there'd be no need for "mosaic savannah"
>would there?

>Is this the best you can do?

Yes, there is. Savannah mosaic refers the transitional zone between
closed canopy forest and savannah.

>PS. You can change the meaning of savannah, if you like.

>PPS. It still doesn't change the fact that chimps are forest

Chimpanzees are primarily forest animals. Some of them ALSO venture
out onto the savannah and this has been documented.


>PPPS. Do you remember my earlier posts on 'verbiage'?

>What's really funny is seeing you and Duncan argue against
>the arboreality of chimps, after arguing about the arboreality
>of Lucy because of its foot :-)...

They are not arguing against the arboreality of chimps. However,
chimps are not exclusively arboreal.

"Habitat: Tropical rain forest, forest savannah mosaic and deciduous
woodland in hilly country; also found in montaine forest up to 10,000
ft. Secondary forest in Sierra Leon. Habitate is arboreal for
approximately 50-75% daylight hours." (From Napier and Napier,
Handbook of Living Primates, 1967).

Now I know you mathematicians don't like dealing with actual data, but
you can't just continue to ignore it just because it destroys your
nice theoretical construct.

Phil Nicholls
"To ask a question you must first know most of the answer"
-Robert Sheckley