Talk:Hare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Mammals Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Mammal-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Are members of the genera Caprolagus and Pronolagus true hares? It seems that Pronolagus, in particular, are called 'Red Rockhares' at times and 'Red Rabbits' at other times.

Edededed 00:24, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I think all non-Lepus stuff must be removed from the page. Hares are members of the genus Lepus, and other leporids are not. Ucucha 09:45, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

While I have to admit to having less knowledge about lagomorphs than I do primates, how are Caprolagus and Pronolagus not hares? As listed here, their common names surely seem to put them into the "hare" category. Simply because they are partitioned slightly away from the other hares by being in a different genus doesn't mean they aren't hares. What's the modernliterature say about the entire lagomorph classification? - UtherSRG 11:43, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Phylogenetics of Leporidae are very confused, I think, but I thought Caprolagus and a few other small genera have been placed in the subfamily Palaeolaginae, while Pronolagus was related to Lepus (?). See Mikko's Phylogeny Archive ([1]). In any case the "hare" group of this article is not supported in any classification, and Pronolagus has also been called a "rabbit", I thought. I don't think we have to sort beasts according to common name. We don't place Notoryctes under real moles only because it has been called the "marsupial mole", so why should we place Caprolagus under real hares only because it has been called a "hare"? Ucucha 14:47, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Just wanted to notify anyone concerned that the link http://www.alienexplorer.com/ecology/m101.html is gone.

I just removed the reference (by deleting that sentence). Molinari 00:47, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned sentence

I removed the following sentence: "The word 'hare' refers to large members of the family Leporidae only," since it has been orphaned from its original context when it was first added in the 15:36 edit on the date 7 Aug 2003. The language was already perhaps a bit vague, but became even more so when its preceding sentence was replaced in the 18:32 edit on 2 April, 2004. Eventually, through subsequent editing, the sentence was quite unrelated to the rest of the paragraph.

Instead of moving the sentence to a new paragraph I chose to remove the sentence and archive it here because I am unsure as to the sentence's intent. I think the original contributor meant that the term "hare," while having a scientific definition, is often used colloquially to refer to any large member of the family Leporidae. I could not locate documentary proof of this assertion, despite my agreement with the assertion on anecdotal grounds. I felt it best to remove a potentially confusing sentence, and I was not confident enough in my interpretation of the original contributor's intent to edit the passage to a more clear meaning.

[edit] Disambiguation?

Maybe a disambiguation page is in order for the animal hare, a hare-lip, various people called hare, etc?

[edit] Diet

It's similar to rabbits'.... but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be included in this article! pomegranate 00:27, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bugs Bunny

What evidence do we actually have that Bugs Bunny is a jackrabbit? That sounds like speculation to me. He gets called a "hare" in the cartoons (usually to make a pun), but he also gets called a "rabbit" quite a lot. I'm not sure we can assume that he's supposed to be any particular species. His long ears and gangly legs suggest a hare, but could just be cartoonish exaggeration.

I changed this a few days ago. Someone likely misinterpreted a fact on his page stating he may be based on an earlier character that was a hare. So? He could be based on anything - say a chinchilla - and it wouldn't mean he is. Indium 04:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where are hare kidneys? where is a diagram showing organs in hares?

someone needs to find a diagram of a rabbit and put it in here!

[edit] A small addition to folklore

Just wanted to point out that I added a bit of information from my own research on the Proto-Indo-European culture about hares. Hope it helps a little. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seadog driftwood (talk • contribs) .

Please cite your sources. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I take it Seadog is the originator of the claim about the hare being subject to some early PIE taboo? FTA:

"There is evidence to suggest that there was some sort of taboo regarding hares in the Proto-Indo-European culture; this is especially notable due to the likelihood that the common word for hare, *kasos, which literally means "the grey one", was a euphemism for a previous and now lost word for hare."

The argument as I understand it is that animal words based on PIE roots for color indicate a hunter's taboo, i.e. that an animal's true name could not be spoken on the hunt. Thus the Latin word for bear being ursus, while Proto-Germanic languages use terms like bear and bruin that ultimately derive from the PIE root for "brown one."

Since hare is derived from *kas (grey), there is probably another unknown PIE root for it. We know about the "real" root for bear because some PIE family languages like Greek and Latin have preserved them, which (apparently?) is not the case for hare. At least, I take it that is what Seadog meant in the quoted text and when he talked about his "own research" above.

If there are no timely objections I'll re-write the unsourced passage and add a source. Incidentally here is the online source I used to try and figure out this riddle: http://www.bartleby.com/61/8.html#69 --Pompous stranger (talk) 11:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Oddly enough I just came across a fuller version of Seadog's mythological "research." All of it is, of course, vague and un-sourced, though interesting. http://www.thepacksden.com/thepackboard/viewtopic.php?p=132856&sid=d2fcd13680f4e4eb84b14474a7eabc64 --Pompous stranger (talk) 12:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The hare as food

The article lacks information at present on the hare as a food (jugged hare, etc.). -- Picapica 19:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rabbit/Hare hybrids

Can rabbits and hares interbreed and produce viable offspring? Drutt 05:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Rabbits + hARES == Rares... Actually I have no idea. --Jeff Bongi 03:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Do people orthodoxly eat hares as they do rabbits? --Jeff Bongi 03:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jackrabbits

Jackrabbit and jack rabbit are redirects to the accompanying article hare, but not all hares are jackrabbits, and it seems more reasonable to make "jackrabbit" the Dab (and "jack rabbit" a Rdr to it), and have a group of entries on the Dab for the various species. (Each article should of course lk to hare, accomplishing everything the current Rdrs do. I'm doing Dab-Cleanup on Jack rabbit (disambiguation), which i'll move to "jackrabbit" before making the additions i'm talking about. I'm proceeding BOLDly w/o waiting for discussion, anticipating that anything that i'm missing can be fixed later.
--Jerzy•t 05:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer it as it is, with all redirecting to hare, unless and until someone creates a jackrabbit specific article that describes the differences between jackrabbits and the remainder of this taxa (which IIRC) are none. - UtherSRG (talk) 05:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[shrug]
--Jerzy•t 06:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)