Hi herbalist, apologies if I've missed it, but this thread is massive. Does anyone know what type of numbers he is talking about, number of wolves / deer involved?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Back To Nature. [Rewilding by Monbiot]
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
sorry Ferret - no I haven't seen those numbers. If I've missed them too apologies folks. However even if the starting deer population is large and the initial wolf population tiny the end result will be the same - it will just take longer - unless there is outside intervention to either control the predator population or import more deer to bolster the prey population. But that doesn't sound like a self sustaining model.
Numbers wise, there are approximately 350,000 roe deer in Scotland according to the Herald newspaper... while the Forestry Commission estimates 500,000 in the UK and the Scottish Parliament reports numbers between 200,000 - 350,000 in Scotland.
I've reread this thread and there seems to be a collective consensus of opinion for the most part that the wolf isn't really a threat to humans, so I decided to research it... and wolves definitely are a threat to humans.
Attacks are divided between predatory attacks (mainly non-rabid), rabid attacks and quite relevant to topic, captive attacks... and the number of known attacks aren't that rare.
Since 2000 alone there have been fatal attacks by predatory wolves in Alaska, India, China, Turkey, Sweden, Tajikistan, Russia, Kashmir, Iraq, Georgia, Afghanistan, Canada.... I could go on, but those who think these are isolated attacks, but considering Sweden was mentioned earlier in the thread as not having a wolf problem, should we discuss the four attacks in a Swedish Zoo, the fourth attack being a fatal one? Yes, its a captive attack, but what are the proposals for the wolves in Scotland? They want to keep them captive.
Chris Packham (I think thats his name) is a nature guy on the telly, he said recently he's up for wolves coming back to Scotland because it worked in Yellowstone and there have been relatively few deaths. Relatively few?
As for wolves in populated areas, Iran 2005... "Wolves entering the village seeking refuge from harsh weather attacked an elderly homeless man in front of witnesses. Those witnessing the incident attempted to fight off the wolves, while waiting for police assistance. Police intervention never came, and the victim died."
So wolves do kill, they do attack and they sometimes don't play well with humans... are the numbers anything like the people killed on our roads every year? Do they compare to the number of deaths attributed to work place accidents? Probably not, but those deaths aren't caused by an animal we've introduced (if it went ahead) to the countryside that has been extinct for 300 years in Scotland and 400+ years in England.
Another point... remember this?
[video=youtube;358yUeLGkCI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=358yUeLGkCI[/video]
Thats in a country with no predators wandering around... imagine the public's reaction if they're told wolves have been reintroduced? People will be seeing wolves everywhere!
I've reread this thread and there seems to be a collective consensus of opinion for the most part that the wolf isn't really a threat to humans, so I decided to research it... and wolves definitely are a threat to humans.
Attacks are divided between predatory attacks (mainly non-rabid), rabid attacks and quite relevant to topic, captive attacks... and the number of known attacks aren't that rare.
Since 2000 alone there have been fatal attacks by predatory wolves in Alaska, India, China, Turkey, Sweden, Tajikistan, Russia, Kashmir, Iraq, Georgia, Afghanistan, Canada.... I could go on, but those who think these are isolated attacks, but considering Sweden was mentioned earlier in the thread as not having a wolf problem, should we discuss the four attacks in a Swedish Zoo, the fourth attack being a fatal one? Yes, its a captive attack, but what are the proposals for the wolves in Scotland? They want to keep them captive.
Chris Packham (I think thats his name) is a nature guy on the telly, he said recently he's up for wolves coming back to Scotland because it worked in Yellowstone and there have been relatively few deaths. Relatively few?
As for wolves in populated areas, Iran 2005... "Wolves entering the village seeking refuge from harsh weather attacked an elderly homeless man in front of witnesses. Those witnessing the incident attempted to fight off the wolves, while waiting for police assistance. Police intervention never came, and the victim died."
So wolves do kill, they do attack and they sometimes don't play well with humans... are the numbers anything like the people killed on our roads every year? Do they compare to the number of deaths attributed to work place accidents? Probably not, but those deaths aren't caused by an animal we've introduced (if it went ahead) to the countryside that has been extinct for 300 years in Scotland and 400+ years in England.
Another point... remember this?
[video=youtube;358yUeLGkCI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=358yUeLGkCI[/video]
Thats in a country with no predators wandering around... imagine the public's reaction if they're told wolves have been reintroduced? People will be seeing wolves everywhere!
How funny that a digression into the costs of the NHS mentioning chaplains aroused wrath and censure but digressions into the use of insulin and who pays for the NHS did not, even though my post was in response. But one should realise that religion is sacred.
Wheesht you. We're trying hard to keep this discussion open and on topic without bringing that up again.
It's been an interesting ramble of a conversation, and there are at least three mods keeping an eye on it, but it's really, really, pushing the boundaries as it is.
M
It's been an interesting ramble of a conversation, and there are at least three mods keeping an eye on it, but it's really, really, pushing the boundaries as it is.
M
I couldn't give a hoot about the bloke proposing it in the article really, because when you research this, he is one of many... at least this fella isn't talking about wolves roaming wild through Scotland as others have done.
What puzzles me is that the main reason given for reintroducing wolves is to control the deer population. Surely if the deer population is a serious problem, the solution isn't to introduce the random element of predatory killing machines, but to promote venison in the way we promote beef and lamb... if more people are willing to put it on the menu, the problem should sort itself.
The logic of introducing wolves to solve the deer problem is daft... if the wolf population gets out of control will there be a suggestion we reintroduce bears to Scotland? Then the bears population gets out of control, maybe we should try and engineer a dinosaur-type creature to eat them? Silly? Yes... but so is sticking wolves into modern day Scotland!
What puzzles me is that the main reason given for reintroducing wolves is to control the deer population. Surely if the deer population is a serious problem, the solution isn't to introduce the random element of predatory killing machines, but to promote venison in the way we promote beef and lamb... if more people are willing to put it on the menu, the problem should sort itself.
The logic of introducing wolves to solve the deer problem is daft... if the wolf population gets out of control will there be a suggestion we reintroduce bears to Scotland? Then the bears population gets out of control, maybe we should try and engineer a dinosaur-type creature to eat them? Silly? Yes... but so is sticking wolves into modern day Scotland!
MOD HAT ON.
There are now four of us keeping an eye on this thread.
Pretty please, can we stick to the discussion on re-wilding ? It'd be a boon to get through the thread this time without it getting closed down because folks get heated and take it too far OT.
atb,
M
There are now four of us keeping an eye on this thread.
Pretty please, can we stick to the discussion on re-wilding ? It'd be a boon to get through the thread this time without it getting closed down because folks get heated and take it too far OT.
atb,
M
I've been talked out of some bans here, for the last time though. The next person to discuss, quote religious text or issues will be taking a rest from the forum. No "just wanted to point outs" or "but what I mean is.."
It's a good thread, don't spoil it for everyone.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
It's a good thread, don't spoil it for everyone.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
"The Mods have one hell of a job to do, but they are what helps make it so good and keep it as fair as possible, I for one don't ever want to force their hand into banning people. I somehow managed not to get involved in the sub-thread of Chaplaincy, which given my background and other interests was unbelievably difficult (and then some!), but I guess it can be done, and I'll continue to 'self-censor' as much as I humanly can, but help from others is good too."
Come on guys, its unfair to put the Mods in this position.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Come on guys, its unfair to put the Mods in this position.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Are their fences 50 miles long though ? I know they aren't on deer farms further up the valley from here. Just big fields really.
M
M
"There's already been a thread closing and some other actions taken in part from members not following our No Religion Rule this week. "
I for one am very upset by people flouting their atheism in public. Certainly a religion as much as any of the other non-theistic ones are. Which I could prove to my satisfaction easily - having a background in such things.
But wolves - bad idea. And in not so many distant years cloning of frozen mastodon and other maga fauna chromosomes will be done - and then the real questions will come. Giant cave dwelling ground sloths anyone?
I for one am very upset by people flouting their atheism in public. Certainly a religion as much as any of the other non-theistic ones are. Which I could prove to my satisfaction easily - having a background in such things.
But wolves - bad idea. And in not so many distant years cloning of frozen mastodon and other maga fauna chromosomes will be done - and then the real questions will come. Giant cave dwelling ground sloths anyone?
Oh do behave yourself... the whole point of atheism is that there is a total lack of belief. No belief as in no book that gives the rules, no imaginary being to tell them what to do... this is the whole reason religion is a banned subject is idiots who can not resist the urge to spout off their particular belief and squash anything that threatens it. Wouldn't mind, I'm not even an atheist and thats got right up my nose!
Believe what you want to believe, but this is a forum about Bushcrafting.
Another thread ruined by 'belief'.
............:theyareon
