From a purely genetic/evolution point of view 68 individuals is already a ridiculously low number of wolves for a country as big as Norway.
I can only guess at how much damage 68 wolves can do to sheep farms but I have to imagine there has to be a better way to deal with an apex predator than cull 70%.
I thought that this was about Wolves in a remote part of Norway,the wilderness area of the South East, I am sure there are more wolves in the whole of Norway than 68, this area borders Sweden and between the two countries there are about 300 wolves, who can roam between both countries, the reason for this is stated by the Government because of the killing of livestock(sheep etc.) the Government are obliged under an agreement to compensate farmers for their losses from Wolf attacks, now WWF say the loss is minimal, they could only get this information by talking to farmers, and if they concluded that the farmers say losses are minimal, then unless the farmers are making exaggerated claims for losses that are not occurring, their would be no problem with the wolves, and the Government would not get involved, someone here is not being honest, it would be interesting to find out who.
One other point, if we actually ate wolf meat, like we do Alligator, Buffalo, kangaroo, Elk, Moose, Reindeer, Deer, etc, etc, no one would be interested in whether they were culled or not, and that is sad.
I can only guess at how much damage 68 wolves can do to sheep farms but I have to imagine there has to be a better way to deal with an apex predator than cull 70%.
I thought that this was about Wolves in a remote part of Norway,the wilderness area of the South East, I am sure there are more wolves in the whole of Norway than 68, this area borders Sweden and between the two countries there are about 300 wolves, who can roam between both countries, the reason for this is stated by the Government because of the killing of livestock(sheep etc.) the Government are obliged under an agreement to compensate farmers for their losses from Wolf attacks, now WWF say the loss is minimal, they could only get this information by talking to farmers, and if they concluded that the farmers say losses are minimal, then unless the farmers are making exaggerated claims for losses that are not occurring, their would be no problem with the wolves, and the Government would not get involved, someone here is not being honest, it would be interesting to find out who.
One other point, if we actually ate wolf meat, like we do Alligator, Buffalo, kangaroo, Elk, Moose, Reindeer, Deer, etc, etc, no one would be interested in whether they were culled or not, and that is sad.
Last edited: