Time To Boycott Norway?

CLEM

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Jul 10, 2004
2,460
462
Stourbridge
I used to live in Norway back in the early 90's, I loved the place and its people and I still do. It's finished as is Sweden for the same reasons. My ex/girl back in Oslo who I am still friends with has taken to colouring her hair black as have all her blonde friends to avoid being hunted by predators. It's not only Wolves who are being hunted over there. I'll say no more.
 

JonathanD

Ophiological Genius
Sep 3, 2004
12,815
1,511
Stourton,UK
Some of these posts have actually disgusted me. I actually can't believe that so called bushcraft enthusiasts have made them.
 

boatman

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Feb 20, 2007
2,444
8
78
Cornwall
Our purpose, as a small defenceless creature, is to be naturaly wary of things with big teeth.

(Or to find our way around such hazards)
We are not a small animal and only defenceless if we want to be. Look up relative sizes of animals and see where we fit in the size graph. Until she fell out of a tree even small Lucy existed in a world of predators. Natural to pick up a stick or throw a stone and shout as we have done for millennia. How viable is Norwegian sheep farming without subsidies? Worth paying for any sheep attacked by wolves. And, as with foxes and lambs in the UK farmers could try proper shepherding again to reduce the alleged losses.
 

dewi

Full Member
May 26, 2015
2,647
13
Cheshire
Some of these posts have actually disgusted me. I actually can't believe that so called bushcraft enthusiasts have made them.

I couldn't agree more... those advocating the culling of humans, terrible... just terrible.

The bit about 'so called bushcraft enthusiasts' is a bit harsh though... people can have genocidal tendancies and enjoy going back to basics in the woods as well... the two are not mutually exclusive. I mean, look at Baden-Powell... after a spot of genocide in Africa at the end of the 19th century, he returned home a veritable war hero and helped to found the Boy Scouts! Nobody likes a massacre, but everybody likes the Boy Scouts... swings and roundabouts.
 

Andy BB

Full Member
Apr 19, 2010
3,290
3
Hampshire
Is this Norway the same intelligent, ecology-friendly country that still hunts whales for sport? I say sport because in such a rich country there is no need to hunt and kill whales for food....
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,120
68
Florida
In that case , and in your line of thinking , what purpose do we serve?
As mammals on this planet...
Time for a cull?

As the case of Yellowstone shows , wolves do indeed serve various purposes.
And in that case it was to help reestablishing the natural balance of the landscape, as there was too much elk and moose and not enough vegetation , as a result of the extermination of the wolves years before....

The overpopulation of deer, elk, and so forth in Yellowstone was due to the complete ban on hunting in ALL National Parks.
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,120
68
Florida
Yeh, I cannot really be arsed getting into it, the conversations been had before and Ive posted loads of stuff. I cannot understand people who want to see them become extinct either. They have as much right to exist as you or I......

Two points:
1) I certainly don't want to see them extinct. I want a population that will sustain a rigorous harvest.
2) By your logic ALL creatures have a right to live. Including viruses. And yet we spend considerable time, money, and effort trying to make those viruses extinct.
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,120
68
Florida
......I do have an affinity for wolves, how can you not? Beautiful intelligent creatures IMO.

Yeah, me too. I had a wolf for a bit over 13 years. Broke my heart when I had to have her put down when she was 17 (she was 4 when I got her)
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,120
68
Florida
.....Very simply when looking at predator / prey numbers over time you see a self regulating pattern. If prey numbers increase then predator numbers will then tend to increase. Over predation will in turn lead to lower numbers of prey and subsequently with fewer prey, predator numbers will decline.
Obviously these interactions are complicated in real life due to the other species in an ecosystem but it is a simple example of what I think was meant by breeding fitness.
The least fit prey tend to be the ones they get eaten. The least fit predators tend to be the ones that starve.....

Your comments are true to a point, but highly oversimplified. Predators kill commonly kill other predatory species out of instinct.

I wasn't speaking of just the Florida ecosystem when I mentioned larger predators displacing smaller ones. I was talking of most of the middle latitudes of N.A. The prey of all predators I mentioned overlaps at least one step up and down the chain:
-Foxes, bobcats, and coyotes all prey on rabbit sized prey as well as birds so they compete with each other.
-Bobcats, cougars, coyotes, and wolves all prey on deer sized animals so they compete with each other.
-Cougars, bear, and wolves all prey on elk sized animals so they compete with each other.

I was completely ignoring fighting over carcasses. They simply kill each other on sight if they have the advantage; with the exception of bears. Bears do need a little provocation and in turn, not many other of the others are bold enough to provoke a bear.
 
Last edited:
Jul 30, 2012
3,570
225
westmidlands
Get rid of the sheep, hunt deer. Its not like there is a shortage lamb meat in the world ! But they shouldnt be fed livestock. If africa can have vast reserves, so should europe !
 

dewi

Full Member
May 26, 2015
2,647
13
Cheshire
Sure... as well as eradication of their natural predators

Good point, and if the Norwegians excessively meddle, maybe they will suffer the same fate as Yellowstone. Or maybe that is exactly why they want to eliminate 70% of the wolves, so the remaining will keep some sort of balance. Who knows, well other than someone in Norway.

There was a documentary on a few days ago about an area in Eastern Europe that has been made a sort of safe zone and they're trying to get that area as close to its natural habitat as possible. Was a fascinating programme and really beautifully filmed.... There it was working, probably due to the low human population and lack of commercial interests. Elsewhere the same project might fail flat on its face.
 

dewi

Full Member
May 26, 2015
2,647
13
Cheshire
Dewi, yes i agree with alot of what your saying, but animals dont do it for money, or because they believe a differant fairy tale.(best leave that there.)

The animals aren't getting a pay packet at the end of each week? How the devil has that been allowed to happen in Europe... surely there is some sort of equal right legislation or directive?

This is pretty much what happened when Attenborough was in Africa... not a single one of those animals you see in the films is paid properly for their time and energies. There needs to be an Equity type organisation for animals... the RSPIETRAI organisation... Royal Society for the Protection and Interests of Equity Type Rights for Animals and Insects. Only problem I can think of with it, is where do the animals keep their Equity card to show to any visiting camera crews?
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,120
68
Florida
Sure... as well as eradication of their natural predators

We ARE their natural predators. That's the thing that gets overlooked. And just like the other predators, our instinct is to eliminate the competition.
 
Last edited:

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,120
68
Florida
Good point, and if the Norwegians excessively meddle, maybe they will suffer the same fate as Yellowstone. Or maybe that is exactly why they want to eliminate 70% of the wolves, so the remaining will keep some sort of balance. Who knows, well other than someone in Norway.

There was a documentary on a few days ago about an area in Eastern Europe that has been made a sort of safe zone and they're trying to get that area as close to its natural habitat as possible. Was a fascinating programme and really beautifully filmed.... There it was working, probably due to the low human population and lack of commercial interests. Elsewhere the same project might fail flat on its face.

"Safe zones" (also known as National Parks) work for some species. Others such as wolves simply have too large a range. That's the real trouble with the wolves in Yellowstone; they don't stay in the park. In theory those zones could work, if they're large enough.
 

Leshy

Full Member
Jun 14, 2016
2,389
57
Wiltshire
We ARE their natural predators. That's the thing that gets overlooked.
Yes sir. But we are not the only ones.
Hunting as a sport or for food is a personal preference and if methods and choice of prey are sustainable then I don't see a problem.

I do see a problem with mankind PERSECUTING and/or enslaving a particular species , for whatever reason... Profit or not.
Cetaceans are a flagrant example of this human "superiority" behaviour.
Keeping Orca in pools for our amusement.
Independently of the educational value that it may or may not contribute to our little minds.


What I'm trying to say is that there are better alternatives for this problem , and not using our grey matter and technology to solve this , seems barbaric and backwards to me...

Playing sounds of other wolf packs , ON or near the farms affected is not just a good idea, it works!
It's been proved in Poland , where the wolf is protected by law but still damaged farmers livestock.



If we didn't know any better , fair enough but the cull is just lazy and sad.



But hey, my opinion is just that....
 

KenThis

Settler
Jun 14, 2016
825
122
Cardiff
Your comments are true to a point, but highly oversimplified. Predators kill commonly kill other predatory species out of instinct.

I wasn't speaking of just the Florida ecosystem when I mentioned larger predators displacing smaller ones. I was talking of most of the middle latitudes of N.A. The prey of all predators I mentioned overlaps at least one step up and down the chain:
-Foxes, bobcats, and coyotes all prey on rabbit sized prey as well as birds so they compete with each other.
-Bobcats, cougars, coyotes, and wolves all prey on deer sized animals so they compete with each other.
-Cougars, bear, and wolves all prey on elk sized animals so they compete with each other.

I was completely ignoring fighting over carcasses. They simply kill each other on sight if they have the advantage; with the exception of bears. Bears do need a little provocation and in turn, not many other of the others are bold enough to provoke a bear.

I really can't speak for North America, as I don't know the specifics. Also I can't really speak for situations complicated by the action of humans or on the specific instances you know of, of one predator species killing another.
I can only speak generally because I only studied speciation and evolution generally.

At a gross oversimplification - but still relevant.
Imagine an island, it is 100 square miles of identical ecosystem.
Now imagine looking at 10 square miles of that ecosystem.
What is often found is a variation of the following, going from top to bottom, from Apex predator down through the heirarchy to prey species.
1 x A predator.
10 x B predator.
100 x C predator/prey.
1000 x D prey.
10,000 x E prey.
The actual numbers aren't important and neither are the number of levels in the system or the specific interactions.
The important thing to note is that the relative numbers of each species will be the same over the entire island and over time.
Generally we have reached a stable system with how many of each species are sustainable at each level.
This is because each species has a particular ecological niche, they are not in 'direct competition' as I mean it because although the two main predator species may hunt prey species D there are more than enough of prey species D to sustain both predator species. This has to be true because if there weren't then whichever species was best would survive and the predator species that was worse would not, or the prey species would go extinct (closely followed by the two predator species)

Obviously in a real situation there would be other interactions.
Predator A's diet may be 1% predator B, 9% predator/prey C, 70% prey D and 20% prey E.
Predator B's diet may be 5% predator C 25% prey D and 70% prey E.
Predator A will mainly hunt prey D, but will take other species as and when they become available.
Predator B will mainly hunt prey E, but will take other species if they can.

Also obviously the actual system is dynamic and can become infinitely more complex.
In the short term there can be fluctuations in numbers at particular levels that will have knock on effects on other levels. But because the system is stable these are only fluctuations and the system will end up becoming balanced once again.

What I've said can be taken as true for ecosystems in general. Unfortunately in real life things are often complicated by the actions of man.
Man can end up arbitrarily changing the numbers of different species or the ecosystem itself which can cause the system to be unbalanced or even fail.
(The video about wolves in yellowstone is a great example.)

Again I can't comment on specifics you know about or have witnessed but what you have termed 'displacement' is in my mind far more likely to be caused through 'unnatural' external pressures on the system by man. Or perhaps more likely is one of the mechanisms by which the stable system is maintained.
That is when you have seen (or know of) a predator species killing another it is in response to local and short term changes.

From the grossly oversimplified example above if Predator B species has a particularly good year and there are now 20 individuals in a particular 10 square miles then they are going to come into more contact with Predator species A. Therefore the natural instinct of predator A kicks in and it kills predator B individuals when it comes across them. Soon the number of predator B approaches 10, predator A no longer comes into contact with predator B and so the populations remain stable.

Anyway I hope I have explained myself more clearly. I don't think you're wrong and am not trying to discount what you've said.
In fact I think we're just looking at the system from two different vantage points, myself from the general from text books and lectures, whereas you clearly have a lot more experience of the specifics in real time on the ground. Obviously I make assumptions to simplify the system so I can better understand it and come at it from a completely different perspective to yourself.
 

Tengu

Full Member
Jan 10, 2006
13,031
1,642
51
Wiltshire
How do places like Finland and Sweden deal with wolves?

And does the shepherd have the moral right to protect his flock?
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE