They ate all the deer

I bet the wolves eat until there's no food left then either die, or swim to the next land.

At least when humans are in control of a species, there is conservation involved.
So here's my comment about conservation.
I think you're misconstruing controlling and impacting.

Your mistake was the comment about more conservationists, not as much with your subsequent arguments. "We conservationists" are by many measures rather worthless, spineless, and ineffective. We've failed miserably is most regards with only a handful of positive examples that we all point to and pat ourselves on the back.
I'm not patting anyone on the back. I'm saying current day, compared to wolves, humans wouldn't kill all the deer on the island. Conservation is involved. If conservation wasn't involved, there would be no interest in protecting a resource such as wild game.

Most people care about preserving hunting as a whole. That includes protecting the animals. No one cares more about the elk herds or deer herds than hunters do.
 
Tillamook.

So this reads to me like the Trophic Cascade crowd is going to be very excited about this article.

“This allows wolves to remain abundant even as they cause large herbivore populations to decline. That is, sea otters may allow wolves to maintain large herbivores at lower densities, which has implications for vegetation and the animals that depend on it (bees, birds, bears for floral and berry resources, for example), across a huge coastline that will be eventually occupied by sea otters as their recovery continues,” Levi adds.
 
Couple good articles on moose in the bighorns. Without human help they would not be there, so we are not all bad.


 

Forum statistics

Threads
114,027
Messages
2,041,749
Members
36,436
Latest member
kandee
Back
Top