Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The "rewilding" of carnivores

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The "rewilding" of carnivores

    Not specific to the Adirondacks, but here is the link to an article (NY Times) about the "rewilding" of wolves and other carnivores. Effects, where it can succeed, where not.



  • #2
    Originally posted by mphilli2 View Post
    Not specific to the Adirondacks, but here is the link to an article (NY Times) about the "rewilding" of wolves and other carnivores. Effects, where it can succeed, where not.





    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/16/s...av=bottom-well


    Interesting read. Ive heard hunting advocates talk about this subject as well, specifically the biological carrying capacity that exists, or doesn’t exist, in many areas where predators use to roam.

    I saw similar article in the ADK explorer with a yes versus no opinion piece about reintroducing the cougar to NY. The yes person stated that NY (including the ADK’s) has ample space and prey base for the cats, even suggesting that NY needs a predator like the cougar to control the deer #’s. The no person pointed out that the higher density of deer exists outside of ADK’s in western and central NY, which the cats would inevitably drift towards, causing problems.

    I agree with the no person on that issue: the ADK’s, and similar mature forests in the northeast, just don’t have the same prey populations in the same way that places like Montana, Wyoming and Idaho do.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • #3
      I agree with you, Bounder.

      The abject failure of the Lynx "rewilding" 30 years ago is instructional.

      The Cougar needs a larger, wilder territory than the Lynx. There is zero chance that a Cougar "rewilding" would work here. The "advocates" are just romantics. And it's fine to be a romantic, as long as they don't want to spend my money on it...

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm a romantic. The quest to make the existing environment conducive to a large predator is the direction that would benefit the ecosystem. Rather than say "it won't work" it would be better to say, "how can we make this work". Failure in said quest will still leave a much healthier ecosystem than which exist at present.
        "We must recognize our role as partners with the environment, rather than dominators, to maintain functioning ecosystems".
        Methinks maintaining is not enough, we need to revert what we have (think Boreas as wilderness) to a more holistic time. We have an opportunity of amelioration , every year it will only become harder to gain ground, wild ground.
        Listen to the howl of the wolf and heal thy spirit.
        "A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden

        Comment


        • #5
          I hate to say it, but I agree it's a bad idea as well (to reintroduce large predators in this area).

          One really only does need to look at the west to see that it's caused a number of issues with ranchers and they have much larger territories to roam. Adding them here would be an exercise in futility in how we keep them "where we want them" and have them "eat what we want them to eat". Household pets, small children, livestock... large cats and wolves will not care when it's an easier meal than trying to run down deer in big woods.

          There's a reason humans eradicated those species here. It may not be a good reason, but our population hasn't gotten any smaller and our wild lands just aren't big and remote enough for them to coexist.

          Comment


          • #6
            To make the ,” exsisiting environment conducive to large predators,”.

            When wolves and eastern Mtn. Lions did roam NY, ( and never in large numbers), there were NO coyotes east of the Mississippi. So for the romantic purists , you would have to eliminate the coyote population first. Good luck with that.

            Comment


            • #7
              Although invasive, I don't see the coyote as a problem. If anything they are filling a good niche. They aren't large and aggressive enough to be much of a bother for the things I mentioned, although I'm sure they'd get a small dog or cat if you left them out. They can't really take down healthy deer, they are omnivorous, and they adapt very well to suburban settings.

              The only issue I see for them is being another vector for rabies. I know others think they are a scurge and a pest, but I don't see it at all.

              Comment


              • #8
                I am what I am and thats all that I am. I may be a romantic but have enough realism not be labeled a purist. We will never eliminate all the invasives but our aim should stay true.
                I know wolf re-introduction is a long shot due to many obstacles. Cougars stand a better chance, slim but better.
                However, striving to make the environment conducive to large predators isn't so far fetched. Large predators need a healthy and robust environment. How can we go wrong achieving that end?
                "A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by geogymn View Post
                  Large predators need a healthy and robust environment. How can we go wrong achieving that end?
                  I don't thing there is anything wrong with striving towards a "healthy environment." We've certainly made a lot of progress in that regard.

                  A robust environment is a different story. You either have a robust enough ecosystem and prey base to support apex predators, or you don't. Short of abandoning much of NY's farm country and letting reintroduced predators have at it, I don't think that issue is something we can directly affect with a simple policy or law.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Anyone who thinks coyotes cannot take down a adult healthy deer is delusional. A 45 lb- 50 lb coyote not being able to kill a 120 lb deer ? 120 lb wolves kill 600 lb - 1500 lb , elk, moose and bison.

                    Yes, like my dog , they are omnivores , but given a choice between fruits and berries , they will choose red meat when available.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Tug Hill View Post
                      Anyone who thinks coyotes cannot take down a adult healthy deer is delusional. A 45 lb- 50 lb coyote not being able to kill a 120 lb deer ? 120 lb wolves kill 600 lb - 1500 lb , elk, moose and bison.

                      Yes, like my dog , they are omnivores , but given a choice between fruits and berries , they will choose red meat when available.
                      There's no real evidence, and a single wolf cannot take down anything that large unless it's completely spent.

                      Most coyote I have seen in the Adirondacks are small, like 20-30 lbs. A large coyote is probably a coywolf, and unless they are in a strong pack and running that deer to exhaustion, they aren't going to be able to take it.

                      You also know that wolf hunts (and coyote hunts) are highly unsuccessful? They are lucky to get something 1/10 chases. It's probably less in heavily wooded areas.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Well friend, you need to pass your theory on to the coyotes on the Tug Hill Plateau.
                        I manage 30,000 acres of timberland in the core of the plateau, have seen many coyote killed adult deer , summer - winter. It doesn’t take much to run a deer to exhaustion in deep snow pack, especially when the crust of the snow will hold a coyote but not a deer.
                        But coyotes real impact is on fawns in spring. Couple that with a now healthy B Bear population on the plateau, and the fawn recruitment level is less than 1 .

                        If you are right about our coyotes actually being coy- wolves,( and they are much heavier than20-30 lbs) then we already have a large predators here, no need to re-introduce grey wolves ?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Tug Hill View Post
                          Well friend, you need to pass your theory on to the coyotes on the Tug Hill Plateau.
                          I manage 30,000 acres of timberland in the core of the plateau, have seen many coyote killed adult deer , summer - winter. It doesn’t take much to run a deer to exhaustion in deep snow pack, especially when the crust of the snow will hold a coyote but not a deer.
                          But coyotes real impact is on fawns in spring. Couple that with a now healthy B Bear population on the plateau, and the fawn recruitment level is less than 1 .

                          If you are right about our coyotes actually being coy- wolves,( and they are much heavier than20-30 lbs) then we already have a large predators here, no need to re-introduce grey wolves ?
                          Sounds good to me. Our deer population is already rampant. Maybe the coyotes will help control them more downstate where they are really over populated (I don't know much about Tug Hill). And FWIW those coyotes are selecting the weakest deer - the strongest will be able to outlast them. And of course they will go after fawns. Wolves and cats would do the same. That's how it works. I think it is highly possible that the coyotes in TH are coywolves though - they are migrating from Canada and that seems like a likely habitat for them.

                          And I do agree, and that's why I said coyotes are filling a good niche. It just so happens that hunters don't agree because they are in direct competition for the same food sources. But we have to realize that the deer population is not livestock, they are wild animals, and if it comes to the point where coyotes take a significant portion of that resource, we'll have to limit the number of deer taken by humans.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by montcalm View Post
                            Sounds good to me. Our deer population is already rampant. Maybe the coyotes will help control them more downstate where they are really over populated (I don't know much about Tug Hill). And FWIW those coyotes are selecting the weakest deer - the strongest will be able to outlast them. And of course they will go after fawns. Wolves and cats would do the same. That's how it works. I think it is highly possible that the coyotes in TH are coywolves though - they are migrating from Canada and that seems like a likely habitat for them.

                            And I do agree, and that's why I said coyotes are filling a good niche. It just so happens that hunters don't agree because they are in direct competition for the same food sources. But we have to realize that the deer population is not livestock, they are wild animals, and if it comes to the point where coyotes take a significant portion of that resource, we'll have to limit the number of deer taken by humans.
                            Come to the Adirondacks and see just how abundant the deer aren't The number of deer taken by humans already are limited.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by geogymn View Post
                              I'm a romantic. The quest to make the existing environment conducive to a large predator is the direction that would benefit the ecosystem.
                              Romance and alpha predator recovery/viability in the ADKs are utterly compatible. The NYS DEC's updated wolf and puma assessments for the 2015 state wildlife actions plans cite plenty of good big predator habitat not just in the ADKs, but throughout NY state.

                              MN, WI, and the MI UP have supported as many as 3,700 wolves in habitats, prey and human densities comparable to the ADKs. Italy, the same size as CA with twice as many people, supports 700 wolves down the entire peninsula (as well as a small population of European grizzlies two hours from Rome). Spain hosts between 2,000-3,000 wolves, more than the entire western US wolf population. I've tracked wolves in the Maritime Alps thirty miles from 6 million people in Nice/Monaco.

                              There are 70 adult pumas and roughly 100 kittens living in the San Francisco peninsula between the cities of San Francisco, San Jose, and Santa Cruz, some with home ranges I've tracked in San Francisco and Silicon Valley suburbs. The habitat and human densities are similar to Rockland/Orange Counties down-state. At least 6 peer-reviewed puma habitat studies for the East (one for the ADKs) and Midwest have been published, not to mention the dozen reintroduction locations in the Southeast/Florida cited in the panther recovery plan. Public attitude studies for panther reintroductions including hunters, anglers and residents within the proposed reintroduction areas averaged 80% in favor.

                              20 Texas pumas were test-released in southern GA for two years twenty years ago. They did fine. We've learned much since the lynx failure.

                              Proximity to humans and human development is not the limiting issue with respect to alpha predator recovery --- persecution is.
                              Last edited by Walker; 03-25-2018, 11:46 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X