Rewilding

[wildfowler.250]

By and large, they are.

The LEGAL reintroductions have been extremely cautious and data driven. The LEGAL beaver reintroduction in Scotland was designed to be a phased process, starting with a site that was isolated, so they data could be collected on the impacts.

That got totally left behind once the illegal introductions started.

Looking further afield, you mention wolves and elk in North America. The data there are complex. If you take a purely ecological perspective, and ignore the human costs, there is quite good evidence that there is a net positive effect on the ecosystems. That makes sense: these are systems that evolved with predators in place that regulated herbivore populations. In the absence of predators, we need to manage the herbivores. As we see with deer in the UK, we’re not always entirely effective at this, and it’s expensive.

Of course you can’t ignore the human cost: large predators and agriculture don’t mix well. So then the challenge becomes working out how you manage that balance. I don’t think anyone wants to completely eradicate the predators. So once you’ve decided you do want some to survive, you’ve got to accept that some conflict is inevitable, and then set about figuring out how you deal with this.

In the UK, predators are probably unrealistic. However, think about it this way: we are rightly horrified at the absurd amount of money the Scottish government is throwing at deer control. At the same time, much sheep farming is maintained by subsidy. So - you could imagine a situation where you introduce wolves, who do your deer control for free, and simply compensate any livestock loss. It wouldn’t take much to figure out a system that works, if people decided they wanted it to.

Forgive me because I’m also cooking dinner so it’s brief: I think a lot of the Idaho hunters hate wolves. I think they’ve massively reduced populations of elk. Am I right in saying that a wolf takes 7 elk a year? It would fairly hammer the uk deer population.
But then at least Idaho issue tags. That wouldn’t happen here. But from what I’ve seen online, they’re more of a chance shooting than actually spot and stalkable.

They are connected, but my view is:
A. Big business are driving "rewinding " as a cover story for carbon offset project. This is the main event.
B. Reintroduction is a fringe group, who are jumping on the rewinding theme. Big business are happy with the extra noise that demonised deer and the claim that deer are out of control.
I doubt wolf reintroduction will happen, there aren't enough deer to feed them.

M

Probably true. Fringe group shouting loudest.

I’m all for increased green areas / replanting. Although a bit laughable compared to all the flights and factories across the world really.

My apologies as I was meaning this thread more to lynx and wolves but it’s interesting to hear about the linked tree dynamic

 

[Beej]

"Rewilding, wilding, restoration ecology " are all terms associated with conservation based land management practices. Nothing scary about them, but need to be science based and in areas suitable to support such projects. In Southern Africa, virgin bush was cleared of wildlife back in the 1900s up till the 1970s and turned into large cattle ranches. As a result the areas were severly degraded over time, in terms of soil health and biodiversity, the cattle then lost condition and the farmers felt the negative imapct in their pockets. Then in the 1990s and up till present day these cattle ranches have now removed the cattle and once again reintroduced wildlife. This has had a positive economic impact in terms of job creation and revenue generating businesses such as tourism enterprises and hunting and the areas have once again become rich in biodiversity.
At the end of the day its all down to the Economics of the time. More animals and less people in wild areas is always a good thing, however turning productive farmland land into non productive wastelands purely to tap into a grant does not make economical sense.

 

[slider]

Folks where has all this rewilding rubbish come from? I can get that folk want to plant more trees - sure. But the wolves and lynx brigade seems to be a combination of folk who are 1) anti hunting and 2) want to turn the highlands into a zoo.

spelt it wrong - the word is rewinding

 

[Mungo]

Forgive me because I’m also cooking dinner so it’s brief: I think a lot of the Idaho hunters hate wolves. I think they’ve massively reduced populations of elk.

It’s more complicated than that.

The first thing to understand is the historical context, which is that at the start of the 20th century, all the large mammals in that area had been hunted either to extinction or very close to it. No wolves left, very few elk.

Hunting was restricted, and subjected to very tight controls: tag system, no commercial sale of meat, very short seasons, tight bag limits.

The elk population bounced back fast, as herbivores do. By the last quarter of the 20th century, they were probably unnaturally large numbers of elk, and there was evidence that they were degrading the habitat in the particularly dense areas. They were also used to moving through a landscape without predators, so movement patterns were very different to ‘natural’.

That is the point of reference for a lot of hunters: loads of elk out in the open, on low ground, in daylight.

The reintroduction of wolves changed that, dramatically. It has not markedly changed the overall number of elk, but it has changed where they are, how they move, and how easy they are to hunt.

In a UK context, if you put aside the risk to livestock for the sake of argument, adding wolves is not completely crazy. The Scottish government is paying silly money to shoot deer. Wolves would do that for free.

I very much doubt we will ever reintroduce wolves here. I can’t see the various factions involved in managing the countryside agreeing on a way to manage the risk and compensate for livestock losses. Lynx on the other hand might be feasible, in some places. I can see a niche for them in places with a lot of forestry and few or no sheep (any rewilding advocate who claims they don’t eat sheep can be dismissed as a liar or hopelessly stupid).

 

[3red dogs]

Our local estate seems to have given up on managing for wildlife.
For the last 20 years , 3 (various) keepers haven’t managed to produce enough wild game for a small driven day.
As an aside, we now find that rewiding( beavers) and I am advised, reds, are on the cards.
No running water available and grounds unsuitable for reds. We do even have roe or fallow yet.

 

[Heym SR20]

It’s more complicated than that.

The first thing to understand is the historical context, which is that at the start of the 20th century, all the large mammals in that area had been hunted either to extinction or very close to it. No wolves left, very few elk.

Hunting was restricted, and subjected to very tight controls: tag system, no commercial sale of meat, very short seasons, tight bag limits.

The elk population bounced back fast, as herbivores do. By the last quarter of the 20th century, they were probably unnaturally large numbers of elk, and there was evidence that they were degrading the habitat in the particularly dense areas. They were also used to moving through a landscape without predators, so movement patterns were very different to ‘natural’.

That is the point of reference for a lot of hunters: loads of elk out in the open, on low ground, in daylight.

The reintroduction of wolves changed that, dramatically. It has not markedly changed the overall number of elk, but it has changed where they are, how they move, and how easy they are to hunt.

In a UK context, if you put aside the risk to livestock for the sake of argument, adding wolves is not completely crazy. The Scottish government is paying silly money to shoot deer. Wolves would do that for free.

I very much doubt we will ever reintroduce wolves here. I can’t see the various factions involved in managing the countryside agreeing on a way to manage the risk and compensate for livestock losses. Lynx on the other hand might be feasible, in some places. I can see a niche for them in places with a lot of forestry and few or no sheep (any rewilding advocate who claims they don’t eat sheep can be dismissed as a liar or hopelessly stupid).

£30m odd is being spent on deer control by Scottish government. Take just £1m and pay £200 for every sheep killed by a wolf that’s 5,000 sheep / lambs. Go to £1,000 thats 1,000 sheep compensated.

Plenty of sheep and goats are raised in lands where there are big predators. They have shepherds and big dogs to look after the sheep.

Sheep were never really a highland animal. The highlands were cattle country. Sheep were brought in by the lairds who got rid of all the tenants to make way for sheep for wool to supply the mills in lancashire, Borders etc. They didn’t do that well, and when Australia, New Zealand and Argentina opened up they quickly took over - much cheaper to produce.

That’s when the likes of the Duke of Sutherland etc switched to selling Scotland to Victorian gentlemen creating the sporting estates that we all know.

The bit I don’t get with rewilding is that by creating more wild habitat, pockets of woodland etc, we have created the ideal conditions for deer to thrive and prosper. Yet they are treated by many as vermin.

I grew up in South Oxfordshire. 30 / 40 years ago the only deer were in Stonor Deer park. Other than that there were no deer. Now Roe, Fallow and muntjac are widespread. Large acreages of prime agricultural land are now scrubland / rewilded / or laid out for commercial pheasant shooting. The latter in particular is ideal for deer and provides lots of feed throughout the winter - just look at deer prints around any phaesant feeder.

 

[willie_gunn]

Another day, another illegal reintroduction……

Dartmoor wild boar sightings prompt suspicions of guerrilla rewilding

Dog walker’s close encounter prompts debate over whether the animals, once native to UK, should remain

www.theguardian.com

 

[Mungo]

Another day, another illegal reintroduction……

Dartmoor wild boar sightings prompt suspicions of guerrilla rewilding

Dog walker’s close encounter prompts debate over whether the animals, once native to UK, should remain

www.theguardian.com

I think the key word here is ‘illegal’.

There is a theory among rewilders/restoration ecologists that the recent spate of illegal releases is actually a deliberate attempt by anti rewilders to discredit reintroduction. The lynx and boar at Kingussie were so spectacularly stupid, caught the headlines to luridly, and appear to have lead the SNP to firmly reject the idea. No one who actually understood the slightest bit about the ecology of these creatures and who was serious about reintroduction would have done it that way.

 

[yellabelly]

Folks where has all this rewilding rubbish come from? I can get that folk want to plant more trees - sure. But the wolves and lynx brigade seems to be a combination of folk who are 1) anti hunting and 2) want to turn the highlands into a zoo.


Surely these discussions should be 1) science based and 2) decided between locals and farmers who will be most affected.

Ignoring the fact that the biggest deer issues are fallow down south and suburban roe - none of which likely in the proposed wolf catchment area


Thoughts? Is it Facebook warriors that’s now dictating how we manage wildlife..

Will wolves and Lynx appreciate living among solar panels,the way we are going that will be the only bit of land without houses
just a thought

 

[BenBhoy]

It’s just very trendy for the shooting community to get its knickers in a twist because they love to erect a lefty straw man and work up a good head of righteous indignation.

 

[BenBhoy]

I'm sure there are some people (on all/both sides) who are "informed" that something is either right wing racist bastard's or lefty woke nonsense, and then no matter how much of a good idea it is, or how much they might actually agree with it, they simply refuse to.

 

[willie_gunn]

I think the key word here is ‘illegal’.

There is a theory among rewilders/restoration ecologists that the recent spate of illegal releases is actually a deliberate attempt by anti rewilders to discredit reintroduction. The lynx and boar at Kingussie were so spectacularly stupid, caught the headlines to luridly, and appear to have lead the SNP to firmly reject the idea. No one who actually understood the slightest bit about the ecology of these creatures and who was serious about reintroduction would have done it that way.

Of course it could also be that the rewilders/restoration ecologists are simply trying to deflect attention away from the lunatic fringes of the causes that they themselves legally support.

Let's not pretend that this doesn't happen - indeed we see it within the field sports lobby too, where we have gamekeepers who illegally persecute birds of prey, or huntsmen who continue to throw live foxes to hounds. Wouldn't it be so convenient if we could say that these were actually false flag operations committed by the antis in a deliberate attempt to discredit us?

What will be interesting will be to see the results of any investigation. That is, if there is an investigation or if, as with the illegal release of beavers, the authorities prefer instead to turn a blind eye to it.

 

[Mungo]

The views and attitude put forward by Peter Cairns in the film The Last Keeper show there's absolutely no need for a lefty straw man, he's the real thing.

He’s an extremist, and not representative of restoration ecology in general.

Do you define an entire movement by its extreme advocates? That’s very nearly the textbook definition of straw manning.

 

[willie_gunn]

That’s very nearly the textbook definition of straw manning.

Presumably you would also agree, then, that this is very nearly the textbook definition of a conspiracy theory?

There is a theory among rewilders/restoration ecologists that the recent spate of illegal releases is actually a deliberate attempt by anti rewilders to discredit reintroduction.

 

[Mungo]

Of course it could also be that the rewilders/restoration ecologists are simply trying to deflect attention away from the lunatic fringes of the causes that they themselves legally support.

I don’t think it’s that.

I have pretty good links with the major figures in rewiliding in Scotland. They’re all appalled by the Kingussie releases because of the damage that was done to the political capital they’d been generating.

If you were to deliberately set out to wreck the reputation and prospects of reintroductions, it’s hard to think how you’d do it more effectively.

I actually don’t think this is what’s happened. I think the lynx were most likely dumped by someone who had them illegally and couldn’t cope. They chose the site precisely because it was near the zoo - it was equivalent to someone putting a box of kittens on the vet’s doorstep.

The pigs are harder to explain. Though given how common they’re becoming not far from there, I’m not sure why there was such a fuss made.

 

[Mungo]

Presumably you would also agree, then, that this is very nearly the textbook definition of a conspiracy theory?

Absolutely, no question.

The point is that the lynx releases were so damaging to ‘the cause’ that they’re reeling to try to understand why someone would do it.

 

[Rasputin]

In many cases it is commercially driven.
See post #10 by @MAH
And the much-quoted Knepp rewilding project was very definitely commercially driven, but not for carbon offsets.

But aside from that, we can all do our own little bit as per post #9 by @Reloader708

I would argue that it’s 100% not commercial it’s a marketplace solely created because some government tosspost said they have do it rather than want to as it’s a good money maker.

So as a stalker, you’d be happy to see all remaining semi-natural spaces turned over to intensive commercial exploitation?

And you don’t think it’s worth investing anything at all in restoring degraded areas once they’ve finished being used for industry or intensive agriculture?

Rewilding in its basic sense just means taking a bit of land that is no longer being used for intensive commercial purposes and attempting to restore it to a more stable system that has more biodiversity and which offsets the environmental degradation necessarily happening elsewhere. It’s a sensible and ultimately essential tool in any plan for managing land at a large scale.

There are places where the most that any realistic manager can hope for is restoring some of the vegetation and reducing the detritus left behind from previous use - something like a former inner city factory site. There are other places where it’s entirely reasonable to aim for an almost complete recovery of a nearly prehuman ecosystem - though that obviously needs an enormous amount of space and few people.

It’s just very trendy for the shooting community to get its knickers in a twist because they love to erect a lefty straw man and work up a good head of righteous indignation.

As a person I would be against concreting over the landscape forget being a stalker but as a tax payer it boils my **** that money gets wasted on parts of it.

But the OP specifically mentions apex predators not replanting a meadow. Interestingly the more rewinding that’s done the more deer we will have who are currently public enemy number one.

There’s a distinct difference between regenerative ag ie soil , flora/fauna protection of native species etc to reintroduction.

Reintroduction is just drivel funded by tax payers and it irks me. Why the hell do we need beavers all the stats and data just make me think someone’s manipulating it for their own ideals. Regenerative practices crack on healthy soils are the lifeblood of any country and everything starts there.

All my opinion of course but Iv done carbon projects for large corporates and seen rewilded wolves when I lived in Europe.

 

[angusb1]

He’s an extremist, and not representative of restoration ecology in general.

Do you define an entire movement by its extreme advocates? That’s very nearly the textbook definition of straw manning.

I think we're saying the same thing here. I chose him to show how extreme some of these people's views and attitudes are. My point was exactly that he is pretty much the same as what anyone would define as a straw man.

 

[willie_gunn]

Absolutely, no question.

The point is that the lynx releases were so damaging to ‘the cause’ that they’re reeling to try to understand why someone would do it.

Perhaps they should simply accept that “the cause” is a broad church, and that there are those within it who will adopt guerrilla tactics because they feel reintroduction by official means takes too long and has achieved too little?

As you said, there are extremists supporting the cause who, whilst they may not reflect the mainstream position, want to see reintroductions whatever the cost.

It is sadly all too reminiscent of the animal rights movement.

 

[VSS]

I would argue that it’s 100% not commercial it’s a marketplace solely created because some government tosspost said they have do it rather than want to as it’s a good money maker.
.

If you're the landowner, and you're doing it because the financial incentives make it a better money maker than farming sheep or shooting grouse then it is 100% a commercial decision.
Owning and managing land is not significantly different from running any other kind of business.