Rewilding America (your thoughts)

[fourfive8]

Can only be done to the extent the size of the "wilderness" will allow. Otherwise there will be forever a requirement for state and/or federal control and refereeing of problems and conflicts. Even Jellystone is not quite large enough for completely problem free, hands-off housing of "wildness" indicators like wolves, bison and grizzlies. They will require management, in perpetuity, as they will forever occasionally leave the park boundaries or stomp or eat some touri within the boundaries. Most designated "wilderness" areas in the CONUS simply are not big enough. The closest to truly "wild" areas in the US are in AK, whether they are designated wilderness or not. The official designation of land status doesn't matter. The size and diversity of the wild area is what matters biologically..

 

[Ray B]

The problem with "animal rights" is in the definition of the animals deserving of those rights. The current batch of politicians/media/activists are over the edge as far as any constraints so I suspect that if they start giving rights to animals, very quickly the eligible animals will quickly expand beyond the dogs, cats, horses, song birds and the other animals presently on the do not hassle list. It won't be long before mice, ants and roaches have rights, followed by mosquitos and gnats. Within a short time they will expand things down to single cell organisms. Then the line between animal and plant gets very vague. So then the tights will ascend the plant order of life. Be prepared for an order that prohibits the mowing of your lawn or pruning your trees. As I noted earlier, I'm glad I'm old.

 

[Chickenfarmers]

Don't see why not, If kids don't have to go to some fancy zoo or travel abroad to see some animals that aren't here anymore than i think it would be nice. Very nice to have this animals in an increasing population roaming free.

 

[BourbonTrail]

On a personal level, I would love it.

However, on a practical level, I think it would cause more headaches than it’s worth (i.e., wolves anywhere, elk in the east, desert bighorns re-intros, Non-native species: Oryx in NM, and pigs (looking at you Tennessee ) to name a few).

 

[curtism1234]

For decades, I have been a big advocate for re-introducing wolves even if it means lessening the bag limit for hunters. So I am in favor of bringing back certain animals that humans killed off provided human safety is not a concern and the ecosystem can still support it. Wolf packs prove little danger to humans.
A North American lion? No
A American cheetah? Probably

Wooley mammoth / rhino? I think Alaskan Parks can support them. Global warming at this point probably would not be detrimental to their survival in the same manner the polar bear is currently struggling due to ice loss.

I also think cloning is a way to expand pure bloodlines in existing animals. Very very few bison are of pure bloodline. If you can clone instead of introducing domestic cattle bloodlines, I think that is preferred.

 

[mark-hunter]

For me, rewilding America, would be full reintroduction of american bison, to its historyc range, followed by same for: grizly, cougar, white tail deer, caribou, elk, wolves etc But bison is the key.
My perception of when America became "tamed and civilised" is basically the period when large bison herds were wiped out.

 

[Rocked and Loaded]

What have been the issues with re-introducing borregos?

On a personal level, I would love it.

However, on a practical level, I think it would cause more headaches than it’s worth (i.e., wolves anywhere, elk in the east, desert bighorns re-intros, Non-native species: Oryx in NM, and pigs (looking at you Tennessee ) to name a few).

 

[Red Leg]

For decades, I have been a big advocate for re-introducing wolves even if it means lessening the bag limit for hunters. So I am in favor of bringing back certain animals that humans killed off provided human safety is not a concern and the ecosystem can still support it. Wolf packs prove little danger to humans.
A North American lion? No
A American cheetah? Probably

Wooley mammoth / rhino? I think Alaskan Parks can support them. Global warming at this point probably would not be detrimental to their survival in the same manner the polar bear is currently struggling due to ice loss.

I also think cloning is a way to expand pure bloodlines in existing animals. Very very few bison are of pure bloodline. If you can clone instead of introducing domestic cattle bloodlines, I think that is preferred.

Polar bears aren't struggling. There is considerable data that their numbers have steadily increased in recent decades in spite of climate alarmist claims.

Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000)

It’s long past time for polar bear specialists to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate that will never be achieved and determine a reasonable and credible ‘bes…

polarbearscience.com

This is an anti-hunting/ climate alarmist "fact check" piece that is doing its best to hide and minimize the trend.

Polar Bear Population - FactCheck.org

Q: Are there three times as many polar bears in the Arctic now as there were in the 1970s? A: The population of polar bears today is larger than it was in the 1970s, due mainly to legislation banning polar bear hunting, but exact numbers are unclear. We couldn’t find any figures showing that the...

www.factcheck.org

 

[BourbonTrail]

What have been the issues with re-introducing borregos?

Mostly that people botch the re-intro and nearly the whole herd (borregos = sheep for everyone who didn’t catch that) got eaten by mountain lions, and then they have pros come and snuff out the lions (This happened on Mt. Lemmon in Tucson). Point is: It’s not always about the animal causing the issue, but it’s always more complicated than everyone assumes.

 

[curtism1234]

Polar bears aren't struggling. There is considerable data that their numbers have steadily increased in recent decades in spite of climate alarmist claims.

Yes, the population grew significantly in the 60's and 70's but have remained pretty much flat the past 30-40 years (with reports of decline in recent years in certain areas). Any slight increase in numbers are a result of a better means of an accurate count than a true increase in bears (population in the 80's were 25k, 2010's were 22-30k, 2020 is about 30k). With artic ice receding in alarming record amounts, it is projected a 33% decline in population in the next 30 years.

 

[Hunter4752001]

While there is a current 'conservation' fad about re-introducing predator populations, one issue that doesn't receive attention is that of mega herbivores. Mega fauna occupied a necessary biological niche in most places around the world. They prevented the forests being clogged by excessive growth, created open areas where other species could flourish and generally ensured a healthy environment. They are believed to have largely died out around the time the first people arrived. (Lets put aside the question of what caused what). Many of the early peoples used fire to thin the forests and create an environment suitable for the game they hunted. In so doing they effectively took over the role that the mega fauna had performed. Scroll forward thousands of years and we now have a situation where the mega fauna are gone and forest burning isn't practiced. The current forest are not natural environments they are simply the result of very recent land management practices.

Traveling in Alaska and western Canada and talking with local guides, I saw the same thing that I observed deer hunting in my own country. The remaining forest areas were overgrown and choked to such an extent that wildlife had difficulty finding grazing habitat and in some places even being able to move through it. A consequence is that the remaining animals often congregated in the more cleared areas on roadsides. More accidents, but to the uninformed it looked like high population numbers simply because they were located where they could be seen

A very real challenge to wildlife management will be to either re-introduce large herbivores (even if it means non-indigenous species) or develop the expertise to conduct cool burning to open out forest areas.

 

[Cervus elaphus]

On a personal level, I would love it.

However, on a practical level, I think it would cause more headaches than it’s worth (i.e., wolves anywhere, elk in the east, desert bighorns re-intros, Non-native species: Oryx in NM, and pigs (looking at you Tennessee ) to name a few).

"I Legend"

 

[flatwater bill]

My 5 year old granddaughter asked me this same question last week. I told her I was working on a Flux Capacitor...... think I got that one. But whether a Werewolf could beat a vampire in a fair fight, or what makes some zombies fast and some slow?......I am still working on those. ..............FWB

 

[Cervus elaphus]

My 5 year old granddaughter asked me this same question last week. I told her I was working on a Flux Capacitor...... think I got that one. But whether a Werewolf could beat a vampire in a fair fight, or what makes some zombies fast and some slow?......I am still working on those. ..............FWB

I always thought zombies travelled at the same speed i.e. a dead heat.
p.s. My flux capacitor is down on power since Coke went Woke and I'm using Pepsi cans and plastic straws.

 

[Cervus elaphus]

"I Legend"

That should read "I am Legend". I liked the previous version "The Omega Man" with Charlton Heston better. There was an earlier version iirc with Vincent Price

 

[Cervus elaphus]

While there is a current 'conservation' fad about re-introducing predator populations, one issue that doesn't receive attention is that of mega herbivores. Mega fauna occupied a necessary biological niche in most places around the world. They prevented the forests being clogged by excessive growth, created open areas where other species could flourish and generally ensured a healthy environment. They are believed to have largely died out around the time the first people arrived. (Lets put aside the question of what caused what). Many of the early peoples used fire to thin the forests and create an environment suitable for the game they hunted. In so doing they effectively took over the role that the mega fauna had performed. Scroll forward thousands of years and we now have a situation where the mega fauna are gone and forest burning isn't practiced. The current forest are not natural environments they are simply the result of very recent land management practices.

Traveling in Alaska and western Canada and talking with local guides, I saw the same thing that I observed deer hunting in my own country. The remaining forest areas were overgrown and choked to such an extent that wildlife had difficulty finding grazing habitat and in some places even being able to move through it. A consequence is that the remaining animals often congregated in the more cleared areas on roadsides. More accidents, but to the uninformed it looked like high population numbers simply because they were located where they could be seen

A very real challenge to wildlife management will be to either re-introduce large herbivores (even if it means non-indigenous species) or develop the expertise to conduct cool burning to open out forest areas.

In NZ areas where there are a lot blackberries, property owners/farmers put cattle and goats into the area. The cattle barge through and open up spaces inside the blackberry "bomas" and the goats get in to eat and kill off the growth. A good example of teamwork and with the blackberry gone, the grass comes up for the cattle. The downside is I love the wild blackberries, fresh and in jam.
Further, in Australia where pre-summer burning of forest floor fuel is prevented (thankyou greens) that's where the horrendous bush fires happen with thousands of animals killed (koalas e.g.). In the forests and national parks, 4WD clubs used to keep the tracks open which gave firefighters access during the fire season, then in some areas 4WD clubs were banned because "they were damaging the environment" with the consequence that the fire trucks could no longer get through the overgrown tracks and the rest is history. The green "environmentalist" crowd are not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

 

[Deleted member 53080]

For decades, I have been a big advocate for re-introducing wolves even if it means lessening the bag limit for hunters. So I am in favor of bringing back certain animals that humans killed off provided human safety is not a concern and the ecosystem can still support it. Wolf packs prove little danger to humans.
A North American lion? No
A American cheetah? Probably

Wooley mammoth / rhino? I think Alaskan Parks can support them. Global warming at this point probably would not be detrimental to their survival in the same manner the polar bear is currently struggling due to ice loss.

I also think cloning is a way to expand pure bloodlines in existing animals. Very very few bison are of pure bloodline. If you can clone instead of introducing domestic cattle bloodlines, I think that is preferred.

The other side of the wolf pack reintroduction (to historic native ranges) coin, and the grizzly one for that matter, is the threat they pose to domesticated livestock in rural, agrarian communities/areas. Sure they can put them in state/national parks but how long before they get out? I don’t mean any offense to you personally but these are terribly irrational ideas developed by largely left leaning, mostly urban and suburban people who are out of touch with reality and could care less what the ramifications of their actions would be. They’re fine where they are. Leave em be. Or as mentioned earlier in the thread they could release them in leftist cities and see how good an idea they think it is then

 

[Cervus elaphus]

The other side of the wolf pack reintroduction (to historic native ranges) coin, and the grizzly one for that matter, is the threat they pose to domesticated livestock in rural, agrarian communities/areas. Sure they can put them in state/national parks but how long before they get out? I don’t mean any offense to you personally but these are terribly irrational ideas developed by largely left leaning, mostly urban and suburban people who are out of touch with reality and could care less what the ramifications of their actions would be. They’re fine where they are. Leave em be. Or as mentioned earlier in the thread they could release them in leftist cities and see how good an idea they think it is then

Nicely put. I was thinking about that very clever movie "12 Monkeys" with Bruce Willis

 

[Ike85123]

I think it would make an interesting real life study. Arizona is 73mil acres , most is unusable desert. In comparison, kruger is only 5mil acres. It wouldn't have to be krugee size, but large. Sit back and see how the ecosystems change. If all else fails, the us would atleast have a kick @$$ safari park ! Lol

 

[CoElkHunter]

For me, rewilding America, would be full reintroduction of american bison, to its historyc range, followed by same for: grizly, cougar, white tail deer, caribou, elk, wolves etc But bison is the key.
My perception of when America became "tamed and civilised" is basically the period when large bison herds were wiped out.

+1. I would like to see bison mostly everywhere where they were historically. I find it interesting that wolves are mentioned quite often as a reintroduction species, but not a word about the bison. I think if wolves are introduced somewhere, then bison should be required too, or neither species. I would think this could be a legal argument to prevent wolves from being introduced without the bison?
Oh yeah, and written into the reintroduction law, would be when their numbers reach a certain threshold, they are required to be managed through controlled hunting seasons.