Return of big horn sheep to their former habitat

Almost all funded by hunting to. The article states that without hunters conservation would suffer.

If interest in hunting dwindles, these experts warn, conservation projects may need a broader base of financial and logistical support.
Click to expand...
 
True, the hunting associations have demonstrable impact on conservation of wild ovid populations in US. To my mind, the basis is also good science in terms of sustainable usage an off-take (age classes, sex et al ...) all benefitting good population management and thus better assurance and recovery rates.

BTW: why is wolf conservation not working in the SW US states?
(as you all know the Mexican wolf population and the recovery program are still dealing with dangerously low numbers and frequent calls for eradication or retrieval of re-introduced wolves and - packs???
 
The Mexican wolf population is not part of an active recovery program (yet), but strictly has been managed as an experimental population (leading up to an expanded program) until very recently. If you re-read my response in this thread from a few months back, I explained the reason for this and essentially why the population has low numbers.

http://www.zoochat.com/65/mexican-wolf-recovery-plan-expanding-so-342000/

In terms of the wolf politics, USFWS worked exclusively with a Native American reservation and people living near or on US forest property. It was my understanding that they did not seek stakeholders on a large scale, just those in this small region where the wolves would be released. As a whole, most Americans in western states do not support native carnivore management and prefer eradication because they essentially fear the carnivorous mammals.
 
gerenuk said:
As a whole, most Americans in western states do not support native carnivore management and prefer eradication because they essentially fear the carnivorous mammals.
Click to expand...

I think that this statement is not entirely true. There is a great constituency for native carnivore restoration on the West Coast. People were very excited when a wolf returned to California for the first time and the wildlife department has been actively planning for their return. I think that the same is true in Oregon and Washington. It is true that in the rural west there is much antipathy towards wolves, but a lot of that is wrapped up in general anti-government sentiment that is not shared by people in urban areas or who do not hold anti-government views.
 
Last edited:
DavidBrown said:
I think that this statement is not entirely true. There is a great constituency for native carnivore restoration on the West Coast. People were very excited when a wolf returned to California for the first time and the wildlife department has been actively planning for their return. I think that the same is true in Oregon and Washington. It is true that in the rural west there is much antipathy towards wolves, but a lot of that is wrapped up in general anti-government sentiment that is not shared by people in urban areas or who do not hold anti-government views.
Click to expand...

I would say its more than general anti-government sentiment, a lot of it is because it is seen as a threat to livelihoods, which is a legitimate concern. It's truly a very complicated issue, particularly in my home state of Idaho.

As far as Mexican wolves, I'm not sure what gerenuk said in the other post, but essentially it boils down to space. Wolves increase their population by expanding range, not by increasing density. The experimental population in New Mexico and Arizona is really boxed in, with wolves not allowed to leave the prescribed area, thus the population does not have the room it needs to increase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top