UK Lynx Reintroduction

I suppose the other side of the coin is that the LynxTrust feel that if they don't push it now it might be never. Brexit could well throw up more barriers once the government gets its act together in going through the legislation to change (esp since they are going to do it closed-shop style rather than accepting it all or doing it via normal methods which take far longer - even if they are more public).

Another factor could be that getting land owners on-board is a near impossible task and that possibly LT feel that at least getting lynx into the wilderness (with proper protected status) at least starts to make changes; instead of getting stuck in a never ending quagmire of debate and attempted education (esp since many people won't adopt new methods/strategies until their situation requires them too).



I can understand their desire for speed, but I also understand that not having as many land-owners/workers/managers on board with the idea is a huge risk. Especially with the increased number of high profit game hunts around these days (go back 20 or 30 years and they were around but far fewer and smaller scale - now they are far more widespread).
 
I very much support bringing back lynx to Britain.

That article is laughable by suggesting that reintroduction of lynx is 'pushing things'.

Britain is about half a century slower than Continental Europe. Germany, Austria and Switzerland reintroduced lynx in the 1970s. They are, too, densely populated, industrial countries with sheep farming, road traffic and commercial hunting. Lynx can be reintroduced and live in a landscape dominated by people and farming. It is now obvious, and no longer controversial or uncertain.

Bringing back Lynx to Britian was first scientifically discussed in 1986. That is 31 years ago, when most members of this forum were not yet born. So, how many Lynx actually stepped on British soil in the wild since then? Zero.

Big majority of British are in favor of reintroducting wildlife. There are long proven schemes to reintroduce lynx and minimize and compensate eventual damage to the livestock. Trying to obtain agreement of 100% of people is never going to happen.

I agree with the UK Lynx Trust that it is waste of money to make endless cycles of 'consultations' and 'planning' which can last years without any conclusion nor action in the field.
 
Giant Panda said:
The UKLT's lack of success suggests you're mistaken.
Click to expand...

But they have only just done the required consultation? Or should just release them and forget any due diligence.

Having read the article I think its a bit negative on the whole process, I have not seen the big push by the Lynx Trust that the article seems to suggest they have. I have seen two recently posts on facebook and several media outlets picking up on a one of these posts....

But happy for further evidence to be presented for both cases and look forward to seeing what happens.

P.S if I lived in the area that they wanted to introduce them to I would be supporting it.
 
taun said:
But they have only just done the required consultation?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be precisely the point? Public consultation has been going on for at least a couple of years, but imposing beliefs and values top-down has undermined bottom-up community support. Incidentally, I don't think this is one-sided and some farming lobbies are equally culpable, but that doesn't exonerate the UKLT. It's because I'm in favour of the reintroduction that I'm against alienating local stakeholders.

taun said:
Or should just release them and forget any due diligence.
Click to expand...

This is neither my position, nor the article's. Quite the opposite in fact.

taun said:
Having read the article I think its a bit negative on the whole process, I have not seen the big push by the Lynx Trust that the article seems to suggest they have. I have seen two recently posts on facebook and several media outlets picking up on a one of these posts....
Click to expand...

But the reports from these media outlets (including numerous articles in the regional and national press) and interviews with Paul O'Donoghue are what the article was referring to. The UKLT are widely publicising impossibly unrealistic timelines instead of taking the time to really engage with communities.

taun said:
P.S if I lived in the area that they wanted to introduce them to I would be supporting it.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly the kind of thinking I disagree with. It's irrelevant, because you don't, and unhelpful, because (presumably) you don't know how you'd feel if you did.
 
Last edited:
Giant Panda said:
Which is exactly the kind of thinking I disagree with. It's irrelevant, because you don't, and unhelpful, because (presumably) you don't know how you'd feel if you did.
Click to expand...

By the by, I *do* live very close to the area in question - and my girlfriend's parents live within the immediate area itself - and fully support the idea of reintroduction.
 
I haven't actually discussed the matter with them, funnily enough, although we *have* discussed the related matter of how feasible/desirable it would be to bolster the tiny Northumbrian population of Pine Marten with introduced stock in order to stem the tide of the grey squirrel. As for myself, I think the following two quotes somewhat sum up my feelings on the matter:

overread said:
I suppose the other side of the coin is that the LynxTrust feel that if they don't push it now it might be never.
Click to expand...

overread said:
Another factor could be that getting land owners on-board is a near impossible task and that possibly LT feel that at least getting lynx into the wilderness (with proper protected status) at least starts to make changes; instead of getting stuck in a never ending quagmire of debate and attempted education (esp since many people won't adopt new methods/strategies until their situation requires them too).
Click to expand...

In other words, no matter how justified reintroduction of lynx may be, I feel that a more cautious and measured approach would merely result in nothing whatsoever happening, as those parties interested in suppressing such a move have a *lot* of power and influence. It is worth bearing in mind that this area is one of the biggest hotspots for species such as buzzard, hen harrier and other "vermin" being killed legally and illegally for the benefit of the shooting lobby, and that the presence of species such as mountain hare (another one the shooting lobby tries to exterminate) is suppressed and denied..... if a population officially doesn't exist, after all, then they can't possibly be undergoing persecution. When dealing with such cases, I feel that presenting people with a fait accompli is the best option - and this is what LynxTrust are presumably trying to do. I don't think they have gone about this in the best possible way, mind you.... but I do think that this general strategy is the one most likely to succeed.

Perhaps the best example of this principle is the fact that I am *certain* that the official reintroduction programme for European Beaver would not have gone so well had the illicit population in Tayside not provided so much evidence that the fears and purported problems with this species being present were unfounded. Given the fact that the presence of an existing introduced population of Lynx in Northumberland is not proven - although I strongly believe this to be the case - it would be rash to suggest that something similar could well turn out to be the case for this population too ;)
 
Getting a population into the wild does at least end the endless cycle of "what-ifs" that can plague such debate. Even evidence such as the fact that beavers don't eat fish can be twisted/mistaken/ignored by certain parties and thus hold back releases from pressure from the fishing community.
At least having the population in the wild forces it to shift from an argument of "opinions" into one where you can at least demand fact and evidence and proof. Of course you will get those who will fabricate or mistakenly identify proof, but you at least narrow the playing field.


A generation thing also comes into play; generations without any experience of such predators and pressures are liable to overplay the pressures card because its a totally new thing. Whilst generations who grow up with it are more accustomed and thus more inclined to consider it how things "should be/art to be".
 
An extra point: using Kielder as the reintroduction site means the lynx, if they do will, can cross into Scotland by their own volition, thus avoiding the complications from reintroducing them to two countries.
 
The reintroduction in the UK is basically, nimby to the extreme. Even more than any other public investment (restoration of nature is a kind of investment for public benefit).

Local landowners have no cost of saying no. This ensures that, basically, they have no interest in agreeing or even learning about the lynx. The current law is formulated so that opposing everything the best strategy.
 
Jurek7 said:
Local landowners have no cost of saying no. This ensures that, basically, they have no interest in agreeing or even learning about the lynx. The current law is formulated so that opposing everything the best strategy.
Click to expand...

How would you set it up so that there would be a cost to saying no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top