9 ms·

"yay!" is what only those people in Germany say, that don't have to live with the consequences that pack of wolves are their new neighbours.

wirrbel 9y ago
Oh snap. forgot that I left my flock of sheep in the front yard... seriously, what are these terrible consequences?
- lindig 9y ago
  You might want to look after your horses and their foals that you don't keep in the front yard.
- JTenerife 9y ago
  How about your kids? In Germany there are a lot of small villages. Kids still playing in the forests and fields. It's plain stupid to forget that wolves are predators.
  - wander_homer 9y ago
    No worries, by the time my kids manage to run into a wolf they are already run over by cars multiple times on the way to the forest. Or stung to death by wasps, bees, ... bitten by the neighbors dog, attacked by a boar, drowned in some water, ...
  - wirrbel 9y ago
    You know what is a concrete danger for my kids (and all other kids, in both rural and cityareas)? - cars and if you worry about animals - dogs (which are wolves, bread for insanity and not fearing humans, and sometimes trained to attack people) - chicken (salmonella probably kills a few kids a year)
  - zaarn 9y ago
    I fear boars much more than the wolves living in our woods. Wolves rarely attack humans and even if it is usually associated with rabies rather than an actual hunt. If you happen to walk into a wolf, it's probably gonna bite you and then leave you alone when you run away.
  - ajuc 9y ago
    Oh please.. I was a kid in Polesie in eastern Poland, huge forests all around. Played in the woods almost every day in the summer/winter vacations, never even encountered a wolf, despite them being there. Stray dogs are a bigger threat. Rabid bats or foxes are a bigger threat. Ticks are a MUCH bigger threat. And if you drive a car - you're much more likely to kill a human being than all the wolves in the world combined. 50 years, whole world - over 211 deaths. ~5 per year. > In the half-century up to 2002, there were eight fatal attacks in Europe and Russia, three in North America, and more than 200 in south Asia. [1] For comparison, just in one year, just in USA - around 20-30. > At least 4.5–4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs every year and, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 20 to 30 of these result in death [2] Wolves avoid people. There's something irrational in people's reaction to wolves. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_attacks_on_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_attacks_on_humans [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_Unite...
- swerner 9y ago
  I have to say, I can observe some mixed standards in this regard: "Deer eat saplings" - "Kill the deer!" "Wolves eat livestock" - "Don't shoot, get a fence."
  - wirrbel 9y ago
    Get a shepherd dog might be the better option. I guess you can always argue that the ecosystem used to have wolves (and elks) in Germany. So the restauration is I think a good thing. The only issue I found with this wish is that consequently, probably lions should be brought back to southern europe, etc.
    - swerner 9y ago
      The question is, is the current landscape in Germany an adequate habitat for a predator that claims large territories? Last time there was a native wolf population in Germany, there was no Autobahn, no large corn fields for bioethanol and ground-breeders had plenty of cover in the shrubs between small parcels of land. The drastic changes in land use are one of the reasons Germany now has a growing wild boar population again, where in the 1940s large areas had no boar at all. Boar hunting is more effective than ever (night vision, cameras, etc) but can't offset the exploding food supply. When wolves return, we're not going to get some romantic version of fairy tale wild nature back - Germany doesn't have large enough preservation areas for that to happen[1]. Anyone who claims to be able to predict the future of wolf in Germany is just full of it - both sides of the debate. [1]The Dutch Oostvaardersplassen is one example of what can happen when you naively try to turn tiny areas into a "natural wilderness habitat".
      - wirrbel 9y ago
        what specifically is your issue with Oostvaardersplassen?
        swerner 9y ago
        It demonstrates how going from cultured land to a natural reserve doesn't necessarily lead to a balanced ecosystem. There you have a herbivore population that requires culling in order to prevent mass starvation from exhausting the food supply. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oostvaardersplassen#Natural_processes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oostvaardersplassen#Natural_pr... In the absence of natural predators the rangers shoot animals that are unlikely to survive. It is quite common for 30 to 60 per cent of the population to be killed in this way. After a cull, the vegetation has a chance to recover and this will get the first natural afforestation of the area under way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tofJFxKOVao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tofJFxKOVao
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jjjII978 9y ago
You couldn't be more wrong. Wolf attacks are extremely rare. They're not a significant threat to humans. http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2011/dec/16/oregon-department-fish-and-wildlife/department-fish-and-wildlife-says-there-have-been-/ http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2011/dec/16/oreg... Wolves are vilified because of their threat to livestock. Farmers kill wolves to protect their animals. The return of wolves is good news for people living in forested areas overpopulated by deer. Without wolves, the deer population grows unchecked. The deer overgraze which hurts plant growth. https://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/ https://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/
- woodpanel 9y ago
  The rhetoric reveals your biasedness: Where did I even mention attacks? Nowhere. But, because you know that my statement is correct, that the majority of people in rural areas don't like having wolfpack-neighbors, you've seem to feel obliged to make ridicule of their fears. Its clearly an overreaction. An impulse I just can guess what triggered it. Is it maybe that I pointed out, that the romanticization of things ('yay!') is usually done by people who don't have to live with the outcomes of it? And precisely because they don't have to live with that are usually much more powerful and likely to get their romanticized ideals poured into legislation (e.g. wealth redistribution vs. not being dependent on entry level jobs, social housing projects vs. not living in them, promoting preditors vs. living in gentrified urban areas etc.)? Is it maybe that at the core of the romaticizer's actions is the aim for Deutungshoheit (narrative control) via claiming "pureness", which is most hurt by showing its very basic inconsistencies? Is it because applying a 80s-moustache statement glass wearing Hipster face to "Yay! Wolfes are back" lays bare the author's arrogance?

wirrbel 9y ago

Oh snap. forgot that I left my flock of sheep in the front yard... seriously, what are these terrible consequences?

lindig 9y ago
You might want to look after your horses and their foals that you don't keep in the front yard.
JTenerife 9y ago
How about your kids? In Germany there are a lot of small villages. Kids still playing in the forests and fields. It's plain stupid to forget that wolves are predators.
- wander_homer 9y ago
  No worries, by the time my kids manage to run into a wolf they are already run over by cars multiple times on the way to the forest. Or stung to death by wasps, bees, ... bitten by the neighbors dog, attacked by a boar, drowned in some water, ...
- wirrbel 9y ago
  You know what is a concrete danger for my kids (and all other kids, in both rural and cityareas)? - cars and if you worry about animals - dogs (which are wolves, bread for insanity and not fearing humans, and sometimes trained to attack people) - chicken (salmonella probably kills a few kids a year)
- zaarn 9y ago
  I fear boars much more than the wolves living in our woods. Wolves rarely attack humans and even if it is usually associated with rabies rather than an actual hunt. If you happen to walk into a wolf, it's probably gonna bite you and then leave you alone when you run away.
- ajuc 9y ago
  Oh please.. I was a kid in Polesie in eastern Poland, huge forests all around. Played in the woods almost every day in the summer/winter vacations, never even encountered a wolf, despite them being there. Stray dogs are a bigger threat. Rabid bats or foxes are a bigger threat. Ticks are a MUCH bigger threat. And if you drive a car - you're much more likely to kill a human being than all the wolves in the world combined. 50 years, whole world - over 211 deaths. ~5 per year. > In the half-century up to 2002, there were eight fatal attacks in Europe and Russia, three in North America, and more than 200 in south Asia. [1] For comparison, just in one year, just in USA - around 20-30. > At least 4.5–4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs every year and, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 20 to 30 of these result in death [2] Wolves avoid people. There's something irrational in people's reaction to wolves. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_attacks_on_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_attacks_on_humans [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_Unite...
swerner 9y ago
I have to say, I can observe some mixed standards in this regard: "Deer eat saplings" - "Kill the deer!" "Wolves eat livestock" - "Don't shoot, get a fence."
- wirrbel 9y ago
  Get a shepherd dog might be the better option. I guess you can always argue that the ecosystem used to have wolves (and elks) in Germany. So the restauration is I think a good thing. The only issue I found with this wish is that consequently, probably lions should be brought back to southern europe, etc.
  - swerner 9y ago
    The question is, is the current landscape in Germany an adequate habitat for a predator that claims large territories? Last time there was a native wolf population in Germany, there was no Autobahn, no large corn fields for bioethanol and ground-breeders had plenty of cover in the shrubs between small parcels of land. The drastic changes in land use are one of the reasons Germany now has a growing wild boar population again, where in the 1940s large areas had no boar at all. Boar hunting is more effective than ever (night vision, cameras, etc) but can't offset the exploding food supply. When wolves return, we're not going to get some romantic version of fairy tale wild nature back - Germany doesn't have large enough preservation areas for that to happen[1]. Anyone who claims to be able to predict the future of wolf in Germany is just full of it - both sides of the debate. [1]The Dutch Oostvaardersplassen is one example of what can happen when you naively try to turn tiny areas into a "natural wilderness habitat".
    - wirrbel 9y ago
      what specifically is your issue with Oostvaardersplassen?
      - swerner 9y ago
        It demonstrates how going from cultured land to a natural reserve doesn't necessarily lead to a balanced ecosystem. There you have a herbivore population that requires culling in order to prevent mass starvation from exhausting the food supply. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oostvaardersplassen#Natural_processes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oostvaardersplassen#Natural_pr... In the absence of natural predators the rangers shoot animals that are unlikely to survive. It is quite common for 30 to 60 per cent of the population to be killed in this way. After a cull, the vegetation has a chance to recover and this will get the first natural afforestation of the area under way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tofJFxKOVao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tofJFxKOVao

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jjjII978 9y ago

You couldn't be more wrong. Wolf attacks are extremely rare. They're not a significant threat to humans. http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2011/dec/16/oregon-department-fish-and-wildlife/department-fish-and-wildlife-says-there-have-been-/ http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2011/dec/16/oreg... Wolves are vilified because of their threat to livestock. Farmers kill wolves to protect their animals. The return of wolves is good news for people living in forested areas overpopulated by deer. Without wolves, the deer population grows unchecked. The deer overgraze which hurts plant growth. https://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/ https://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/

woodpanel 9y ago
The rhetoric reveals your biasedness: Where did I even mention attacks? Nowhere. But, because you know that my statement is correct, that the majority of people in rural areas don't like having wolfpack-neighbors, you've seem to feel obliged to make ridicule of their fears. Its clearly an overreaction. An impulse I just can guess what triggered it. Is it maybe that I pointed out, that the romanticization of things ('yay!') is usually done by people who don't have to live with the outcomes of it? And precisely because they don't have to live with that are usually much more powerful and likely to get their romanticized ideals poured into legislation (e.g. wealth redistribution vs. not being dependent on entry level jobs, social housing projects vs. not living in them, promoting preditors vs. living in gentrified urban areas etc.)? Is it maybe that at the core of the romaticizer's actions is the aim for Deutungshoheit (narrative control) via claiming "pureness", which is most hurt by showing its very basic inconsistencies? Is it because applying a 80s-moustache statement glass wearing Hipster face to "Yay! Wolfes are back" lays bare the author's arrogance?