3 ms·
It’s not clear what this sentence is trying to mean. It may just be saying that wolf culls can only occur during parts of the year when they’re allowed to be c
by TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago
It’s not clear what this sentence is trying to mean.
It may just be saying that wolf culls can only occur during parts of the year when they’re allowed to be culled under federal law, rather then that they have to be culled, although the latter interpretation would be ok too, right?
I’m no expert but wouldn’t unchecked wolf numbers rapidly become a significant risk to humans and live stock?
- chipotle_coyote 5y agoIf they could grow in a truly unchecked manner, sure, but this generally isn't a concern with apex predators -- their population is kept in check by availability of resources. We see this in action with the wolves in Yellowstone, which remain federally protected -- the wolf population stabilized at around 100 animals. https://nywolf.org/2019/01/wolves-naturally-limit-their-own-numbers/ https://nywolf.org/2019/01/wolves-naturally-limit-their-own-... So it's probably vanishingly rare that wolf packs would need to be culled. Most of the concern over wolves, from what I've seen over the years, has historically come from - game hunters, because when you remove wolves from an ecosystem, game animal population does grow in a relatively unchecked manner; - ranchers who see wolves as an existential threat to their livestock and therefore livelihood. The latter tends to be rather overemphasized by ranchers, from all the evidence I can find; they happen, but statistically, livestock is far more likely to be killed by coyotes. (It's not impossible that if the ranchers let the wolves alone they might suffer less carnivore predation: coyotes and wolves don't like to share territory.)