6 ms·
https://news.wisc.edu/tolerance-of-wolves-in-wisconsin-continues-to-decline/ https://news.wisc.edu/tolerance-of-wolves-in-wisconsin-conti... this article seems
by rtpg 5y ago
https://news.wisc.edu/tolerance-of-wolves-in-wisconsin-continues-to-decline/ https://news.wisc.edu/tolerance-of-wolves-in-wisconsin-conti...
this article seems to have more. Reading it sideways, what seems to come out is:
> “There was a notion held widely in the scientific literature and said at public meetings that a public hunting season would increase acceptance of wolves,” says Adrian Treves, professor in the Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies and co-author of the study.
> Treves isn’t certain whether most hunters in Wisconsin will ever embrace wolves because the predators feed on the white-tailed deer that hunters value.
> “It’s easier to talk about and tally the costs of dead calves than it is to talk about improved populations of endangered plant species or the other ecosystem benefits that come with wolves.”
Sounds like it's basically that hunters dislike wolves (I imagine rural populations aren't fans either...) and that's kind of the default position. And Wisconsin seems to have adopted this hunt as a way to keep the population under control and "release pressure" from, for example, trying to get them completely wiped out.
Pretty nasty, though my impression is that wolves are not really accepted much anywhere in the US? I don't know if this is more cruel than other mid-western states or not.
- labster 5y agoBased on an environmental policy class I took in university, it seems like wolves are lupae non grata wherever they appear. There seem to be two root causes: ranchers don’t like wolves eating their livestock, and people are just frightened of them. Some of the fright is instinctual, but it’s certainly played up by the ranchers. Essentially anywhere and everywhere wolves are reintroduced, people start freaking out. Some wolves end up shot even when it is illegal, but more are shot when it is not. This is one of those intractable problems because the benefits of predators to wildland is very high, but innate fear and economic concerns keep a solution out of reach. It’s not reasonable to ask ranchers not to carry firearms because wolves and bears are in fact dangerous, and they have economic incentives not to comply with wolf protections.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago> it seems like wolves are lupae non grata wherever they appear Lupi non grati. ;D (non grata isn't an independent phrase; it ends in -a because it has to agree with persona.) (And while lupae could mean "exclusively female wolves", I think it's more likely to mean "prostitutes".)
- didgeoridoo 5y agoLupi eunt domus!
- jfengel 5y agoThey are home. Which is unfortunately the problem.
- SkittyDog 5y agoCute, but I do think applying the actual Latin declination diminishes the rhetorical value of the phrase. English is mostly not declined, so readers in English often don't understand or expect to see words modified as dramatically as Latin grammar requires. So it becomes distracting, and probably ruins the joke for (the vast majority of) readers who don't know Latin. I would have gone with "lupa no grata" or even "lupus non grata" to maximize intelligibility to English readers. Classical Latin makes up a pretty tiny fraction of the lifetime of actual Latin usage, anyway. It happens to make up the bulk of the written literature that got passed down to modern scholars, but a hell of a lot more people actually spoke various pidgins of Latin, or transitional language as it changed into the Romance languages.
- mbg721 5y agoAs a reader who does understand a little bit of classical Latin, I appreciated the correction.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago> Classical Latin makes up a pretty tiny fraction of the lifetime of actual Latin usage, anyway. It happens to make up the bulk of the written literature that got passed down to modern scholars, but a hell of a lot more people actually spoke various pidgins of Latin, or transitional language as it changed into the Romance languages. Well, the amount of usage isn't quite the same question as the lifetime of the usage. 17th century international communication was done in classical Latin, albeit classical Latin that was mysteriously shifted closer to modern languages in a number of ways. An important treaty between Russia and China was formalized in Latin. (Though that might have been church Latin.) The lifetime of classical Latin isn't much shorter than the lifetime of Latin the living language that became the Romance languages. Also, while it's certainly true that modern Romance languages have diverged a long way from classical Latin, they haven't diverged in any way that's relevant here; they all still inflect adjectives to match the modified nouns. (Which is the only declensional phenomenon here that might surprise an English speaker - English still declines nouns to distinguish singular from plural. This is so natural to the modern English speaker that it was correct in the attempted phrase lupae non grata. The nominative case is expected from an English speaker, but is also, by coincidence, correct for classical Latin.)
- ithkuil 5y ago"Lupus non gratus" or "lupi non grati"
- slim 5y agoIt's never lupus
- ithkuil 5y agoWhat do you mean? EDIT: ah. A reference to Dr.House
- thaumasiotes 5y agoLupa isn't just an obvious extension of feminine gender to a usually masculine but living noun. It's well attested in the Latin record because of the myth of Romulus and Remus, who were suckled and raised by a lupa. Officially that was a she-wolf, though the theory was available even at the time that the lupa of the story referred to a whore.
- ithkuil 5y agoOk fine, then lupa non grata (singular) or lupae non gratae (plural) "Lupae non grata" just sounds wrong and agramarical, in the same sense as "people is happy" would to an native English speaker. Yes it's just a little sounds, just like the small difference between "are" and "is"
- unionpivo 5y agoPretty much why there are almost no wolves in EU. I live in one area where there are still wolfs. We are sort of proud we still have them. But people and wolfs don't mix. And they can be scary as fuck. A lot of people just think of them as wild dogs. But if you ever seen one in person you know that's not true.
- mrpopo 5y agoThere are significant wolves populations in NW Spain, Northern Europe and Eastern Europe. They are being reintroduced in other countries as well. There are ~600 wolves in France, they were reintroduced in 1990.
- unionpivo 5y agoI know, because one of the places they were introduced form is where i live. But there are still probably less than 10k wolfs on entire continent
- Exmoor 5y ago> people are just frightened of them Which is pretty bizarre, statistically speaking. Wild animals deserve cautious respect to be sure, but there have been exactly 2 fatal attacks by wild wolves in North America since World War 2 [0]. For comparison, more than 20 people have been killed by dogs this year. [1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wolf_attacks_in_North_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wolf_attacks_in_North_... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States#Fatalities_in_2021 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_t...
- chalst 5y agoThe thing that most makes wolves unpopular in Germany is not killing livestock: there's an adequate compensation scheme, nor risk to people, it's that wolves go out of their way to kill dogs.
- fourtrees 5y agoAttacking pets is a big reason for coyotes' unpopularity in the North Eastern US too. Our coyotes are also hybrids of wolves and western coyotes which makes them a bit larger than their western cousins and more dangerous to dogs.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago> Our coyotes are also hybrids of wolves and western coyotes Huh, usually a wolf-coyote hybrid is called a wolf, not a coyote. That's what red wolves are.
- rtpg 5y agoIs it bizarre to be frightened of what is essentially a non-domesticated dog with sharp teeth? Lot of people are frightened by big dogs too It's not like we're saying "oh we believe we will be attacked by wolves". It's "Given the choice, I would rather _not_ have wolves in my vicinity". The reason for so few attacks is probably cuz they're basically endangered!
- trynumber9 5y ago> I imagine rural populations aren't fans either... Not me, anyway. When they were reintroduced it was argued for based on population projections and expected range. These projections, on which all estimates of negative wolf interactions were based on, were overly optimistic. The real population far exceeded expectations. That was why the law was passed. They've already had their way introducing the wolf to areas here where many people do not want them. So why can't they "compromise" by limiting the wolf population? Even after this cull it is still higher than originally projected.