32 ms·

That opinion piece says the impacts affecting the park are more nuanced and complicated than the popular narrative of the reintroduction of wolves would lead on

That opinion piece says the impacts affecting the park are more nuanced and complicated than the popular narrative of the reintroduction of wolves would lead one to believe, it doesn't say it's entirely wrong.

wuliwong 12y ago
Look around a bit and you'll see loads of articles and rebuttals to this video's thesis. I for one thought the video was really beautiful but it shouldn't stop researchers from attempting to be accurate, even when it isn't something we want to hear.
gbhn 12y ago
I wonder if the big story is about a different predator species so apex that wolves are basically a hobby for it, and how changes in the behavior and priorities of that species can have dramatic impacts on the park.
akavel 12y ago
Um, quoting exactly: "[The aforementioned] study, which focused on willows, showed that the decades without wolves changed Yellowstone too much to undo. After humans exterminated wolves nearly a century ago, elk grew so abundant that they all but eliminated willow shrubs. Without willows to eat, beavers declined. Without beaver dams, fast-flowing streams cut deeper into the terrain. The water table dropped below the reach of willow roots. Now it’s too late for even high levels of wolf predation to restore the willows." and: "When we tell the wolf story, we get the Yellowstone story wrong. Perhaps the greatest risk of this story is a loss of credibility for the scientists and environmental groups who tell it."
- akavel 12y ago
  Why -1? I'm quoting exactly from the article mentioned above in the thread. Am I wrong in anything? Am I disrespectful? Please care to explain.
  - scott_s 12y ago
    Please resist the urge to question receiving a downvote. If it's unwarranted (and I think it was, in this case), someone will likely give you a corrective upvote.
    - derekp7 12y ago
      The other common case is someone clicking the downvote button in error. Is there any way to undo a downvote, or is that a planned future feature?
      - e12e 12y ago
        No, there isn't. There probably should be (but it's debatable, perhaps like edits, they should be timed, with a hint in the UI that not only voting is done (arrows removed), but which vote was cast (eg: dim the arrow not pressed, highlight the one pressed.). What really should be done, is change the hopelessly small arrows (which are annoying on desktop, unusable on mobile) to a pair of unicode up-down arrows/triangles side-by-side that are more or less full line-height/1em. Eg: ▲▼. It would mean a minimal change in layout (small increase in left margin) -- but greatly increase usability. I'd probably stopped using hn (well interacting with the ui) a long time ago, if I wasn't using vimperator, and could just hit "f"[ollow links] and type a number for the arrow I wanted to hit, rather than hunting the tiny glyphs. /Off-topic-rant
    - innguest 12y ago
      Why doesn't HN have a policy whereby the downvoter must explain the reason for it, much like a Wikipedia edit is strongly encouraged to have a written reason? How can we teach people not to do something worthy of downvote if there is no visible feedback mechanism to help see why something downvoted was rightfully so? If the current policy (of downvoting without a reason) is to avoid discussing the reason for the downvote, so that the conversation not be derailed further, then maybe we should focus on disincentivizing this specific behavior.
      - reitanqild 12y ago

wuliwong 12y ago

Look around a bit and you'll see loads of articles and rebuttals to this video's thesis. I for one thought the video was really beautiful but it shouldn't stop researchers from attempting to be accurate, even when it isn't something we want to hear.

gbhn 12y ago

I wonder if the big story is about a different predator species so apex that wolves are basically a hobby for it, and how changes in the behavior and priorities of that species can have dramatic impacts on the park.

akavel 12y ago

Um, quoting exactly: "[The aforementioned] study, which focused on willows, showed that the decades without wolves changed Yellowstone too much to undo. After humans exterminated wolves nearly a century ago, elk grew so abundant that they all but eliminated willow shrubs. Without willows to eat, beavers declined. Without beaver dams, fast-flowing streams cut deeper into the terrain. The water table dropped below the reach of willow roots. Now it’s too late for even high levels of wolf predation to restore the willows." and: "When we tell the wolf story, we get the Yellowstone story wrong. Perhaps the greatest risk of this story is a loss of credibility for the scientists and environmental groups who tell it."

akavel 12y ago
Why -1? I'm quoting exactly from the article mentioned above in the thread. Am I wrong in anything? Am I disrespectful? Please care to explain.
- scott_s 12y ago
  Please resist the urge to question receiving a downvote. If it's unwarranted (and I think it was, in this case), someone will likely give you a corrective upvote.
  - derekp7 12y ago
    The other common case is someone clicking the downvote button in error. Is there any way to undo a downvote, or is that a planned future feature?
    - e12e 12y ago
      No, there isn't. There probably should be (but it's debatable, perhaps like edits, they should be timed, with a hint in the UI that not only voting is done (arrows removed), but which vote was cast (eg: dim the arrow not pressed, highlight the one pressed.). What really should be done, is change the hopelessly small arrows (which are annoying on desktop, unusable on mobile) to a pair of unicode up-down arrows/triangles side-by-side that are more or less full line-height/1em. Eg: ▲▼. It would mean a minimal change in layout (small increase in left margin) -- but greatly increase usability. I'd probably stopped using hn (well interacting with the ui) a long time ago, if I wasn't using vimperator, and could just hit "f"[ollow links] and type a number for the arrow I wanted to hit, rather than hunting the tiny glyphs. /Off-topic-rant
  - innguest 12y ago
    Why doesn't HN have a policy whereby the downvoter must explain the reason for it, much like a Wikipedia edit is strongly encouraged to have a written reason? How can we teach people not to do something worthy of downvote if there is no visible feedback mechanism to help see why something downvoted was rightfully so? If the current policy (of downvoting without a reason) is to avoid discussing the reason for the downvote, so that the conversation not be derailed further, then maybe we should focus on disincentivizing this specific behavior.
    - reitanqild 12y ago