For once, Green™ or other activist wannabe world-saver can be bothered to ask: why? Here's what's happening in Africa: drought-stricken and with famines feared, gov't turns to agit-prop
Namibia is wracked by an HIV-epidemic where tens of percents of the population is infected, which is a far greater problem than droughts or elephants.
A population can certainly be thriving and threatened at the same time but not in the same place. The rook (the bird) is only present in Scania in southern Sweden, and never migrates or ventures north. However, there's also a small population in Uppsala north of Stockholm. The Scanian population is stable and not threatened; the one in Upsala is small and therefore threatened.
As for bears (and wolves and so on) - that's to be expected when you leave the city. My position on it is basically the same as I have re: people moving to a city and complaining about rats, doves and gulls: it's their natural habitat, what did you expect? Bears in Italy sounds weird however. In such a densely populated nation, surely a region-sized wildlife preserve would be a better option than letting bears and such roam?
Here, the main problem with predators is rules and regulations regarding fencing and housing of livestock, not the actual animals as such.
Oh, lest I forget: it’s hunting season here, and since our ancestors killed all the wolves, culling the number of deer is also a non-issue.
But with elephants? That’s, of course, entirely different.
What the Africans are doing is little, if at-all, different from hunting season elsewhere; if we’d stop doing that, the deer population would invade towns and cities.
Hunting season = wear alarm-orange/yellow vest when walking in the forest. Even if hunters always mark off or even cordon off the area they're in, there's always trigger-happy goons to account for.
Especially the ones who buy a place in the hunting team, city-folks and such, with no real connection to nature but willing to pay €3000 and upwards for a chance of downing a deer or a hart or a moose.
Deer ain't no problem this side the fjells, until you come down towards the coast or the lowlands - but there they're everywhere due to stupid regulations. And down south boars are a real problem for farmers, and they are making their way north (the boars, that is).
I thought Norway had some 50-60 wolves, not counting the ones that criss-cross the border to Sweden when roaming? Not that 50-60 wolves make much of a dent in a deer population ranging in the tens of thousands of course.
Oh, well, I live in exactly the area you describe: but that side the fjells, right where you come down towards the coast. The people who do the hunting here are all locals, we're too remote for these weekend wannabes to come out here for sporting reasons.
Yes, there are some wolves, but Norway is pretty big and the further inland you go, the fewer people are there.
Ah yes and your sadly perceptive parallel - us next - “humans are damaging habitats” up the culling numbers…
That’s how I read it, yes. Once you see it, there’s no way not to un-see this.
Namibia is wracked by an HIV-epidemic where tens of percents of the population is infected, which is a far greater problem than droughts or elephants.
A population can certainly be thriving and threatened at the same time but not in the same place. The rook (the bird) is only present in Scania in southern Sweden, and never migrates or ventures north. However, there's also a small population in Uppsala north of Stockholm. The Scanian population is stable and not threatened; the one in Upsala is small and therefore threatened.
As for bears (and wolves and so on) - that's to be expected when you leave the city. My position on it is basically the same as I have re: people moving to a city and complaining about rats, doves and gulls: it's their natural habitat, what did you expect? Bears in Italy sounds weird however. In such a densely populated nation, surely a region-sized wildlife preserve would be a better option than letting bears and such roam?
Here, the main problem with predators is rules and regulations regarding fencing and housing of livestock, not the actual animals as such.
Oh, lest I forget: it’s hunting season here, and since our ancestors killed all the wolves, culling the number of deer is also a non-issue.
But with elephants? That’s, of course, entirely different.
What the Africans are doing is little, if at-all, different from hunting season elsewhere; if we’d stop doing that, the deer population would invade towns and cities.
Hunting season = wear alarm-orange/yellow vest when walking in the forest. Even if hunters always mark off or even cordon off the area they're in, there's always trigger-happy goons to account for.
Especially the ones who buy a place in the hunting team, city-folks and such, with no real connection to nature but willing to pay €3000 and upwards for a chance of downing a deer or a hart or a moose.
Deer ain't no problem this side the fjells, until you come down towards the coast or the lowlands - but there they're everywhere due to stupid regulations. And down south boars are a real problem for farmers, and they are making their way north (the boars, that is).
I thought Norway had some 50-60 wolves, not counting the ones that criss-cross the border to Sweden when roaming? Not that 50-60 wolves make much of a dent in a deer population ranging in the tens of thousands of course.
Oh, well, I live in exactly the area you describe: but that side the fjells, right where you come down towards the coast. The people who do the hunting here are all locals, we're too remote for these weekend wannabes to come out here for sporting reasons.
Yes, there are some wolves, but Norway is pretty big and the further inland you go, the fewer people are there.
Let's get rid of the people that want to get rid of the elephants.
What an absolute shit show our planet has turned into