https://theconversation.com/grey-sq...-giving-native-reds-the-advantage-131064

Am I reading this right? Are the knotheads in England considering a restocking of wolves and Lynx to the island?

The link is about marten and squirrel.
They re-introduced beaver there.I believe it has been quite successful.

this part of the authors conclusion at the bottom of the page

Yes they are, along with reforestation of scotland.

Lots of rabbits and fox sounds like in the UK, just like cutting them fox loose in Australia back in the day heck they imported the dung beetle to work on the cow pies there also.

Well if they do we will be selling them a lot of beef and mutton so thats a good thing

The conclusion of potential benefits of larger predators based upon the benefits of reintroduction of the smaller predators (Pine Marten) is a logical conclusion. Don't you see that?

As much as you might not want to admit large predators do a service to the environment.

https://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/

AN undeniable fact is there are too many deer.
I have said this many times.

If you don't believe me read a couple of the studies cited at the end of above article.
EVERY person involved in land management of the natural community sees the damage due to deer.

They have the issue in the UK, too many deer. Reintroduction of wolves and lynx will help that.

Another article from the UK about deer overpopulation.

https://findingnature.co.uk/effects-growing-deer-population/

a line from the end of the article.

"Lastly, some experts are recommending the reintroduction of wolves and lynx into Britain. This so-called natural solution may result in a significant decline in the deer population in 20 years"

I can post dozens of studies about damage to the environment by deer.

If only there was a way to control deer numbers without adding another Apex predator...



"absence of natural deer predators in the country as one of the reasons for the overpopulation. There’s also the fact that these animals are protected from being hunted and being treated as pests under the 1963 Deer Act. Records show that, since the implementation of this legislation, deer population has steadily grown."

Wont take those wolves long to wipe out the deer. If they are that thick wolves will kill them for fun for awhile. Since there is no trapping, and very little hunting in merry in old england, i wonder if they will be hiring Americans to kill them 10 years after reintroduction? Populations sure exploded in yellowstone when they got released. Didnt take long to really lower elk deer and buffalo numbers either. I dont think England has rabies or mange mites. Might even do better there than they did in Yellowstone

Lots of hunting in british isles.

Seeing how hunting has failed in the eastern US to keep deer numbers in balance what are you suggesting?
They "cull" approx. 350,000 deer annually in the UK. Still need to cull more.

Apparently there needs to be either more culling or more predators, same as here in the good old USA.

Another misconception, wolves will not "wipe out" the deer. You do understand that wolves have been eating deer for thousands of years and yet the deer are still here? Yea, I know some kind of miracle.
Lowering the elk and buffalo populations in Yellowstone was a good thing. Many studies verify this.

Depends on whether or not you need an elk so you can eat all winter.

Sure the deer are still here. First you have to many deer then you have to many predators. There is no balance, Only a pendulum without human management. Hunting in England is for the wealthy. So is gun ownership. So when the pendulum swings the other way and the deer population crashes they will prey heavily on livestock. Probably get in dumpsters and attack humans.

And yes they do kill for fun.

I hunted there,and fished.Plenty.

The game commissions in the east claim there are too many deer all the while charging high fees for tags. And not requiring the harvest of does before sombody can harvest a buck .

Those that want to reintroduce wolves forget that stories like little red riding hood were probably born in truth . Problems people faced every day before guns ,when humans and their livestock were on the menu If you protect wolves long enough they will lose their instinctual fear of humans born of our quest to exterminate them for the last several thousand years . We drove them them to near extinction only a few of the most fearfull and isolated
Were left to repopulate from .

not just in the east its the way they do things here in ks

If there are to many deer there is no reason anybody that wants to eat as many as they can kill shouldnt be able to at a reasonable cost or no cost .

That would mean the crown was no longer in control of its loyal subjects.

Mike

People need to stop messing with nature, period. With that said, however, too many deer or ungulates or animals of any kind is not good. Predators are needed. Yes if they re-introduce wolves and/or lynx there, the predator population may explode while the prey population seemingly diminishes. At least for a while. Then the predators will become so overpopulated that disease will thin them out considerably and the prey will rebound. Then there will eventually become a balance between predator and prey (if man stays out of the equation). Unfortunately, with this balancing equation, it could take decades or even a century to balance itself out. I don't want to see the final balance in nature come long after we are all gone. These types of scenarios are really hard to take a side on. On one hand, no one wants to see an overpopulated predator population with a depleted prey population. On the other hand, there's WAY too many deer in Hope, Idaho and not many predators other than humans (allowed 1 deer per season) to keep them in check. Those deer are some of the most sickly, strange deer I've ever seen. Overpopulation, I suspect, has made them that way.

If your relying on getting an elk from Yellowstone to eat all winter your out of luck, no hunting allowed for many good reasons.
Does anyone rely on getting an elk so they can eat all winter in the lower 48?
No Elk then they starve? I doubt it.

Your previous statement was wrong about wolves wiping out deer. You exaggerated the situation.
I'll agree with you, there is no balance. In nature there is no balance, there is always one fighting for existence at the expense of others. The wolves at the deer, the deer at the expense of plants, plats at the expense of other plants. Its a war out there for survival.

My fact remains, there are too many deer.
Or do you dispute this fact?

And man is already "supposedly" keeping the deer herd in check because the apex predators are gone in the majority of their former ranges.
But the dirty little truth is man is doing a poor job.

The sooner the hunting community forgets its selfish interests and demands game managers do whats best for the environment the better.
Hunters scream the loudest when the herds get smaller.