[Closed] how wolves change rivers.

Interesting...wonder if they will ever contemplate bringing them back into the UK again.

Best video I've seen for some time.

We need something like that to control the human population in this country

Fantastic

Thanks for posting

Get hold of this book for a Scottish vision of such things.....
http://www.northshots.com/store.asp?item=57&cat=4&name=Caledonia%20-%20Scotlan d's%20Heart%20of%20Pine

Interesting...wonder if they will ever contemplate bringing them back into the UK again.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/10409499/Scottish-landowner-plans-to-bring-back-wolves-and-bears.html ]Yes,[/url] it's been contemplated. Not sure how far it'll get though, not least as there are issues about land access and deer.

thats cool

Funnily enough my wife has just come back from Romania where she was horse riding. The stable owners are mainly involved in wolf research and conservation and she was telling me about this.

http://equus-silvania.com/en/index.php?lg=en

http://www.conservationcarpathia.org/life_en/index.php?lg=en

This video is great! Emphasises how nature is far too complicated for humans ever to 'manage'. It can does a pretty good job itself, naturally.

This video is great! Emphasises how nature is far too complicated for humans ever to 'manage'. It can does a pretty good job itself, naturally.

I agree its a great video, but the rest is just plain wrong. Who managed the reintroduction of the wolves? What do you mean by naturally and nature, are humans not just another species on the planet and part of nature?

This video is great! Emphasises how nature is far too complicated for humans ever to 'manage'. It can does a pretty good job itself, naturally.

Well, it's had a lot more practice at being 'nature' than human kind...

Great vid btw

What do you mean by naturally and nature, are humans not just another species on the planet and part of nature?

This ^.

"Natural" is a fallacy.
See if you can get anyone to agree on a definition..

What do you mean by naturally and nature.........

It is universally accepted that in English "naturally" means without human intervention, and "nature" refers to the physical world which hasn't been created by humans.

Great video, thanks.

Yep, 'natural' as in 'not manufactured'. HTH.

The idea of reintroducing wolves to Scotland is just a ruse by the big landowners to close off large areas to access. They're pissed off about the access laws and will pretend to be passionately "green" to do so.

If they want to reintroduce extinct native species and allow them to proliferate, may I suggest they start with the reintroduction of a species the landowners went to great lengths to remove from the land in more recent times - humans.

Naturally we would hunt wolves to extinction again. 🙂

It is universally accepted that in English "naturally" means without human intervention, and "nature" refers to the physical world which hasn't been created by humans.

how can humans not intervene in an ecosystem when they are present in the biosphere? I means Yellowstone National Park... the clues in the title. I dont accept your universal definition and I have a PhD in ecology.

I dont accept your universal definition and I have a PhD in ecology.

But obviously not in English.

I don't have a PhD in anything, or any degree for that matter, but I do know what "naturally" and "nature" means.

If you haven't got a dictionary try googling ?

So describe terrestrial ecosystem that is natural by your definition.

George Monibot's book Feral is a good read for a look at the U.K. and a similar issue with sheep in the Welsh hills.

It's not "my" definition, I didn't invent the English language.

It's sad that someone posting a fascinating video which shows what can happen to the environment when humans take a back seat approach should result in pedantic point scoring by those who want to prove how clever and highly qualified they are.

But the point is the humans didnt take a back seat they reintroduced wolves.
I take from this you havent thought of a natural ecosystem yet?

Yeah everyone is aware that it was humans that reintroduced the wolves, but thanks for pointing it out to us less qualified people

"...increased the number of badgers" - never float over here 🙂

Yeah everyone is aware that it was humans that reintroduced the wolves, but thanks for pointing it out to us less qualified people

you keep deflecting

I may have missed something here, but wasn't it the humans that extinguished wolves from the area in the first place?

Apparently a wolf was run over and killed on the autobahn about 30km from where I live a month or so ago. They seem to be migrating from places like Romania. Much like their human cousins. 🙂

So it's the deer's fault?

there is some documentary about introduced and re-introduced species somewhere online. included the thing about yellowstone. can't find it. 🙁

I may have missed something here, but wasn't it the humans that extinguished wolves from the area in the first place?

true but they evolved in the first place in ecosystems with humans in. The whole "natural" or "unnatural" thing is very anti-darwinian and implies that humans are somehow separate or different from other living things.

Roter stern, I take it you dont live in Berkshire!!!!

This is true, we haven't been around long enough to know what 'normal' is. Not that there is ever a state of 'normality' as change being the only variable constant.

Can you tell that I don't have a degree either? 😉

It's sad that someone posting a fascinating video which shows what can happen to the environment when humans take a back seat approach should result in pedantic point scoring by those who want to prove how clever and highly qualified they are.

+1

it is only in the last 13000 years that humans have inhabited the Americas. before that the wolves had a long time to find their place within the ecosystem. when the first people did arrive they lived alongside the wolves. they did not exterminate them. we know this as there were still wolves around when the europeans turned up. it is only one generation ago when wolves were removed from the park.

Can you tell that I don't have a degree either? 

only because you told me

Alpin do you think yellowstone 13000 years ago looked like it does now?

There were probably more tree's, because there were wolves to keep the deer in check. Apart from that, I'd say it was very similar

Great video thanks. Good to see in true STW form the thread has descened into a row complete with a bit about big landowners !

Well you would be wrong. Yellowstone Park was formed from the habitat that preceded it and it had thousands of years of human intervention the changes that occurred within the park after the introduction of wolves such as the return of song birds for example would have come largely from migration of species from the "unnatural" outside or changes to the frequency of those species within which again wouldnt have been those species around 13000 years ago.
The point being calling something natural is just daft, we live on the planet and to missquote somone or other no ecosystem is an island.

To be clear I thought I was having a discussion not a row and I also think the video is brilliant just talking about what it means from a wider perspective. Would be a bit dull if someone posted something we all said thats great and left it at that wouldnt it?

Will the wolves stop the supervolcano from erupting?

Great video thanks. Good to see in true STW form the thread has descened into a row...

It's only become fractious because ernie_lynch won't answer anagallis_arvensis's "terrestrial ecosystem" question - because he's unable to do so without dismantling and reconsidering the "universally accepted", yet woefully flimsy, definition of 'natural', which would, in turn, lead him to agreeing, perhaps, with anagallis_arvensis.

The descent has been caused by one person's refusal to accept and learn from somebody with a broader and more detailed, more substantial, understanding of a situation, preferring instead to play the role of victim and accuse the more learned person of trying to score points. Some people don't want to discuss and learn, they just want to be right and for everyone else to be their version of right.

The saying goes: never argue with a fool, they'll only drag you down to their own level and beat you with experience every time.

Excellent post Three_Fish ! Do you feel better now ? 🙂

PS. If you want to believe that polluting our rivers, our seas, pumping CO2 into the atmosphere, releasing radio active material, widespread deforestation, etc, is all perfectly natural on the bases that humans are a natural species just like any other, then that's of course fine. But it's not a widely shared attitude so try not to get so cross if others don't agree 💡

In fact all species produce waste which is toxic to themselves and others and use up resources in an unsustainable manner leading to all sorts of chaotic population cycles. Humans are of course different iin knowing they are doing it. Trying to live sustainably could be argued as a very unatural thing.

(Agreeing with A_A here again, makes me feel yucky but I prefer truth over emotion)
😀
Indeed, many species manufacture things too, termites, ants etc, and the the way they have manufactured changes over time.

The whole "natural" fallacy is borne of a mythical concept of mother nature, "like nature intended". Nature does not intend anything, it just evolves according to environment and circumstance.

It astounds me that people view our own evolution as something bad, yet view other animals evolution as perfectly normal.

The only natural thing in the thread is the bickering into which it's descended. 🙂

Btw, thanks for the vid OP. It was interesting, informative and enjoyable.

lovely film though I doubt very much if there were more european badgers ! 🙂

more likely to be the american variety

[img] [/img]

[i]beaver[/i]

anagallis_arvensis - Member

Alpin do you think yellowstone 13000 years ago looked like it does now?

tbh, i don't care.... i wouldn't much care if all humans right now caught the lergies and died a quick death.

sometimes i hate myself for even bothering to reply to some of the shite people on here post.

i'm going to get stoned and watch some wildlife documentary. it seems a better use of my sunday.. certainly more constructive than reading tit-for-tat posts on here.

that was in only 19 years - incredible.

tbh, i don't care.... i wouldn't much care if all humans right now caught the lergies and died a quick death.

feel free to start with yourself

Why do people have to announce they are going to get stoned,its all a bit 14 year old schoolboy,apologies if you are a 14 year old schoolboy of course.

deadlydarcy - Member
The only natural thing in the thread is the bickering into which it's descended.

What's in the video toys? I have them switched off.

tbh, i don't care.... i wouldn't much care if all humans right now caught the lergies and died a quick death.

sometimes i hate myself for even bothering to reply to some of the shite people on here post.

i'm going to get stoned and watch some wildlife documentary. it seems a better use of my sunday.. certainly more constructive than reading tit-for-tat posts on here.

translation " oh shit my received wisdom actually has no basis, I either need to rethink my ideas, find another epistemology or bury my head in the sand, think I'll do the latter"

I say do not give up Alpin, you might learn something.

The bloke in the fast you show who never commits to any opinion for fear of needing the strength to defend it. I call him Mr Zeitgeist, someone who guages the opinons of the room (or in your case the thread) and plonks themselves squarely in the non confrontational middle.

Recently, by comparison, I have found myself agreeing with someone in the thread who is being rude, and see if I can hang on their coat tails..

Ah I see...something vaguely insulting then.

To be fair, that's pretty natural for you toys. I wouldn't expect anything less.

I aim to meet expectations..
I prefer to think of it as amusing banter. It is only a little chat on the internet after all. I always try to include my own self deprecation to make you realise that, but we often fall victim to only seeing what we want to see.

Ah, I think I can remember the guy you were talking about...constantly changes his mind depending on who's talking to him in a group in the pub. Was that the one?

yeah, I realised that the title of the vid is Indecisive [s]Darcy[/s] Dave. He has also been compared to [url= http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/for-indecisive-dave-this-constant-reversal-of-core-beliefs-must-be-terribly-exhausting-8980840.html ]Dave Cameron[/url]. Isn't that nice..

Yeah, I thought that was the one. I'm just going through all my posts on the thread to count how many times I changed my mind. What's your best guess before we count?

Well I will be the first to admit that it isn't a brill comparison, as what you do is just say platitudes/keep your powder dry to ensure you don't stray too far from the middle, but you kind of remind me of that character. Yours is more sort of measuring the zeitgeist and repeating it in witty distilled format. Don't take it as an insult, it's merely a subjective observation. I really enjoy your virtual company.

There have been beavers filmed in the wild, and, it seems, raising young on a river in Devon. Nobody seems to know where they've come from; a scheme nearby that's breeding beaver in a controlled manner say that every one of their animals are accounted for, and locally the attitude is to quietly observe them, to see how they interact with an uncontrolled 'natural' environment, as against a 'controlled' environment.
DEFRA, fairly predictably, are saying in their usual, pompous manner, that it's illegal to release alien creatures into the wild and they may have to be culled! FFS! The controlled programmes are to work towards the release of beaver into the wider environment, which is what's happened, but these office-bound drones are calling for the animals to be culled.
Still, I guess they'll be easier to trap and shoot than badgers, then. 🙄

DEFRA appear to be failing on everyone's measure.

Well I will be the first to admit that it isn't a brill comparison

That's all you had to do in the first place.

Don't take it as an insult

I'll have to go and have a look at an episode of The Fast Show later to make absolutely sure, but I don't remember that character as somebody to whose personality I'd aspire to be honest. Weren't the sketches mostly making fun of him? And now that I know your [s]secret[/s] signal of including a little self-deprecation alongside the (for want of a better word, I really can't think of one for some reason) insult, I'll know how to take it the next time. 🙂

Recently, by comparison, I have found myself agreeing with someone in the thread who is being rude, and see if I can hang on their coat tails..

This was hardly secret, nor was it an edit. (although slightly edited).

Anyway, I wouldn't imagine you were aspiring to be him, it's just reminiscent of the way I see you.

Fairy nuff. I've edited. I'm struggling to keep up with yours though. (Too busy changing my mind, see?)

To be fair I didn't post any self depreciation along side the vid, just in the explanation after.

Anyway, we've already derailed the thread enough. The little fella can't make up his mind whether he wants to empty the cd rack, empty the cupboards or throw his building blocks around so I'm going to have to keep an eye on him. I wish he'd stick to just the one thing. I honestly have no idea where he gets it from.

Sorry I've been out riding my bike all day whilst people have being 'discussing' the video. Just one question to someone with a phd thingy...Are humans the only living creature in nature to persecute another to extinction to fulfil their greed? If so I think we should be considered seperately from the natural world.

...Are humans the only living creature in nature to persecute another to extinction to fulfil their greed?

The examples I can think of are introduced species though and that involves direct human involvement. I'd be surprised if some plant hasn't washed up on a beach somewhere and caused the extinction of some species on that island either through direct competition or outcompeting a food source.
Then out course we can decide if bacterial diseases count, viruses are not alive in the conventional sense.

[i] beavers filmed in the wild[/i]

😀

Shaun20 - Member
..Are humans the only living creature in nature to persecute another to extinction to fulfil their greed? If so I think we should be considered seperately from the natural world.

These [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorylus ]little devils[/url] are pretty effective at wholesale extinctions in their path.

Absolutely fascinating to watch them in action.