Daily News- US to "steal" the Serengeti

quote:

CHEETAHS, lions, camels and elephants would roam wild in the United States under a new proposal to re-introduce large animals similar to those that humans hunted to extinction long ago.

The US Ecological History Park, as it is billed by scientists, would help preserve species that are under increasing pressure for survival in Africa. It would also recreate a more balanced predator-prey relationship in the Great Plains and Southwest, an ecological diversity that has been absent for more than 10,000 years thanks at least in part to hunting pressure.

The idea, similar to one already underway in Siberia, is being mulled by a dozen ecologists and conservationists at 10 universities and institutions.

The park, where large and sometimes dangerous predators would roam free, could be an economic boon to depressed farming regions that humans are fleeing from anyway.

The scientists would like to start now, using large tracts of private land, and expand the effort through the century.

"If we only have 10 minutes to present this idea, people think we're nuts," admits Harry Greene, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Cornell University.

"But if people hear the one-hour version, they realise they haven't thought about this as much as we have. Right now, we are investing all of our megafauna hopes on one continent -- Africa."

Better than rats

One justification for "rewilding," as the scientists call it, is that one way or another, we humans have a dramatic effect on the animal kingdom and ecology in general, so a proactive approach is better than letting the world go to the dogs. Or, in this case, to the rats.

In the absence of elephants and large predators, which together stomp the ground and keep other animals on the run, landscapes will come to be dominated by dandelions, rats and other undesirables, the scientists write.

Large predators can be "keystone species" that are crucial to shaping the flora and fauna of an entire range.

A modern example is the widespread disappearance of wolves and grizzly bears in parts of the West, again at the hands of humans. Elk populations soared. Elk eat willows, which beavers rely on, and so beaver populations in Colorado declined by up to 90 per cent, the authors state.

Fewer beavers meant fewer dams, and the reduced wetlands caused willow populations to decline 60 per cent in some areas.

The paper's lead author is Cornell graduate student Josh Donlan.

"Humans will continue to change ecosystems, cause extinctions, and affect the very future of evolution -- either by default or design," Donlan said.

"The default scenario will surely include ever more pests and weed-dominated landscapes and the extinction of most large vertebrates."

Cheetahs, woolly mammoths and relatives of the camel were just a few of the large mammals that roamed America during the Pleistocene era, which ended 10,000 years ago as the last Ice Age retreated.

Studies have shown that their demise was due largely to hunting by humans, not from climate change as one theory held.

Their absence has altered the biodiversity of the continent and potentially the evolution of other animals. Large prey such as the antelope-like pronghorn of the Southwest evolved lightning speed over millions of years to escape cheetahs, for example.

The park would actually involve multiple locations and phases of introduction, beginning immediately.

One first step would be to import endangered camels from the Gobi desert to the American Southwest, where they might gobble woody plants that now rule some landscapes.

Small numbers of African cheetahs and elephants from Asia and Africa could immediately be introduced on private property in the United States. The endangered cheetahs are close relatives to cats that roamed prehistoric America. Elephants are related to mammoths.

The elephants could bring economic benefit by their natural ability to manage grasslands and the potential for ecotourism, the scientists say.

Financial benefit is a key to the whole plan, in fact. The researchers cite the more than 1.5 million annual visitors to the semi-wild San Diego Zoo as an example of the draw that might be expected in a Pleistocene Park.

The scientists realise they have an uphill battle to gain public support. The controversy surrounding the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park shows the "clear obstacles" faced by any rewilding effort, Donlan said.

"Obviously, gaining public acceptance is going to be a huge issue, especially when you talk about reintroducing predators," Donlan said. "There are going to have to be some major attitude shifts. That includes realising predation is a natural role, and that people are going to have to take precautions."

quote:

Quite interesting...

This is about as smart as a sellf inflicted poke to the eye. I don't need the 1 hour presentation because the ten minute presentation prooves the great stupidity we are up against each day. This jackass is a Cornell Grad Student. Is he earning his Phd in bullshit. This reflects poorly on that university. According to him if a species' PR department is lacking then they need to be replaced by something more marketable. Rats serve a purpose too. Why am I bitching. Maybe my kids will be able to go on a Kansas PAC hunt in thirty years.

If that idiot thinks the "controversy" over wolves was a big deal , wait till he tries to release lions onto the Kansas plains....
troy.

Sounds like an interesting idea and I'm fine with it on three conditions:

• These animals may not negatively impact native species in the manner that all other introduced exotics have impacted our native flora and fauna;
  
• As populations stabilize, a conservation minded government will allow hunting of these imported animals.
  
• NONE OF MY TAX DOLLARS MAY BE USED TO FUND THIS PROJECT.

Academics with more books smarts than common sense inventing new ways for me to enjoy the sport of hunting is one thing. Academics inventing new ways for the government to piss away more of my tax dollars is another. Furthermore, since mankind has done such a wonderful job of screwing up the ecosystem thus far in history, remind me again how importing new and bigger non-native species is going to help?

It's already happening. It's called the Y.O. Ranch.

Lol.

I love the fact that hunting and hunters are blamed several times in the article for the extinction/demise of these animals and there is no mention of the benefits hunting does bring to conservation efforts.

I usually don't jump in with comments on these but am very impressed with the tenacity of those who hunted 10,000 years ago.

"Cheetahs, woolly mammoths and relatives of the camel were just a few of the large mammals that roamed America during the Pleistocene era, which ended 10,000 years ago as the last Ice Age retreated.

Studies have shown that their demise was due largely to hunting by humans, not from climate change as one theory held."

Apparently they must have been hunted for sport and our human ancestors could kill quicker than than the species could mate. Very impressive.

This guy is more than a few french fries short of a happy meal. His 1.5 million visitors to the SD Zoo provide fewer dollars for conservation (in capativity) than the annual expenditures by hunters going to Africa.

quote:

Originally posted by Msichana:
an ecological diversity that has been absent for more than 10,000 years thanks at least in part to hunting pressure.

Must be Bush's fault. Heaven knows, the natives don't overhunt, and the rest of us have only been here 5% of the stated time period.

Did they have global warming in 8,000 BC??

Isn't it interesting how hunting is to blame for species that haven't existed for over 10,000 years. Must a been a hell of a lot of hunters or some pretty damn good ones to inflict all of that carnage and wipe out that many species with spears, bows and arrows, etc. Maybe they were Bush's ancestors. Probably were, according to the Dems. I say if they restore populations of some of these animals to the U.S., that they then require the proponents of this idiotic idea to first live amongst them for at least 6 months, with primitive weapons as protection only, in order to "monitor" their progress.

This type of thing has been talked about by a small group of scientists or biologists(?) etc. for years and years; it isn't going to happen. Not to mention that the article is full of inuendo and non-factual information.
By the way, the Army(?) tried to re-introduce camels into the Southwest back in the mid/late 1800's (have to verify dates) as a replacement for horses. It was thought they would do better in the Cavalry there; didn't work anyway.
There were rumors for a long time some survived , and/or un-verified sightings kind of like the Loch Ness monster or something....

quote:

Originally posted by smarterthanu:
This jackass is a Cornell Grad Student. Is he earning his Phd in bullshit.

Exactly right. His plan will wither on the vine as soon as he gets his doctorate.

"If we only have 10 minutes to present this idea, people think we're nuts, admits Harry Greene, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Cornell University."

Not nuts, just full of sheeeit. The Fed's put Wolves in Yellowstone, against the wishes of those who had to live with them. Lion's in Wyoming? African Lion's never roamed the prairie, neither did Elephants. Long gone are the Saber-tooth Cat, Mastodon/Wooly Mammoth and American Lion. Turning them loose in a "wild park" here in the States is another jackass idea by people that need a life. They should concentrate on stoping poaching in Kenya...but oh I forgot: Kenya doesn't have poaching problems. My bad.....

As wild as it may sound some US scientist would like to return the American Great Plains to pre ice age Pleistocene era.

See; http://africanhuntinginfo.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=680

But before hunters cancel their safari plans to the Serengeti it should be noted that this transition of the great plains into an animal park does not necessarily include hunters or hunting. Eco tourism is a long held and targeted plan to replace the dwindling hunting generated funds that have supported wildlife in the US for the last 100 years. Just as Yellowstone and the article sited "semi-wild San Diego Zoo" have consistently rejected hunting and any hunting related use of excess animals it should be assumed that the trend for wildlife managers to continue to court the "non consumptive users" and follow the more politically correct birth control, euthanasia, and 4 legged predator control methods.

Wildlife managers realized more than a decade ago that the decline of hunters and their monies spelled big problems for the bureaucratic system that manages US wildlife which hunters proudly paid to restore and manage, even to the point of assuming that it was "their wildlife". Not wanting to run off the goose and the only egg in town, this attitude was allowed to go unchecked and hunters have even touted by WM's all the while they have been looking courting new flocks of the more populace and less finicky bird the general public. It is only recently that Wildlife Managers have started to subtly mention that wildlife is a public resource and encourage hunters to invite cooperation and seek funding assistance from "like minded" wildlife enthusiasts such as the Audubon Society, Sierra Club and etc.
Once the family business goes public and he new majority stockholders have a vote, a huge shift in the board of directors will finally allow the company professionals (aka WMs) to finally run "their department" as it should be run without the interference and meddling of the old boys who demanded dividends in the form of hunting opportunity.

Meanwhile the hunting and fishing public who are basking in the glory of having restored a number of big game species and who opposed each other on numerous issues for the greater good, will likely buy in and be co-opted to quiet or disparage the minority opposition of varmint and bird hunters that currently roam the great plains shooting rats, gophers, pheasants and grouse.

Once the monorail or amtracks are up and running across the great plains and making a broad sweep south thru the Rockies where eco tourist can see the equally prehistoric wolf and grizzly it will likely turn west and head for the gold coast since the domestication of Texas will lag slightly behind unless the current anti high fence and anti commercialization of wildlife in the form of estate and lease hunting continues to catch fire!

Other information on the Socialization of wildlife can be found at;
both sides of the fence

The International socialization of all wildlife is the work of International Assoc. of Fish & Wildlife Agencies The original whie paper on the "New Model for Fish and Wildlife Management" is no longer available on line but it can be found inside; The Value of The North American Model of Fish and Wildlife Management. @ The Value of The North American Model of Fish and Wildlife Management (Pay particular attention to the the 6 points that start about half way down the column)

"2 cents for bucks" from a Dallas Morning News is a good read if you can find it! I lost the link to that article

Best Regards

Mike O

If Congress thinks the uprising against the Immigration Bill was bad, they should think about thousands of farmers, ranchers, and vacation home owners arising at the thought of having their lands populated with Liona, Leopards, Cheetah, and Cape Buffalo!

LLS

Those "models" that show that early man caused the extinction of the mega fauna all assume that only a single species were hunted. Spread the hunting pressure over the mastodons, mammoths, ground sloths, giant bison and giant elk and all of a sudden early man has no effect at all.

I don't think I would mind these programs if they weren't funded by tax dollars, and stuck to present day animals. If they ant to repopulate the plains with Bison, elk and proghorn, wolves, Grizzlys etc ok, but they can't condemn any land and they have to pay for it with donations, not tax dollars and not hunting fees.

quote:

It is only recently that Wildlife Managers have started to subtly mention that wildlife is a public resource and encourage hunters to invite cooperation and seek funding assistance from "like minded" wildlife enthusiasts such as the Audubon Society, Sierra Club and etc.

This really ticks me off, these organizations aren't providing any money, they are using politics to get their members onto the state wildlife boards to determine how the hunting fee money is going to be spent. Here in Colorado they have managed to get a state wildlife board that has more guaranteed positions for environmentalists than the wildlife professionals or the hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by smarterthanu:
This is about as smart as a sellf inflicted poke to the eye. I don't need the 1 hour presentation because the ten minute presentation prooves the great stupidity we are up against each day. This jackass is a Cornell Grad Student. Is he earning his Phd in bullshit. This reflects poorly on that university. According to him if a species' PR department is lacking then they need to be replaced by something more marketable. Rats serve a purpose too. Why am I bitching. Maybe my kids will be able to go on a Kansas PAC hunt in thirty years.

Don't you remember the old saying?

BS, MS, PHD...

Bull Shit
More of the Same
Piled Higher and Deeper

As I have said in previous forums, I am all for this idea as long as the first populations are released in the city parks of New York, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, and maybe in the Peoples Republic of Boulder, Colorado.

I read the article these morons had in Scientific American -- which seems to have recently abandoned being the pre-eminent scientific journal, and started publishing politically motivated crap -- the key component of their plan involves NO MORE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP!!! It hinges on seizing vast tracks of land from ranchers, to establish their little Eutopia -- it is also a garbage preservation idea, since it calls for using hybrids which APPEAR to be similar to past wild species, and ignores that the prarie grass has evolved in 15,000 years, and needs burning for proper management, not elephants, and... well, hell, it's written by a bunch of idiots with no knowledge of genetics, or ecology, or anything else.

Nothing's wrong w. ranchers doing it -- but, the actual proposal mentioned in the article is junk. Additionally, it's being pushed as some type of "conservation" measure -- which it's not.
And, as some mythical way to restore the native grasses -- which it's not. The central US's grass is in terrible shape, but adding elephants is not how to fix it -- planting native seeds, and controlled burns will.

Additionally, many of the roles they want filled by African animals could be filled by American ones, w.o. much disruption. (EG. Wolves were never a problem on our ranch in Montana, even though we had them for several reasons A) we raised cattle -- sheep and goats have absolutely no place on Western American grasslands. B) If the hands saw them anywhere near the buildings, or the cattle, they were shot (so, they learned not to go near the cattle or the buildings.)

If ranchers want to use hybrids, find a way to keep elephants on their own property, thats fine... However, given the trouble we've had eliminating pigs do to local idiots releasing Russian Boars, I can't imagine the same fools getting ahold of pachyderms. (Of course, they might be a bit more careful w. them, given the cost.)