|
Reintroduction & Rewilding
|
It’s official: Voters decide to reintroduce wolves in Colorado
Proposition 114 passed as a flurry of Front Range-votes widened the initiative’s margin of victory, paving the way for the animals’ return to the Western Slope. Unleash the hounds. Proposition 114 was decided Thursday as votes from heavily populated Front Range counties pushed the wolf reintroduction plan to victory. The measure, which tasks Colorado Parks and Wildlife with crafting a plan by the end of 2023 to reintroduce wolves into the Western Slope, was too close to call on Tuesday night and all day Wednesday. The tightest statewide ballot issue in Colorado’s 2020 election, Proposition 114 was ahead by a narrow margin that veered close to triggering an automatic recount. Opponents of the measure conceded the race on Thursday. Even though there were more than 300,000 votes yet to be counted, a lead of more than 20,000 votes out of 2.97 million cast appeared insurmountable.  *This image is copyright of its original author Coloradans Protecting Wildlife, the group opposing Proposition 114, said in a statement that it believed “forced wolf reintroduction” into Colorado is bad policy that should not have been decided by voters. “All along, our opposition campaign was led by those who would be directly impacted by this measure, including real Coloradans, sportsmen, farmers and ranchers, outdoor enthusiasts, and more,” the statement from the group’s spokesman Patrick Pratt, reads. “Despite a small group of wealthy, and often out-of-state, activists spending in excess of $2.1 million to pass this measure, our campaign, with less than $800,000 was able to illustrate why forced wolf introduction is wrong for Colorado.” Few issues raise hackles in the West more than wolves. Farmers, ranchers and hunters fear the return of wolves could damage rural economies that are based on livestock and hunting. Advocates who have pushed to introduce and protect wolves in Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico and Arizona argue that Colorado is a final step in a 40-year effort to return wolf populations that were hunted into extinction in the 1920s. Colorado is the first state to reintroduce wolves at the direction of voters rather than federal wildlife biologists working under the Endangered Species Act. Last week, Interior Sec. David Bernhardt announced that the gray wolf population in the U.S. was recovered and no longer needed protection under the Endangered Specials Act, which has protected the canines since 1978. The federal delisting transfers management of wolves to states. A delisting of wolves in the Northern Rockies in 2008 legalized hunting and trapping of the predators. Colorado already has a law protecting wolves as a “species of concern,” making it illegal to kill the animals. Supporters of Proposition 114 said the delisting emphasizes the need for additional protection of wolves that comes with reintroduction. Opponents argued the federal delisting proved that wolf populations are healthy enough in the Northern Rockies to migrate south and establish packs in Colorado. Earlier this year, Colorado wildlife biologists confirmed the presence of a wolf pack in the northwest portion of the state. The Colorado Wildlife Commission in 2016 rejected a proposal to reintroduce wolves, pointing to potential threats to the state’s big game population and livestock industry. More than three dozen rural counties in Colorado opposed Proposition 114. But voters in the state’s six most populated counties along the Front Range anchored the 13 counties that supported Proposition 114, illustrating a divide over wolves that fell largely along urban-rural lines. Opponents of the measure hope the narrow margin factors into policy discussions as Colorado Parks and Wildlife gathers public input and assembles a plan for reintroduction. That plan, per the ballot language, requires statewide hearings and includes building a system to reimburse ranchers who lose livestock to wolves. “The election results demonstrate that nearly half of Coloradans agree with us. We hope these election results show proponents, lawmakers and Colorado Parks and Wildlife that next steps must be taken in a measured, responsible way,” the statement from Coloradans Protecting Wildlife reads. The group said it would continue to work to protect wildlife, ensure diverse groups — “not just activists and regulators from the Front Range” — are including in wolf-policy development, and to defend ranchers and “prepare the West Slope for the realities of introducing a new apex predator.” Supporters of Proposition 114 say the margin doesn’t matter and welcome their opponents to the next step. “The bottom line is that Proposition 114 is not based on how close the vote was. It’s the law. We need to all get our heads around that fact and lean into the work ahead, which is fashioning a future for wolves in Colorado that we can coexist with,” said Rob Edward with the Rocky Mountain Wolf Action Fund. “We need to go forward as neighbors and adversaries and friends and create a future for wolves.” Edward dismissed the notion that Proposition 114 passed solely on the back of Front Range and urban residents. He points to San Miguel, La Plata, San Juan, Summit and Pitkin counties, where a majority of voters approved the measure. “We would not be having this conversation today had it not been for people on the Western Slope voting for wolves,” he said. 
In 2010, a tigress was killed by a jeep in Bandhavgarh buffer zone. She had 3 4 month cubs. One of the cubs was killed by a stray male while the other two were on the verge of starvation when the forest officials rescued them.
The two siblings were raised in-situ for 4 years till the officials were satisfied with the hunting capabilities. This female was “re-wilded” in Satpura in 2015 and has since raised 6 cubs in 2 litters each and is currently raising another 3 cubs in her latest litter. She is called the Churna Tigress. Couple of years ago, a tigress named Avni was shot and her two cubs were orphaned. The male eluded capture but the female was brought to Pench and was raised in-situ exactly like Churna tigress using her blueprint. After nearly 2 years, the NTCA has given the green light for her to be re-wilded in Pench itself. She would have been released earlier but her hunting rate didn’t match the standards set by NTCA. https://www.hindustantimes.com/mumbai-news/ntca-approves-release-of-tigress-avni-s-cub-into-the-wild-maharashtra-forest-department/story-l2mjnbS43ncPfC3FuZQWKJ.html
The Case for Hippos in Colombia
Abstract Drug lord Pablo Escobar imported 4 Hippopotamuses (Hippopotamus amphibius) onto his private estate in Colombia in the 1980s. Since his arrest and assassination, the hippos have escaped the confines of the property and have begun to reproduce in the wild of Colombia. They now number approximately 60 individuals. The presence of such a large, and possibly dangerous, species in a new habitat raises several moral and ecological questions and dilemmas. It is unknown what effect these animals may have on their new environment, or the threat that they pose to the people living near them. In an effort to mitigate possible risks to the environment and local populations the Colombian government initiated an effort to castrate all males in the herd. However, it is unlikely that these efforts will be very effective in curbing the population growth of the animals. South America lost most of its large species of animals during the Quaternary Extinction and it is possible that the hippos are filling a gap that still exists in the ecology of the continent. The rewilding efforts occurring around the world aim to restore and protect natural processes and habitats by introducing (or reintroducing) apex predators or keystone species. Perhaps further research could shed light on possible positive influences that the Hippos have on the South American environment and responsible ways to avoid risks to local populations.
The summarised, but holistic case for rewilding
Rewilding should be central to global restoration efforts
Elephant rewilding indirectly affects the abundance of an arboreal but not generalist savanna lizard
Abstract Trophic rewilding provides a nature-based solution for biological conservation; however, empirical studies demonstrating rewilding effects are limited. Megaherbivores moderate the type and quality of habitat available to other fauna. However, these effects may take time to develop. Further, fauna responses to megaherbivore rewilding will depend on a suite of life-history traits and strategies that allow persistence within megaherbivore modified landscapes. We conducted a space-for-time field survey in South African savanna to determine if habitat modifications mediated by a reintroduced megaherbivore, the African savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana), impacts the abundance of the diurnal arboreal cape dwarf gecko (Lygodactylus capensis) and two generalist diurnal skinks [the variable skink (Trachylepis varia) and striped skink (Trachylepis striata), collectively] across a 47-year period. The relative abundance of lizards and six habitat attributes utilized by lizards were assessed at 30 sites stratified across three biophysically and climatically similar nature reserves with different elephant reintroduction times (no elephants, 2003, 1972). The arboreal gecko was less common at the reserve with an older reintroduction time than the other reserves and was most commonly observed on, and positively correlated with, the density of the corkwood tree (Commiphora mollis). The generalist skinks were common across all reserves and were observed in a variety of habitats. Our results suggest that elephant rewilding differently impacts lizard species with different life-history strategies and that these effects take prolonged periods to develop. Given such knowledge, a long-term understanding of post-rewilding interactions will be a key point when designing and assessing the success of rewilding initiatives.  IBERÁ, A COMPLETE, BEAUTIFUL, AND LIVELY WETLAND It's been almost six months since the jaguar returned to Iberá, in northeastern Argentina. Six months since this spectacular wetland from Corrientes became complete, more beautiful, livelier. Watching Juruna and her cubs, Sãso and Sagua'a, walk along the edge of the ""Estero"" in a winter morning only confirms this idea. The people from Corrientes chose the path of coexistence with wildlife many years ago, allowing the return of many missing species. Choices like this bring hope for a future in harmony with the natural world and prosperity for local communities respectful of all living beings. @rewilding_argentina - @gobiernocorrientes
Prehistoric and historic baselines for trophic rewilding in the Neotropics
Abstract A promising, but also controversial approach to ecological restoration is trophic rewilding, i.e., species introductions to restore top-down trophic interactions and associated trophic cascades to promote self-regulating biodiverse ecosystems. To provide historically-informed base-lines for trophic rewilding in the Neotropics, we aggregate data on late-Quaternary (last 130,000 years) large-bodied (megafauna, here: ≥10kg body mass) mammals to estimate two base-lines: megafaunas including historically (post-1500 AD) extinct species and accounting for regional extirpations of extant species (historic base-line), and megafaunas additionally including Late Pleistocene-Holocene prehistorically extinct species (prehistoric base-line). The historic base-line is less controversial, while the prehistoric base-line is more relevant from an evolutionary, long-term perspective. The estimated potential distributions indicate strong scope for trophic rewilding, with high levels for the prehistoric baseline (with >20 species missing in many regions and biomes), but also considerable values for the historical baseline. Many areas have strongly reduced diversities for a range of functional and phylogenetic subgroups. We discuss implications, highlighting the need for a more nuanced view on non-native megafauna species as they may sometimes represent taxon substitutions for missing species. We emphasize that trophic rewilding should be implemented flexibly and in dialogue with society, e.g., handling human–wildlife conflicts and ensuring benefits for local livelihoods.
Global meta-analysis reveals incomplete recovery of soil conditions and invertebrate assemblages after ecological restoration in agricultural landscapes
Abstract
Rewilding the world's large carnivores
Abstract Earth's terrestrial large carnivores form a highly endangered group of species with unique conservation challenges. The majority of these species have experienced major geographical range contractions, which puts many of them at high risk of extinction or of becoming ecologically ineffective. As a result of these range contractions and the associated loss of intact predator guilds, the ecological effects of these species are now far less widespread and common, with inevitable consequences for ecosystem function. Rewilding—which includes reintroducing species into portions of their former ranges—is an important carnivore conservation tool and means for restoring top-down ecological regulation. We conducted a global analysis of potential reintroduction areas. We first considered protected areas where one or more large carnivore species have been extirpated, identifying a total of 130 protected areas that may be most suitable for carnivore reintroduction. These protected areas include sites in every major world region, and are most commonly found in Mongolia (n = 13), Canada (n = 11), Thailand (n = 9), Namibia (n = 6), Indonesia (n = 6) and Australia (n = 6). We considered the sizes of protected areas, their levels of protection, the extent of human impacts within and around the protected areas, and the status of prey species in the protected areas. Finally, we used the ‘last of the wild’ approach to identify contiguous low human footprint regions within the former ranges of each species, identifying an additional 150 areas which could be the focus of conservation efforts to create conditions conducive to reintroductions. These low footprint regions were most commonly found in the USA (n = 14), Russia (n = 14), Canada (n = 10), China (n = 9) and Mauritania (n = 8). Together, our results show the global-scale potential for carnivore rewilding projects to both conserve these species and provide critical ecological and social benefits.
An ecoregion-based approach to restoring the world's intact large mammal assemblages
Abstract Assemblages of large mammal species play a disproportionate role in the structure and composition of natural habitats. Loss of these assemblages destabilizes natural systems, while their recovery can restore ecological integrity. Here we take an ecoregion-based approach to identify landscapes that retain their historically present large mammal assemblages, and map ecoregions where reintroduction of 1–3 species could restore intact assemblages. Intact mammal assemblages occur across more than one-third of the 730 terrestrial ecoregions where large mammals were historically present, and 22% of these ecoregions retain complete assemblages across > 20% of the ecoregion area. Twenty species, if reintroduced or allowed to recolonize through improved connectivity, can trigger restoration of complete assemblages over 54% of the terrestrial realm (11 116 000 km2). Each of these species have at least two large, intact habitat areas (> 10 000 km2) in a given ecoregion. Timely integration of recovery efforts for large mammals strengthens area-based targets being considered under the Convention on Biological Diversity. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |