Rural Community Gateway

Well done Brian Moffat for making a few sensible and rational comments.

If people want to introduce more exotic animals into the Scottish countryside, they can join a long list of other thoughtless people who released species like grey squirrels, sika and fallow deer, signal crayfish etc to say nothing of hogweed, knotweed, and balsam and moved hedgehogs to the Western Isles.

Are the same people who banned hunting foxes keen to see feral wolves pulling down deer? A bit irrational from an animal welfare point of view one might have thought.

I suppose it does not matter much if lots of sheep and pets get killed and even a few campers too but they would probably only be injured! But who will take responsibility for the damage caused?

One thing is certain, management must be allowed to control numbers if they cause problems or reach pest proportions.

But some hope when Veggie Benn will not even sanction controlling badgers sick with TB.

11-Jun-2008 @ 16:34PM

Norette Ferns

Thanks for your comment Brian. The debate certainly continues, which is why I have highlighted the issue in Rural Answers - hopefully this will attract comment from more Rural Gateway users.

I noticed on the BBC website today that there will be a conference in Findhorn Forres in September about the issue of reintroducing animals. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7446062.stm

Norette, this seems to be a live one again, as the landowner concerned (I'm told) has been quite high profile in the media very recently,advocating the re-introduction. Brian Moffatt

11-Jun-2008 @ 14:11PM

Norette Ferns

Although this article is about three years old, we've had a number of thought provoking comments recently.

We didn't want these comments and the debate to get buried in the archives, so I've added a posting in Rural Answers with a link to this article, asking people for their views.

You'll also find a link to BBC Radio 4's programme about Paul Lister at Alladale Estate in Sutherland and his plans to re-wild his estate.

Here's the link to the Rural Answers posting:
http://www.ruralgateway.org.uk/item/2298

For crying out loud!!! when did humans get the right to destroy everything we come into contact with? I throughly agree with this idea although why should they be fenced in? it is about time we woke up and realised that unless we do something drastic very soon we are not going to have a world to live in. Animals have as much right if not more to inhabit this world without the fear of us humans shooting them. I support paul 100% with this and hope that the goverment wake up very soon and allow this to take place without anymore delay. If Paul would like my help in anyway I will gladly give it free of charge.

Just for a starting point, try Wikipedia, "wolf attacks on humans". Of course the pro wolf lobby will dismiss all of this and other evidence as mere fiction. Further I like deer,and fail to understand why anyone wishing to carry out a cull, would rather see a deer torn apart by wolves, than cleanly shot, and the meat utilised for human consumption. Its about as nice as keepers introducing myxomatosis, to kill rabbits, and believe me they still do that. But then what do I know?Brian Moffatt

30yrs living very rural in the countryside, interest in both history and wildlife 64 yrs old. No experience? Not many farmers on rural gateway either, are there? All in all, its pretty one sided this argument (sorry, discussion). As a matter of interest I've actually seen something that looked very like a wolf out here. I wonder just who let that one out? How about asking Defra about all of this? And if wolves are introduced, and it doesn't work out how, do you propose to get rid of them. Yours, Brian Moffatt

I think Brian's comments are typical of people who think they know something about wildlife. The reality is that we humans are the most dangerous creature to come across in any forest or even on any city street, not the wolf. Records of wolves attacking humans are almost non existent. Personally I think that the reintroduction of the wolf would be good for the wolf, the human spirit, send the right caring messages to our young people and good for the rural economy.

Come back Little Red Riding Hood, all is forgiven!
This is why berserkers wore wolf skins, because they were such a friendly lot?
How many of you would feel safe out here in the dark, in the woods, alone, knowing there was a gentle pack of wolves, hunting a deer or two nearby?
Let's get real.
Brian Moffatt.

I wyte dove would like to thank and congratulate Paul van Vlissingen..for what he is trying to do !!!!!!!
It is one of the oldest conflicts between man and beast: farmers killing marauders such as wolves, lynxes, lions and leopards to defend their livestock from the predators. This ancient tension has increased as people have encroached ever further into the wilderness, and many predators have been driven to the verge of extinction as a result.

As well as hopes that the wolves would hunt wild deer, support comes from those interested in recreating the long-lost forested landscapes of ancient Britain, where wolves lived with bear, elk and other extinct or rare species.
In Yellowstone, the reintroduction of wolves has been linked to declines in their favoured prey of elks and coyotes. Pronghorn fawn, which are hunted by the coyote, and willow and aspen eaten by the elk have thrived, and the burgeoning vegetation has helped birds and insects prosper too. The wolves have also brought in millions of dollars a year in tourist spending.
Such changes could be felt in Britain, but only if more work is done to reintroduce other extinct species and replant trees in areas of Scotland where reintroductions are most likely, said Richard Morley, a co-director of the Wolves and Humans Foundation. 'It would help, but we have got to acknowledge Scotland has a very degraded environment,' he said.
The supporters of wild wolf reintroductions acknowledge there is still strong opposition, especially from farmers who are worried about livestock, and walking groups who fear the wolves could be a danger to people - although most experts agree humans should be safe.
Scottish Natural Heritage's policy director, Professor Colin Galbraith, also warns there might not be sufficient forest habitat for wild wolves.
These were 'legitimate concerns' and so the only way wolves could be reintroduced was to persuade people it was safe for them and their animals, said Hutt. 'We have to learn conflict resolution,' she said. 'The animals will do fine if we give them a place to live, and we can sit down and talk to each other about how best to manage them and alter to their needs.'

It is correct that Scotland looks at the reitroduction of the Lynx the Beaver and any other wild creatures that have recently become extinct here. All can see that the sea eagles, ospreys, red Kites etc are great for business and great for the soul !! BUT I continue to argue that it is not small pockets of eco resistance that we should be looking into but the fact that there is no one group, think tank or task force to take up and run with this whole ecotourism environmental issue.

We're following the debate here with interest. Correspondents might be interested to learn that from around mid-July we will be running a users' survey about the issue of reintroduction of wolves and lynx in Scotland. We will publicise this nearer the time.

I would say that after 27 years here of driving much of the ecotourism stuff, the biggest problem is that there is no ecotourism industry/group, nor any green tourism hand guiding anything here. Instead all is simply up for grabs by market forces. This is shocking I feel in this truly environmentally aware age. Yes we have SNH and RSPB but they are environmentalists by nature and do not really understand, nor want to understand the economic angle of all of this. If we are to 'sell' care of the natural environment, reintroduction of the Beaver, a tourism tree planting scheme, better on the ground eco interpretation, etc etc then we need a group to steer and nurture the whole ecotourism show here, or it continues in the slap dash way that it happens at present. Environmental knowledge and awareness seems to be new to many here at a senior level or even on our community councils and they are foxed by all these people coming to places like Mull with binoculars round their necks, when they can go to Tenerife !! We need and must have people who know about these things sitting around a table to discuss ways forward with Ecotourism. Otherwise I can see the reintroduction of the wolf coming about via a couple of tourists with two wolves and three or four beavers in their boot!!!

I am ok with that but is this really a professional way forward for Scotland and environmental/ecotourism??

I would love to see wolves and other species re-introduced but I believe wolves would rather focus on easily captured sheep than deer and would soon be hunted by irate farmers.

And I agree with Paul Lounds !! Despite the gigantic interest in all things 'environmental'our own national and regional government nor local community groups are not at all up with the pace of things. As a country historically peceived to be 'green' one can scratch the surface aywhere here and find that this is simply not true. We have a government adding to this negativity simply because they are afraid of upsetting anyone. Goodness me we have even cancelled the reintroduction of an innocent and native creature like the Beaver!!!Frankly I cannot bring to mind a single environmental visionary here since John Muir.

I agree wholeheartedly with David Woodhouse and Carl Pye in putting John Webb's comments into perspective and bringing some balance into the argument. This issue is more a matter of truth and fact, rather than uninformed mere opinion. Everyone would be appalled (naturally justified) and also up in arms (less justified) if a wolf attacked a person, it would be headline national news. But the hundreds of annual dog attacks and dozens of deer and livestock accidents, some fatal, do not make even the local news often, and certainly do not persuade us to ban all the large canine pets, or indeed legally-owned, dangerous exotic animals.

Why don't these invoke the horror that a wolf attack would? Injuries to people sustained in these ways would always outnumber any possible wolf attacks by thousands to one, and yet it would, without exception, be the wolf attacks, if any, that would be focussed on. It makes no sense, and is biased, irrational and illogical. For the more mercenary-minded amongst us - just as deer, livestock and dogs serve us in various ways, wolves would likewise serve a useful purpose, as an eco-tourist attraction and income generator, deer-population controller, natural ecosystem balancer and all-round beautiful sight.

Bring back the wolf to our island and, indeed, all our historical but extinct indigenous population of flora and fauna. It makes sense.

I agree with Carl but even he neglects to mention the massive ecotourism interest that there would be if wolves were to return to Scotland. I am told that I am an eco capitalist rather than an environmetalist but actually I think I am both but what I can clearly see is that sea eagles on Mull, Ospreys on the mainland, kites in England and Wales and cetaceans off the Hebrides etc etc., all put serious bums on beds and that means cash in the pockets of millions of rural people. I am also certain that all of my furry and feathered friends are happy to play their part in Sctoland's tourism effort.

Well regarding your comment, John, that this would be an accident waiting to happen, as someone in the world is eventually going to get killed by a wild wolf. How many people are killed or seriously injured by "pet" dogs each _year_? There are usually several fatalities and thousands of attacks serious enough to require hospitilisation worldwide.

_This_ is an accident waiting to happen. Still, this doesn't mean that we should ban dog ownership, does it?

I'd rather take my chances with a wolf that I know is wild, than take a chance with a supposedly "tame" dog that I don't know.

As an afterthought, should we take into account how many people are killed by collisions with deer each year?

I cannot say I'm in favour of bring back wolves to help cull the deer population. So Mr Van Vlissingen says there have been no known wolf attacks on people in the last century? The Wolf Trust website contradicts him: "Only 17 cases of people killed by wolves were found in the last 50 or so years in the whole of North America, Europe and Russia."

It adds: "Wolves can live close to people without causing problems. Their tolerance is surprising, even when people harm their cubs or take their kills. This is not to say that a healthy (that is non-rabid) wolf will never kill anyone. Sooner or later this may happen."

See: http://www.wolftrust.org.uk/a-wkp9-conclusions.html

So please knock this accident waiting to happen on the head, and look to other ways to control deer!