Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Study Debunks Hypothesis That Killing Predators Reduces Livestock Losses

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday September 04 2016, @01:49PM   Printer-friendly
from the untangling-the-food-web dept.

-- OriginalOwner_ writes:

The Center for Biological Diversity reports via Common Dreams

Killing predators such as wolves, mountain lions and bears in order to protect livestock may have intuitive appeal, but a rigorous review of multiple studies that was published today shows little or no scientific support that it actually reduces livestock losses. In fact, in some cases it even leads to increases in livestock loss. These conclusions directly counter the reasoning behind the common practice of killing predators in response to livestock depredations--as carried out by the secretive federal program, Wildlife Services, and many state game agencies.

"This study [paywalled] shows that not only is Wildlife Services' annual killing of tens of thousands of wolves, coyotes, bears, bobcats, cougars, and other animals unconscionable--it's also ineffective", said Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity. "Our government should ground the aerial snipers, pull the poisons and remove the steel leghold traps in response to these findings."

The unexpected finding that carnivore killings can increase depredations is likely based on disruption of the predators' social dynamics--namely, by removing dominant animals that maintain large territories, these killings release sub-adult animals that are less-skilled hunters and thus more likely to target domestic animals.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Study Debunks Hypothesis That Killing Predators Reduces Livestock Losses | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 48 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday September 04 2016, @02:53PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday September 04 2016, @02:53PM (#397402) Homepage

    Killing wolves is morally reprehensible unless one's life depends on it.

    This is a list of animals which are okay (and often recommended) to to kill:

    Pigeons
    Seagulls
    Ducks
    Geese
    Hogs
    Rabbits
    Humans

    As somebody who has shot a few animals, it feels amazing when you drop your prey. Then you can walk up to the still-thrashing body and take potshots at it, or you can fire a 12-gauge shotgun from point-blank range -- they literally explode! Taking an animal with a gun is such a powerful feeling, it raises you to the top of the world! You are king of the jungle!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=1, Funny=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   3  

  • (Score: 3, Touché) by jimshatt on Sunday September 04 2016, @03:13PM

    by jimshatt (978) on Sunday September 04 2016, @03:13PM (#397406) Journal
    Non-flying creatures such as hogs and humans are less fun though, unless of course they are flung into the air first.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @07:56PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @07:56PM (#397479)

      Bacon catapult?

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @08:33PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @08:33PM (#397496)

    I'm certain serial killers feel the same way.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @09:49PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @09:49PM (#397525)

      I'm certain other serial killers feel the same way.