U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-10-2014, 01:26 AM
 
Location: Yellow cottage, green doors.
16,443 posts, read 13,558,784 times
Reputation: 72639

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742 View Post
You could read the backgrounds on the specimens. One was a roadkill. The other found alive in a very different area, by unrelated people. Interbreeding between species within the same genera is extremely common, of course.

Red backed salamanders? Super common. Probably still the most abundant vertebrate of the northern forest. Find them within large city environs all the time, but whatever.

Mute swans aren't "majestic", please don't fall for the emotional charismatic megafauna bull crud. They aren't as destructive as say feral cats (a true beast of an animal), but they have no redeeming qualities in a native North American wetland ecosystem.

Pheasants are another one that is good riddance. Survived due to stocking and were hanging around as long as the right grass nesting habitat continued to exist, but nevertheless, they're another exotic that isn't missed.


Completely incorrect. ^^^
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-11-2014, 12:30 PM
 
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
37,937 posts, read 27,311,316 times
Reputation: 35092
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainroosty View Post

Completely incorrect. ^^^

Please expand. I stand by my statements. The only thing that can be debated was the statement: "Interbreeding between species within the same genera is extremely common, of course."

That would be debatable only on very technical terms as to what species are, and what "common" means. It is not infrequent, clearly.

Pheasants are exotics from Asia.

Mutes are Eurasian exotics.

Plethodon cinereus is widespread and abundant. All, or most, are facing some declines, but still considered one of, if not the, most abundant vertebrate in the northern forest. (Citation: Wyman, Richard L. 1997. Experimental Assessment of Salamanders as Predators of Detrital Food Webs: Effects on Invertebrates, Decomposition and the Carbon Cycle. Biodiversity and Conservation 7, 642-650.) (There are other references to this as well, I just am linking one of the first larger papers on the notion, site specific studies repeating the claim within smaller regions are widely available).

The fox / bull snake hybrid analysis (in a reputable peer reviewed journal) was linked earlier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 02:40 PM
 
Location: San Diego
38,166 posts, read 34,188,128 times
Reputation: 22352
Quote:
Originally Posted by okyrah View Post
I disagree with the killing of Ring necked pheasants. It's not their faults that humans brought them over from China and now their numbers are manipulated so hunters can use them for target practice.
Eurasion Doves are a scourge in the Southwest now. There is now no limit or hunting season on them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Duluth, MN
527 posts, read 996,922 times
Reputation: 884
As someone who also works in wildlife management, I think Timberline742 is spot-on. There has to be balance. There was balance before humans intruded into nature to the point we have now. But as we overpopulate this planet and consume its resources, we're forced into the position of being the ones to do the balancing. And to do that, emotion has to be removed from the equation.

This is why we don't see "petitions" to save other invasives - like zebra mussels or Asian carp. But wait, those aren't cute, cuddly, or "majestic," are they? How about Canada geese, the majority of which are no longer "migratory" and for whom the Fish and Wildlife Service regularly allows the "slaughter" of (aka 'depredation,' for anyone not drinking the "save-this" kool-aid).

But because they poop on our lawns, there are no such "save-the-geese" movements afoot. Go figure.

However - and I'll use wolves in MN as an example - we're seeing repeated efforts to block science-based management efforts like wolf hunts, even after the species has recovered and we had almost twice the numbers needed for a sustainable population. Why? Because a whole bunch of people think of them along the same lines as domestic dogs and assume they're just as lovable as Fido, curled up on the couch next to them. And because their puppies are cute. No, they're a wild species whose actions have potential repercussions on other wild species. Period.

I spent almost 20 years enforcing laws that protected and saved wolves (until their delisting), so I arguably have a lot more invested in them than the average person. But I also understand that need for balance. Just because I "like" them doesn't mean we need so many that they can start affecting other species (like our moose), or can kill pets and take livestock to a degree they've never done previously.

Read some of any wildlife agency's environmental impact studies if you really want the truth. They're written by scientists, the vast majority of whom are avid tree-huggers, to begin with. As such, they would be the first to be against the needless killing of any species. But science and emotion are separate, and these folks realize are able to separate the two. Blogs by someone who thinks a given species is pretty or fun to watch only provide a single perspective.

Also, if a decision has been made by a wildlife agency to manage a species, it almost always costs them money to do so. For anyone who hasn't been living under a rock during the past decade, wildlife agencies aren't exactly flush with cash. That's another reason why the decision is based on science. Not on a whim, because they don't "like" an animal, or because they're being "mean" or "cold-blooded."

I appreciate the passion for wildlife, probably more than most people. But you can't let that passion determine how wildlife is managed.

Oh, and species DO interbreed quite often. We see hybrid wolf-coyotes and hybrid lynx-bobcats here in MN.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2014, 09:12 AM
 
734 posts, read 1,427,868 times
Reputation: 884
I hate to be a spoil sport for people like timberline but the swans have a reprieve and there will be no mass killing of them now.
Hooray for these beautiful birds that add much to our lives! Each and every one is an individual and knows pain and fear and the strong instinct to protect their young and family.
Thank you to the ones on here that supported this and to the many, many people that signed petitions!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2014, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Indiana
31 posts, read 48,495 times
Reputation: 58
Default To the OP

Mute swans are not native to the US. They're an imported Asian species that have negative effects on people and native wildlife. Unlike Canadian geese who are mostly annoying when they **** everywhere, Swans can be dangerous to people and pets. I know, I know. They're beautiful, majestic etc...but they need to go. Being pretty doesn't justify a destructive non-native species continued existence in areas where they cause problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2014, 09:42 AM
 
Location: Yellow cottage, green doors.
16,443 posts, read 13,558,784 times
Reputation: 72639
Quote:
Originally Posted by J5K5LY View Post
I hate to be a spoil sport for people like timberline but the swans have a reprieve and there will be no mass killing of them now.
Hooray for these beautiful birds that add much to our lives! Each and every one is an individual and knows pain and fear and the strong instinct to protect their young and family.
Thank you to the ones on here that supported this and to the many, many people that signed petitions!
I had already read about that news and I thank you for bringing this issue up to us in the first place. Amazing how some people think that their small collection of books is the definitive source of information in reality...rather than first hand, long term evaluation in the field. That's why I quit posting in this thread and others in this Nature forum....small minded ones that will not accept less than, 'look at me, I know all!'. Please.
I'm still stunned at how a salamander is the most common vertebrate in the northeast forests.
LOL! Been out much lately?
Those swans are a vivid part of my memories in the forest, at the ponds. It was like there was universal respect for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2014, 10:33 AM
 
734 posts, read 1,427,868 times
Reputation: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecreepingwolf View Post
Mute swans are not native to the US. They're an imported Asian species that have negative effects on people and native wildlife. Unlike Canadian geese who are mostly annoying when they **** everywhere, Swans can be dangerous to people and pets. I know, I know. They're beautiful, majestic etc...but they need to go. Being pretty doesn't justify a destructive non-native species continued existence in areas where they cause problems.

Seldom are swans a problem with aggression. If anyone has half a brain, they will keep a healthy distance and keep their pets away.
These are the swans in NY we are talking about. You have some chutzpah saying OUR swans must go!
There are NO conclusive studies showing the swans decimating the environment or causing problems. Invasive? After all these years, I would think we would have some major issues but alas, there are none so we aren't going to satisfy the people that enjoy mass slaughter.

Rainroosty- I had quit posting too cuz I don't have time talking to brick walls. Thanks so much for your support!

I am now done with the thread-again. Have at it, heartless people! It's all yours! The swans are safe! Words don't matter!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2014, 10:02 AM
 
Location: Duluth, MN
527 posts, read 996,922 times
Reputation: 884
Quote:
Amazing how some people think that their small collection of books is the definitive source of information in reality...rather than first hand, long term evaluation in the field.
Um, yeah. That's exactly what I've been doing for almost 20 years, not to mention basing my opinions on others who do the same. I think that's a more valid source for an informed opinion than simply evaluating a species based on its aesthetic value.

Quote:
Seldom are swans a problem with aggression. If anyone has half a brain, they will keep a healthy distance and keep their pets away. These are the swans in NY we are talking about. You have some chutzpah saying OUR swans must go! There are NO conclusive studies showing the swans decimating the environment or causing problems. Invasive? After all these years, I would think we would have some major issues but alas, there are none so we aren't going to satisfy the people that enjoy mass slaughter.
Really? Are you a scientist? Google is your friend. I'd use it before I make a sweeping pronouncement like the one you just made. Here's a link to a study by the USDA of mute swans in Michigan.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/regulation...%209-27-12.pdf

Yes, I realize you're talking about mute swans in your area, but it's the same species, and just because they haven't had the same effect in your area doesn't mean they won't.

Pay particular attention to the one small paragraph that talks about the animals' benefits: mainly removing a certain type of algae and chasing off geese (which other methods can also effectively accomplish) and the fact that they're fun to look at. Then contrast that with the multiple paragraphs on their drawbacks and the damage they do, to include displacing native and threatened species, trampling eggs and nests of other birds, and health and safety risks to humans.

They also cite all of the scientific studies on which the article is based. I.e. from people "in the field" doing "long term evaluation," if you care to read those. Though I doubt you will, since you're opting out of the debate: a typical internet tactic for someone who has no valid points to make.

I'm breathing a sigh of relief right now that people don't find Asian carp to be "beautiful" or "majestic." If every uninformed animal lover with 15 cats thought that, our native fisheries would be doomed.

I certainly don't know everything and haven't claimed to (and haven't seen anyone else here doing so), but my opinions are certainly grounded in more than a "small collection of books." They come from spending much of my career in the woods, reading biological opinions, enforcing wildlife laws, and simply immersing myself in the field of conservation. So I certainly think I know more than someone who wants to protect every wild creature that's 'pretty', for that main reason.

Some of you need to put your money where your mouths are and spend some time educating yourselves on concepts of wildlife management, read something other than a like-minded blog (something scientifically-based), or at least do something more than sit on your couch and cast negative judgements on every view that's different from your own. Especially when your views are based solely on personal preference.

Speaking of talking to a brick wall...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2014, 12:25 AM
 
1,181 posts, read 2,682,646 times
Reputation: 1782
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
just keep them around, and issue hunting licenses for a fee. This way the state makes money, keeps population in check, and we get to keep some wildlife around
That's how the populations are controlled in the West. My Dad's cousin got a swan license one year (one of 7 issued). He got his bird and we had swan for Thanksgiving that year.

I can't help wondering if the article is misleading and biased. If not, then maybe other alternatives should be considered, alternatives other than destroying an entire population especially one that's been there so long.

And, btw, true hunters are among the strongest supporters of true and realistic conservation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top