How should we deal with dangerous wildlife?
Where you live, how do the authorities manage potentially dangerous animals? Do you agree with the official policy, or would you prefer a different approach?
From the article When it’s legal to shoot the wrong wolf
Wolves in North America are still misunderstood by our now almost completely urbanized population. They are equally loved and hated by both sides of our increasingly divided political and religious cultural split. Generally they are killed right outside our national parks, and even poached there, because of our inadequate ranger force. The most rational discussions are unfortunately not widely read. They're by Carter Niemyer and Cristina Eisenberg: his 2 memoirs and her 2 books, THE WOLF'S TOOTH and THE CARNIVORE WAY. His are WOLFER and WOLF LAND. He's a retired pest controller, and she's an academic at Oregon State University. Both do consulting work.
The question has just become more explosive again this week.
https://www.srf.ch/news/baerenangriff-im-trentino-jogger-in-norditalien-von-baer-angegriffen-und-getoetet
At this point, one must praise the media that again report on such incidents!
How do you intend to protect joggers and hikers from bears?
Is there now a radical nationwide ban on jogging and hiking?
And it is not in the sense of Article 25 of the UN Human Rights the duty of a state to protect life and limb of the people?
Die Frage hat diese Woche gerade wieder an Brisanz zugenommen.
https://www.srf.ch/news/baerenangriff-im-trentino-jogger-in-norditalien-von-baer-angegriffen-und-getoetet
An dieser Stelle muss man die Medien loben dass wieder über solche Vorfälle berichten!
Wie gedenkt man Jogger und Wanderer vor Bären zu schützen?
Kommt nun radikaler Weise Landesweit ein Jogging und Wanderverbot?
Und es nicht im Sinne von Artikel 25 der Uno-Menschenrechte die Pflicht eines Staates Leib und Leben der Menschen zu schützen?
The very term "dangerous" fauna seems to me irrelevant. We have encroached on the vital spaces of species in a proliferation that is out of proportion to other species. The only reasonable solutions are a general awareness of the need to implement the necessary means for an effective protection of the herds - the Spaniards do it - and the delimitation of the territories that man allocates to himself without imposing the necessary restrictions to the life of others.
ALL species have the right to life.
Le terme même de faune "dangereuse" me semble hors propos. Nous avons empiété sur les espaces vitaux des espèces dans une prolifération hors norme par rapport aux autres espèces. Les seules solutions raisonnables sont une prise de conscience générale sur la nécessité de mettre en oeuvre les moyens nécessaires à une protection efficace des troupeaux - les Espagnols le font - et la délimitation des territoires que l'homme s'attribue sans imposer les restrictions nécessaires à la vie des autres.
TOUTES les espèces ont le droit à la vie.
If all species have a right to life, what should predators like wolves and lynx eat?
One issue that plays against herd protection is the conformation of the territory, which is very different in Graubünden, Valais, and Ticino than in Spain and Portugal and Italy. A coexistence is certainly possible, abstracting from such elements as human garrison of the territory, the hard-to-reconciliate needs of animal keepers and breeders, subsidy and safeguard policies, cultures, availability of means of protection, and technology.
Un tema che gioca contro la protezione delle greggi è la conformazione del territorio, che è molto differente, in Grigioni, Vallese, Ticino, rispetto alla Spagna e al Portogallo e all'Italia. Una convivenza è senz'altro possibile, astraendo da elementi quali il presidio del territorio da parte dell'uomo, le esigenze difficilmente conciliabili di animalisti e allevatori, le politiche di sovvenzione e di salvaguardia, le culture, la disponibilità di mezzi di protezione e la tecnologia.
I’m originally from the interior northeast of Portugal where we have a strong presence of Iberian wolf, in the border with Spain. The traditional economy relies on raising sheep. To avoid conflict the natural park authorities 1. require shepherds to have traditional dogs in their flock protecting the sheep and 2. pay out sheep that is killed by wolves, which is confirmed via an official veterinarian. Thus farmers understand and tolerate the presence of wolves and the iconic species is protected from unnecessary retaliations.
Very interesting to hear about the Portuguese approach! Similar to Switzerland with a key difference: guard dogs are a requirement rather than a suggestion.
The lay of the land in Switzerland is very different. I invite you to visit the mountains of Ticino, Graubünden, to understand that land and wildlife management, both wild and farmed, is quite different. It takes two to three years to get a herding dog. In the meantime?
La conformazione del territorio in Svizzera è molto diverso. La invito a visitare le montagne del Ticino, dei Grigioni, per capire che la gestione del territorio e della fauna, sia selvatica che allevata, è cosa ben diversa. Per ottenere un cane da gregge sono necessari da due a tre anni. Nel frattempo?
The animals were there before humans, in most cases, unless reintroduced into the wild. It's like how colonists behave. Kill whatever is there to steal the land and call it your own. The best approach is not to kill, but to move it somewhere well away from humans, which are the most dangerous of all creatures.
The best approach is to move them well away from humans, but to where?. The earth surface is limited and animals reproduce themselves "unlimited". The animals will extend to the human civilisation when the natural resources for the animals are on the limit. This will generate conflicts with humans. So then lock all dangerous animals away, or lock all humans away.
The big majority of the humans don't kill sheep and cows on a sic way. Some animals do so. Further, some humans are vegetarians. some species in the wildlife not!
And locking away potential dangerous meat eating species and feeding them by vegetarien humas lead to the stange situation; where do the vegetariens get the meet to feed the dangerouse animals?
Further, do you have evidence that potentail dangerouse animals were been here before humas and are no neozoen? With this argument; all people with migrations background of the last 3'000 year in switzerland has to loose the voting and electoral rights. Is this ok?
Your photo here fits well with the topic! Can you tell us why you go by the name LYNX? And have you ever seen one in the wild?
If there is a wild animal, and it is impossible or cost too much to capture, it is totally OKAY to shoot and kill (not injure because injured animals are more dangerous), in order to protect Human life (like small children). We are mostly animal lovers but it does not mean we react lightly when they are going to kill or injure our small helpless children. If you have small children, I am sure you will agree children comes first.
Thank you for that insight, HAT. Where do you live, and what sort of animals are a threat there?
Why are potentially dangerous animals behind fences in the zoo?
Probably not to prevent them from running away.
One possible approach is practise in some places in Canada. When a dangerous animal comes close to civilisation, this includs recreational and tourist areas, it is captured and released into the fare wilderness. If, in spite of this lesson, the dangerous animal goes near civilisation again, it will be eliminated. A dangerous animal that gets used to civilisation will become a problematic dangerous animal. Dangerous animals are not stupid. Why should a bear gather berries in the forest when it can get food much more easily in the rubbish cans, vehicles and houses of civilisation?
There are some ingenious litter bins in US national parks for this reason. In Canada as well?
These litter garbage cans are also available in Canada... Whereby, know Canada unfortunately only from the vacations.
Diese Abfallbehälter gibt es auch in Kanada.. Wobei, kenne Kanada leider nur von den Ferien.
Canadian living in Switzerland here. Yes, in all parks where people camp, use lakes, etc the garbage bins are bear proof. That being said, this does not prevent them from being curious and wandering in these areas with the smell of food nearby. Specific methods of handling your food safely and storing it away from your campsite in a bear proof manner are taught so people can remain safe. Bear spray is also available as a deterrent and safety measure.
The best deterrent however is just to clip bells on your body and on your pet's. The bears actively avoid humans and if they hear you coming they will leave the area. They typically only attack if they are starving or have Cubs nearby and believe you to be a threat. Between Polar bears, Grizzly bears and Black bears Canada has over 750,000 bears. Sure, there will be incidents but humans should be trained on how to live peacefully with animals. Just look at Algonquin park in Ontario, it's almost 25 percent of the size of Switzerland. Wolves live there in large numbers (as do bears). The park constructed a tower for visitors to howl put to the wolves and hear them howl back. The tower is located in the south of the park where most of the easily accessible camping is. It is rare someone can hear the wolves anymore because they left the area because of all the human activity in that area. The wolves want nothing to do with humans.
For your reference look up the PCT method of hanging food to prevent bears from being able to get it.
You can find an overview of ongoing debates with our journalists here . Please join us!
If you want to start a conversation about a topic raised in this article or want to report factual errors, email us at english@swissinfo.ch.