Monbiot–Wolves have made Yellowstone a better place

15 thoughts on “Monbiot–Wolves have made Yellowstone a better place”

1. there you go. good comment.
   however, i would say there are areas of ecological debate i have no clue on.
   REducing overgrazing cannot be discarded as important. i know about overgrazing that occurs when predators are eliminated. the other impacts are certainly subject to differences of opinion.
   If milloy called him moonbat, i will speak to him–Monbiot is dead on with regards to a number of political issues, particularly the danger of fanatic muslims. Monbiot is out of his element on yellowstone ecological esoterica–but i would suggest he was fed that video narrative by someone who is convinced that wolves are a positive. That’s what the enviros think. I am ambivalent about repopulating with the high end predators. Humans can function that way in a more controlled manner.
   However–human predation and culling has been rejected by the fanatics.
   i live in texas, and know of predator problems, Farmers and ranchers think nothing of killing dogs or coyotes to protect their livestock, and i don’t object or argue against them.
   I had great danes at one time and they really aren’t into running down goats, but the goat rancher next door saw the dogs and threatened me about it just because that’s what ranchers do–they worry about their investment. I can live with that.

2. The point is that elk and moose are deer. Deer is a family not a species.
   “Deer (singular and plural) are the ruminant mammals that comprise the family Cervidae. Species therein include white-tailed deer, such mule deer as black-tailed deer, elk, moose, red deer, reindeer (caribou) fallow deer, roe deer, pudú and chital. Male deer of all species (except the Chinese water deer) and female reindeer grow and shed new antlers each year, thereby differing from such permanently horned animals as antelope, which are in the same order as deer and may be superficially similar. The musk deer of Asia and water chevrotain (or mouse deer) of tropical African and Asian forests are not usually regarded to be deer and form their own families: Moschidae and Tragulidae, respectively.”
   Therefor referring to the animal as a deer is accurate. I don’t know what part of N. America WaterTech is from, but where I grew up, if you meant white-tail you said white-tail. The fact that a large number of people don’t know what the word “deer” means shouldn’t make accurate use of the word subject to ridicule. If you have an objection to the information presented that isn’t based on a lack of understanding what the word deer means, by all means present it.

3. I read the posts.Just wondering is this not the same JS that has given Monbiot the sobriquet “Moonbat.”? I have been a longtime reader of JS and remember Mr. Milloy repeatedly referring to him by that name. He narrated a beautifully filmed though partially inaccurate (not his fault as he is definitely not a biologist) short piece on the wolves in a NP and good for him. You will find those of us who live and play or know people who have to put up with wolves have a, excuse the pun, dog in this fight and are very sensitive to the issue of wolves. So if there is a film with inaccuracies you damn well will be sure it will be called to task.

4. That wasn’t about a rant, that was about my theory as to why there were people going after an innocent video that discussed the beneficial effect of wolves on Yellowstone.
   If you know anything about Monbiot you know that he has been on the internet many times with polemics against the left and exposing hypocricies and outrages of Muslims and he doesn’t pull any punches.
   This video about Yellowstone is not his usual schtick and the nasty comments by some struck me as inappropriate and motivated by some animus.
   Did you see some of the comments, and then just ignore them? Bunch of garbage–how is that video a bunch of garbage, and the film footage was beautiful.
   As for what JS does, you’re theory that JS is about inaccuracies–not so,it is about all kinds of things. I am not fact checker for journal articles science–for sure. Could be that wolves don’t do that much good. Interesting theory though.
   I’ll leave it at that. As for your advice as to what Junk Science is supposed to do, it’s a web site, a discussion site. Discussions on the web site might not please you. You’ll see something that fits your expectations from somebody.

5. Now that’s a rant. Wolves to Muslims. I’m for a “balanced” Yellowstone NP. I’m for the people of Wyoming to be able to protect their livelihoods when said apex predator goes outside the NP boundaries. My impression on JS was its drive to point out inaccuracies in articles, statements, movies, etc. or has it now gone to “eh, close enough”?

6. you people kill me. this is just a nice little story about how the wolves introduction back into the ecology reduces the overgrazing and improves the flora and such.
   picky goddammned picky.
   i keep running into this. try not to be too smart.
   wadduino about ecological impacts of the willows and the aspens and such–the point was that wolves kill some prey animals and get some balance.
   can’t we all be happy with that, or do i have to worry about lefties who hate monbiot because he puts up those great rants about stupid socialist crappola ideas. I like the guy–he is the usual brit charming or eloquent if you will.
   Monbiot has put up some great rants on the stupidity of ignoring what fanatic muslims represent in terms of risk–somebody on our reader group all worked up about that? I say get a life, the fanatic muslims may just eliminate us from this earth if they get the chance. We are, after all infidels and unclean, undeserving to live except maybe as slaves or dhimmi. If we live in dhimmi status–as lesser non persons we can be considered 2nd class citizens, lower life forms and required to pay a jizya (that’s a head tax for being an infidel allowed to live a lesser life).
   I think I’ll pass, now and forever.

7. Everybody seems to be an anti Monbiot and trying to make Monbiot a dummy about the wildlife.
   What is the reason for these silly comments?
   Monbiot is not a damn biologist. Or hunter. Besides, there are deer at yellowstone and what they show on the video is elk, a much more impressive animal and more photogenic, but I am sure that there are deer that overgraze the Yellowstone. So it ain’t moose, and so the elk ain’t deer.
   The point is that a lack of predators caused an excess population of herbivores who ate all the the edible grass and browse, and the point of his video/essay was that reintroducing predators reduced the excess browsers and reestablished some growth that improved the flora.
   I won’t argue it didn’t. I thought the story was an interesting and compelling one about reestablishing some balance at the yellowstone.
   I can’t even be sure it did, since I didn’t go and look for myself. some of you people need to get a life.
   So let’s talk about the Monbiot “deer” that are Elk, not Water tech, moose. Moose are part of the wildlife in another area of the US, like Minnesota

8. The aspen comeback has been a dismal failure. I will concede that bank willows and other trees have regrown. I find the exhortation of increased tree growth, conifers especially, top be a good thing. This leads to denser forests and sets the stage for large fires as previously happened in the park. The trees are purported to lead to bank stabilization (a good thing) and straightening of rivers (which when man made is a bad thing). State wildlife agencies and private organizations spend millions putting the bends back into flowing water systems and the wolves are encouraging a straighter river and that’s better?

9. Wolves do not have to fill out forms or get a license to cull a herd.
   They do not live in fear of the government if they kill the wrong animal.
   Otherwise human “predation” would have worked just fine.

10. So you call “moose” “deer”?

11. “It shows how predators make a difference in an eco system.”
    Global warming predators (what else can you call them?) have made a substantial negative difference in our financial, regulatory, energy and societal ecosystems.

12. Elk are deer.

13. The narrator does not seem to know the difference between a deer and an elk. Neither does he seem to understand that elk are grass eaters and deer are browsers. The latter love willow tips, but there were never many of them in Yellowstone. Beaver do a good job of establishing pools along a creek, but they kill all the aspens in a valley and then move on. They create habitat for fish, but, regrettably, these turn into brook trout ponds, choked with 7″ fish. The brookies will wipe out any residual cutthroats. This video is largely a fiction.

14. Load of garbage.

15. The “deer” he refers to are elk. True enough they are members of the Cervid family, but in N America if you refer to “deer” it is the whitetail deer, and to a lesser extent the mule deer. Yellowstone’s habitat issues where related to elk. So, Moonbat struck out with me on that. It is a PR piece against “modern” wildlife management to an extent, though Federal USFWS/NPS management politics are more to blame for what happened inside Yellowstone. Kept waiting for the AGW dig. Need to do a little research on the studies.

Comments are closed.