|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wolf reintroduction article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I live close to an area where wolves were reintroduced. I have heard opponents of reintroduction claim that the introduced wolves were much larger than the wolves that originally inhabited the area. The majority of the information I have gleaned from the internet indicates that this is not true. Does anyone have a creditable source on this issue? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC).
- According to Wikipedia, the reintroduced wolves were McKenzie Valley wolves, which might be somewhat larger than the (probably extinct) original subspecies. Wilhelm Ritter 03:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Many subspecies have been extirpated, some of which there are little or no remains or evidence of size; however, folklore often dictates that some of these subspecies may have been larger/smaller than the populations of today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 04:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I've heard the idea mentioned in books about Olympic National Park, but I don't have details. Is there anywhere else in the US it's been/is being considered? Wilhelm Ritter 03:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Wolves Versus Livestock
I am highly involved in agriculture and I wanted to provide anyone interested with a great resource regarding wolf reintroduction. If you go to pbs.org and search Wolves in Paradise, there is an extrememly interesting documented research project about wolves interaction with cattle. It gives research backed proof that wolves are detremental to ranching operations, but that they are also needed in a balanced ecosystem. Its a facinating film, you should watch it. October 13, 2009 9:57pm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 04:59, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
- This article also lacks mentioning the techniques to keep wolf packs away from livestock using social behavior elements of the predators. I saw (on TV) very promissing experiments with recordings of teritory-defense chants to make neighboring packs think the ranch is already under control of a pack. People involved in those experiments argued it worked very well. I tried to find the source back but I failed. I remember part of it took place in Northern Europe. Anybody knows where to find it? Correjon (talk) 13:57, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Additionally, there is evidence that sport hunting causes irreparable imbalances in wolf packs, leading to "lone wolf" phenomena which are more detrimental to livestock than a cohesive pack. In fact, the most significant spikes in livestock predation have occurred after large-scale hunts. I hope that somebody (I will do it if nobody else does) can demonstrate this important fact in this article, perhaps even under a "controversy" section, if necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The last paragraph of the Scandanavia section is completely without citation or evidence. I tried to take out the whole paragraph, since it reads like a single, biased person's speculation about wolves, but an admin restored it. I hope that this section can be removed or substantiated with evidence (and provide counter-evidence), so as not to mislead readers into adopting an opinion as fact about wolf reintroduction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanzoneja (talk • contribs) 12:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- I feel that this section requires intense revision. Even if the claims are true, there is an overt bias present. It is rife with unfounded opinions, many of which lean toward political activism. Still yet, there is a glaring lack of a professional tone. Sother (talk) 05:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't think this article needs to be under Wyoming, it is certainly an international issue, and within the United States stretches beyond Wyoming, for sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 04:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The article only mentions the (cancelled) reintroduction attempt in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park; however the Red Wolf article also covers the (ongoing) reintroduction into the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in the same state. It seems odd to me to talk about the failed attempt but not the successful one; should info about the latter be copied here from the Red Wolf article? 126.96.36.199 (talk) 15:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- There's surely plenty of things this article is missing, so feel free to add whatever reliable secondary sources and material you find. I see above some sections complaining about the lack of international focus, and I recommend that its always fine to add whatever material one wishes that is relevant to the scope of the article and which is backed by reliable secondary sources.MONGO 16:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- "This story — that wolves fixed a broken Yellowstone by killing and frightening elk — is one of ecology’s most famous. It’s the classic example of what’s called a “trophic cascade,” and has appeared in textbooks, on National Geographic centerfolds and in this newspaper. Americans may know this story better than any other from ecology, and its grip on our imagination is one of the field’s proudest contributions to wildlife conservation. But there is a problem with the story: It’s not true." User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The article neglects to mention the potential risks to the park visitors posed by the reintroduction of wolves. Are the national parks to be considered private game preserves or places open to the public? Equal justice under the law would require equal access to all park visitors. Those most likely to be placed at risk are women and children who are less capable of defending themselves against predators.
There are other means of preventing overgrazing by elk herds. One would be to move an overpopulation to new grazing lands inside or outside the parks with hunting permitted in these areas. Conservationist Teddy Roosevelt was an advocate of both national parks and hunting in the wilderness. There would be no need for the reintroduction of wolves to regulate populations. The use of wolves would lead to fluctuations in both the size of elk herds and that of the wolf populations themselves. If the elk population crashes then the wolves would have to migrate in search of more game. If the leave the parks they would come into conflict with ranchers and their cattle herds which are easier prey for the wolves. --Jbergquist (talk) 06:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Wolves in Germany
There are already some wolves in back Germany, if anyone cares to translate from the German site: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf#Wiedereinwanderung_seit_2000
Linkrot in Citations
Citation #11 goes to a 404 page on Scientific American's site. This is as of July 28, 2015. Searching on the article title, it has been assigned a new page but the text of the article is only available as a PDF behind a paywall.It might be good to add citations to the original scientific papers instead of or in addition to pop science explanations. Ripple, W.J., Beschta, R.L. Trophic cascades in Yellowstone: The first 15 years after wolf reintroduction. Biol. Conserv.(2011), doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2011.11.005 Additionally, it might be good to add a counterpoint from ecologists at Colorado State. "Conservationists Crying Wolf? New Study Shows Yellowstone’s Ecosystem Dynamics More Complex than Trophic Cascade"
Please pardon me if my additions to Talk are a mess. I've always found Wikipedia's interface & etiquette difficult. I just wanted to help bring this to the attention of folks on Wikipedia who know how to edit. Spidra (talk) 02:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)