TheBlackGrouse
Well-known member
Another provocation, if you don't understand something ask questions and/or do research.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Wolf-watching nr. Utrecht?! (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter Ignatius
- Start date
Another provocation, if you don't understand something ask questions and/or do research.
This may be a language issue, but there's not necessarily insult or anything derogatory about skepticism. It's a normal part of discussion and a good opening for you to help him gain confidence in your posted content like you did with me a couple months ago.
There are probably no professionals involved in the forum conversation and part of our layman research is seeing what others who know more than we do have to say on the issue.
TheBlackGrouse
Well-known member
Fair enough.
He is from the Netherlands, me too and for us this has a negative connotation. Besides, the debate on this issue is extremely polarised in our country. In forests some locals want to fight with you if you think positive about wolves, some are even armed and want to shoot them. You can't speak freely anymore.
But thanks for your comment, I was thinking in Dutch and should have mentioned that. English is the language here.
I think almost everything is polarized anymore, but I like to see both sides as best I can. I'm one who thinks that not all cases are the same and while I do draw the line with wolves when they're coming after our dogs, which happens every few years in Alaska, I have no problem with having to compete with them for large game.
Wolves belong in nature just as much as any other animal, but the good ones avoid human settlements and their dogs!
Ribbon
Being Phyllosophical
Well, I (still) don't agree about the scepticism and it's (alleged) connotation. Being sceptical for me is healthy, especially regarding these kind of topics. The usage of facts is essential in the heated discussion about wolves in the NL. I'm not picking sides ('pro or anti wolf') and maybe agree more with TBG than it seems. Going to leave it at that.
TheBlackGrouse
Well-known member
Back to the facts: after the incident with the hybrid, I warned the government organizations that are involved with wolves. They reacted defensively, DNA testing was impossible. Probably to avoid a media circus, since this would be the first hybrid in the Netherlands.
After the incident the animal was in a closed area and hit a small bush (it was shaking) when running. There must have been some DNA there, salivating, lots of tracks, at least a hair. And probably markings, droppings etc. since he was there for the local pack, in the center of their territory and the den was nearby.
My goal was to get rules/laws for foresters with regard to hybrids. DNA material of a hybrid would give everyone a wake-up call. Since this animal was dangerous and the government failed, I warned foresters and convinced them to do something.
A new hybrid will come or will be released. This animal was dangerous: I survived because I did everything right (lucky too), I had to protect a woman who hiked there and another witness had a frightening story. It has to be clear what can be done. A deadly incident with a hybrid will be desastrous for the image and protection of wolves in the Netherlands. The media will make a wolf of it. Our secretary of state does advocate the killing of wolves.
No I'm not happy that I went beyond the law but you have to, I'm still angry that the government put the people at risk, I'm frustrated that there is no DNA-proof.
Last edited:
Similar threads
