“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Published on Mar 4, 2013 "Desertification is a fancy word for land that is turning to desert," begins Allan Savory in this quietly powerful talk. And terrifyingly, it's happening to about two-thirds of the world's grasslands, accelerating climate change and causing traditional grazing societies to descend into social chaos. Savory has devoted his life to stopping it. He now believes -- and his work so far shows -- that a surprising factor can protect grasslands and even reclaim degraded land that was once desert.
Posted by Deuce ☂ at 5/25/2014 09:50:00 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
This story mirrors your report from Yellowstone, where by reintroducing the wolves, the land, forests and elk herds all improved, dramatically.ReplyDelete
Mankind can mimic nature, he cannot improve it.
You can mimic idiocy, but cannot improve on it.Delete
More videos from Allan Savory -ReplyDelete
Want to turn a desert green?ReplyDelete
Look here -Delete
To see Bob's lie.
or here -Delete
Anon, Jack isn't mimicing idiocy.ReplyDelete
He's the real thing.
Another image to illustrate Bob's lying statementsReplyDelete
This comment has been removed by the author.Delete
Bob, there is no fixing your brand of stupid, sorry.Delete
Where the Israeli were able to steal Palestinian water, they could irrigate, which is not the subject of the video.Delete
Poor Bob has bigotry on his mind, what little of it is left, after the syphilis,
Main article: Subspecies of Canis Lupus
Comparative image of C. l. irremotus and C. l. occidentalis skulls.
Historically, the wolf populations originally native to Yellowstone were classed under the subspecies C. l. irremotus. When the issue of what subspecies to use for the introduction was raised, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service representatives stated that the taxonomy of grey wolves had been revised numerous times, and that C. l. irremotus was not a distinct subspecies, but a geographical variant. Three publications were made on the appropriateness of using a founding population of Canadian wolves: Brewster and Fritz supported the motion, while Nowak determined that the original Yellowstone wolves were more similar to C. l. nubilus, a subspecies already present in Minnesota, and that the Canadian animals proposed by Brewster and Fritz were of the subspecies C. l. occidentalis, a significantly larger animal. The rationale behind Brewster and Fritz's favor was that wolves show little genetic diversity, and that the original population was extinct anyway. This was contradicted by Nowak, who contested that Minnesotan wolves were much more similar in size and shape to the original population than the proposed Canadian wolves, though he conceded that C. l. occidentalis was probably already migrating southward even before human intervention. The final use of Canadian wolves for the reintroduction was not without criticism: the American Society of Mammalogists criticized the project's lack of deference to the principle of Bergmann's rule, pointing out that the wolves used for the introduction were 30% larger than the original park wolves, and were adapted to much colder climates. Finally, the society questioned the legality under the ESA of “recovering” a taxon of wolf by expanding the historic range of a less similar type, when more closely related founder stock still remained available.
Ecological impacts after re-introductionDelete
Rolf Peterson investigating the carcass of a coyote killed by a wolf in Yellowstone National Park, January 1996
Scientists have been researching and studying the impacts on the Yellowstone ecosystem since re-introduction in 1995.
As the wolf population in the park has grown, the elk population, their favored prey, has declined. Prior to reintroduction, the EIS predicted that wolves would kill an average 12 elk per wolf annually. This estimate proved too low as wolves are now killing an average of 22 elk per wolf annually. This decline in elk has resulted in changes in flora, most specifically willows, cottonwoods and aspens along the fringes of heavily timbered areas. Although wolf kills are directly attributable to declines in elk numbers, some research has shown that elk behavior has been significantly altered by wolf predation. The constant presence of wolves have pushed elk into less favorable habitats, raised their stress level, lowered their nutrition and their overall birth rate.
The wolves became significant predators of coyotes after their reintroduction. Since then, in 1995 and 1996, the local coyote population went through a dramatic restructuring. Until the wolves returned, Yellowstone National Park had one of the densest and most stable coyote populations in America due to a lack of human impacts. Two years after the wolf reintroductions, the pre-wolf population of coyotes had been reduced to 50% through both competitive exclusion and intraguild predation. Coyote numbers were 39% lower in the areas of Yellowstone where wolves were reintroduced. In one study, about 16% of radio-collared coyotes were preyed upon by wolves. Yellowstone coyotes have had to shift their territories as a result, moving from open meadows to steep terrain. Carcasses in the open no longer attract coyotes; when a coyote is chased on flat terrain, it is often killed. They feel more secure on steep terrain where they will often lead a pursuing wolf downhill. As the wolf comes after it, the coyote will turn around and run uphill. Wolves, being heavier, cannot stop and the coyote gains a large lead. Though physical confrontations between the two species are usually dominated by the larger wolves, coyotes have been known to attack wolves if they outnumber them. Both species will kill each other's pups given the opportunity.
Coyotes, in their turn, naturally suppress foxes, so the diminished coyote population has led to a rise in foxes, and "That in turn shifts the odds of survival for coyote prey such as hares and young deer, as well as for the small rodents and ground-nesting birds the foxes stalk. These changes affect how often certain roots, buds, seeds and insects get eaten, which can alter the balance of local plant communities, and so on down the food chain all the way to fungi and microbes." 
The presence of wolves has also coincided with a dramatic rise in the park's beaver population; where there was just one beaver colony in Yellowstone in 2001, there were nine beaver colonies in the park by 2011. The presence of wolves seems to have encouraged elk to browse more widely, diminishing their pressure on stands of willow, a plant that beavers need to survive the winter. The renewed presence of beavers in the ecosystem has substantial effects on the local watershed because the existence of beaver dams "even[s] out the seasonal pulses of runoff; store[s] water for recharging the water table; and provide[s] cold, shaded water for fish." Beaver dams also counter erosion and create "new pond and marsh habitats for moose, otters, mink, wading birds, waterfowl, fish, amphibians and more."Delete
Wolf kills are scavenged by and thus feed a wide array of animals, including, but not limited to, ravens, wolverines, bald eagles, golden eagles, grizzly bears, black bears, jays, magpies, martens and coyotes.
Meanwhile, wolf packs often claim kills made by cougars, which has driven that species back out of valley hunting grounds to their more traditional mountainside territory.
The top-down effect of the reintroduction of an apex predator like the wolf on other flora and fauna in an ecosystem is an example of a trophic cascade.
Poor Bob has been lying to US for so long, he cannot differentiate his lies from the truth.ReplyDelete
He spent years telling US how the elk were being decimated by the reintroduction of wolves into Idaho.
But, upon cursory investigation, the truth was quite different.
... the Ostentatious Display of the American Flag - Killing Wolves in the West
They have been managing their wolf populations from the get go, we haven’t seen a drop off in bull quality at all.
The elk are in large herds this time of the year, so often, there are multiple trophy bulls within sight at once. They are still bugling at this time of year so we use that to our advantage for locating the herd bull. It’s very common to see 100+ elk a day during this hunt.”
Though a statewide 10-year elk management plan approved by the Idaho Fish and Game Commission earlier this month includes more aggressive predator management, the emphasis in the Wood River Valley area is on reducing elk damage to agriculture.
According to the plan, that damage is the most important factor limiting elk numbers in the two elk management zones—the Pioneer and the Smoky-Bennett Hills zones—that flank the valley.
“The elk population could be higher if we could mitigate the damage elk do to crops and fencing,”
Craig White, the department’s former elk plan coordinator, said in an interview.
According to a story in the Twin Falls Times-News, the department stated ...
that over harvest by hunters is the prime cause of the decreases.
White said elk numbers have generally decreased in the north and central parts of the state, while they have increased in southern and western areas.
Randy Smith, Magic Valley Region wildlife manager, said in an interview that the Pioneer Zone, to the east and north of the Wood River Valley, is one of the zones that are exceeding goals.
He said the elk population increased by about 60 percent between 2008 and 2013, when aerial surveys were conducted. He said the increase was primarily due to the department’s ending a hunt on yearling “spike” bull elk in the zone.
The department’s website shows a population of 9,738 elk in the zone, up from 5,459 in 2008.
It is not the wolves that have hindered the elk, in Idaho, it is the FARMERS.
The elk are moving away from the wolves, moron.Delete
Everyone in Idaho is now allowed to shoot wolves on sight, 24/7/12 - day or night.
The wolves they put into Yellowstone were of the larger, northern variety.
It is not the wolves that have hindered the elk, in Idaho, it is the FARMERS.
Poor Bob, no one said the wolves should be protected, just reintroduced.Delete
No one said they were replacements, but that they balance the eco-system, making it 'better' than it was without them.
He does not dispute that, he whines and cries, instead.
Nothing sadder than a withered heart
You can't fix stupid.
How Wolves Change RiversReplyDelete
There are "elk" pictured in this video when the narrator is referring to "deer." This is because the narrator is British and the British word for "elk" is "red deer" or "deer" for short. The scientific report this is based on refers to elk so we wanted to be accurate with the truth of the story.
"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." - John Muir
When wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park in the United States after being absent nearly 70 years, the most remarkable "trophic cascade" occurred. What is a trophic cascade and how exactly do wolves change rivers? George Monbiot explains in this movie remix.
If one were a grey wolf, and had gun sights on one 24/7/12, one would tend to stay away from areas populated by men and women who know how to shoot.ReplyDelete
Likewise, if one were an elk, one might rapidly learn to favor such areas since they have so much less to fear from men and women than wolves.
Do you ever wonder what your life would have been like, if you had enough oxygen at birth?Delete
Or do you not realize that you are stupid.
Trophic cascades from wolves to grizzly bears in YellowstoneReplyDelete
Published on Feb 25, 2014
A new study suggests that the return of wolves to Yellowstone National Park is beginning to bring back a key part of the diet of grizzly bears that has been missing for much of the past century -- berries that help bears put on fat before going into hibernation.
It's one of the first reports to identify the interactions between these large, important predators, based on complex ecological processes. It was published today by scientists from Oregon State University and Washington State University in the Journal of Animal Ecology.
The researchers found that the level of berries consumed by Yellowstone grizzlies is significantly higher now that shrubs are starting to recover following the re-introduction of wolves, which have reduced over-browsing by elk herds. The berry bushes also produce flowers of value to pollinators like butterflies, insects and hummingbirds; food for other small and large mammals; and special benefits to birds.
The report said that berries may be sufficiently important to grizzly bear diet and health that they could be considered in legal disputes -- as is white pine nut availability now -- about whether or not to change the "threatened" status of grizzly bears under the Endangered Species Act.
"Wild fruit is typically an important part of grizzly bear diet, especially in late summer when they are trying to gain weight as rapidly as possible before winter hibernation," said William Ripple, a professor in the OSU Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, and lead author on the article. "Berries are one part of a diverse food source that aids bear survival and reproduction, and at certain times of the year can be more than half their diet in many places in North America."
When wolves were removed from Yellowstone early in the 1900s, increased browsing by elk herds caused the demise of young aspen and willow trees -- a favorite food -- along with many berry-producing shrubs and tall, herbaceous plants. The recovery of those trees and other food sources since the re-introduction of wolves in the 1990s has had a profound impact on the Yellowstone ecosystem, researchers say, even though it's still in the very early stages.
"Studies like this also point to the need for an ecologically effective number of wolves," said co-author Robert Beschta, an OSU professor emeritus. "As we learn more about the cascading effects they have on ecosystems, the issue may be more than having just enough individual wolves so they can survive as a species. In some situations, we may wish to consider the numbers necessary to help control overbrowsing, allow tree and shrub recovery, and restore ecosystem health."
As wolves help reduce elk numbers in Yellowstone and allow tree and shrub recovery, researchers said, this improves the diet and health of grizzly bears. In turn, a healthy grizzly bear population provides a second avenue of control on wild ungulates, especially on newborns in the spring time.
Yellowstone has a wide variety of nutritious berries -- serviceberry, chokecherry, buffaloberry, twinberry, huckleberry and others -- that are highly palatable to bears. These shrubs are also eaten by elk and thus likely declined as elk populations grew over time. With the return of wolves, the new study found the percentage of fruit in grizzly bear scat in recent years almost doubled during August.
Because the abundant elk have been an important food for Yellowstone grizzly bears for the past half-century, the increased supply of berries may help offset the reduced availability of elk in the bears' diet in recent years. More research is needed regarding the effects of wolves on plants and animals consumed by grizzly bears.
There is precedent for high levels of ungulate herbivory causing problems for grizzly bears, who are omnivores that eat both plants and animals. Before going extinct in the American Southwest by the early 1900s, grizzly bear diets shifted toward livestock depredation, the report noted, because of lack of plant-based food caused by livestock overgrazing. And, in the absence of wolves, black bears went extinct on Anticosti Island in Canada after over-browsing of berry shrubs by introduced while-tailed deer.
Increases in berry production in Yellowstone may also provide a buffer against other ecosystem shifts, the researchers noted -- whitebark pine nut production, a favored bear food, may be facing pressure from climate change. Grizzly bear survival declined during years of low nut production.
Livestock grazing in grizzly bear habitat adjacent to the national park, and bison herbivory in the park, likely also contribute to high foraging pressure on shrubs and forbs, the report said. In addition to eliminating wolf-livestock conflicts, retiring livestock allotments in the grizzly bear recovery zone adjacent to Yellowstone could benefit bears through increases in plant foods.
Take the cattle off the land, and the wildlife will do better.
Notice that Jews make things green meme disappeared.ReplyDelete
That the references to Trophic cascades, as if that were a bad thing, disappeared.
That now Bob will resort to ...
Ad hominem arguments which are his preferred tool when he runs out of real arguments
(or are unable to understand someone else's opinion in the first place, or words like Trophic).
It's so much easier to just attack another person instead of attacking his arguments (especially if the other person is right.)
The Daily Disappoint
Your newspaper of record for the Clearwater Drainage
AP - Once again over the last weekend packs of starving raving farmers were reported attacking the remaining elk in the Lolo. These life forms, as we may call them being polite, attack the elk in groups of 10 to 12 or even 14 at a time. They rush the poor victim tearing it apart with fingernails and dentures. Often the eat only the liver, anus, and genitals before moving onto their next kill......
... leaving the carrion for the vultures, crows, coyotes, and ants.Delete
Fulfilling the "Circle of Life" in a natural way.
Word is, from my lawyer's secretary, who lives out by the farm, that a good number of elk have recently been seen by her in the area.ReplyDelete
Some wolf prints too.
The elk are moving down from the mountains and out of the forests to the farms as they seek safety from the grey wolves.
Thinking of putting up a video cam or trail cam out there to try and catch some action.
In decades past, going back to the very beginning, we've never had wolves there, nor anything more than a very occasional elk. White tail deer, yes.
Nature, in all its wonders, now pople will be part of it, not just as observers, but participants.Delete
Ain't it grand
Guess if the wildlife scared 'em, they could move to town....Delete
Word is, from my lawyer's secretary, who lives out by the farm, that a good number of elk have recently been seen by her in the area.
I seem to recall you said she saw about 80 of them.
Doesn't sound like you have a wolf problem. Sounds more like you have an elk problem.
the elk population increased by about 60 percent between 2008 and 2013, when aerial surveys were conducted. He said the increase was primarily due to the department’s ending a hunt on yearling “spike” bull elk in the zone.Delete
The department’s website shows a population of 9,738 elk in the zone, up from 5,459 in 2008.
When men quit killin' 'em, their numbers do increase ...Delete
"Mankind can mimic nature, he cannot improve it."ReplyDelete
This quote from the computer of the inimitable Jack "Ass" Hawkins is so so lame and astounding it is a wonder that any human built computer would accept it.
One wonders is he has read his Shakespeare about grafting roses, not to mimick nature, not to change nature, but to improve nature.
One wonders if he has read his Frost about 'eyes meeting eyes'.
One wonder if this nincompoop knows what wheat breeding is all about, or whether he has ever had the benefits of, say, a polio shot, or external beam radiation to rid himself of prostate cancer.
One wonders if desert rat realizes that the basic thrust behind nearly all civilizations and laws is an effort to lift the human race beyond the jungle, beyond the paleolithic, to an arena where true research and thought and the improvement of things can actually begin.
One wonders if this jack ass realizes that there are people out there, my Niece for instance, who are devoting their lives to research with the aim of improving human life, improving what nature has given us.
One shakes one's head, and wonders, would this idiot rather walk, or drive his pickup?
Would he rather eat or, perhaps sometimes, if the hunt does not go well, starve?
Does he make use of modern medicine?
Does he know what a library is?
Is there something wrong with his brain, the wiring in his brain?
Perhaps my Niece could determine that, and suggest a solution.
O Quirk, I just noticed you returned.
I was just telling the boys you had rented a cab from LA to somewhere 1,500 miles away, and walked away, not paying.
I know now you are on the lam again.
I wish you well, my friend.
Say, listen up, we never had wolves, or many elk out there before the Idaho Fish and Game fucked it up, and he US whatever department it is.
I know this cause I asked two Aunts on their death beds.
I am so glad to see you, cause now I can mock you. It gets tiring mocking an idiot like desert rat.
Do you need bail money?
Do you need bail money again?Delete
An IOU ain't gonna cut this time.
Quirk, you old sinner, I am so so glad you back !!Delete
#Rejoice - QuirkReplyDelete
Is Back !!
Since I have been back for the last few days, I have evidently succeeded in my attempt to 'fly under the radar'.
Either that or you should take a breath in your battle with the rat and notice the other posts here.
Since you didn't know I was back, I take it you missed my entrance which I composed in response to your crystal ball aided precognition of my return.
QuirkThu May 22, 03:34:00 AM EDT
A cloud rose in the north and crept across the land, a dark cloud, roiling and sulfurous, laced with firedamp explosions that lit the night. Initially born in Stygian darkness during the Carboniferous Period, precursor to the five great extinctions including The Great Dying of the Triassic, the cloud was the most recent incarnation of the chaos generated when the Titan Gondwana rolled across the South Pole and ravished the Goddess Aurora before moving on and leaving her to bare the three Graeae, Oil and Coal and Gas, eldritch and fey, sisters to the monstrous Gorgons.
As the cloud moved it stilled the wind and blotted out the sun. In its wake, crops, corn and switch grass withered and died, just as in previous millennia brachiopods and trilobites and triceratops and fungi and countless other species shared the same fate.
And as the storm drew near, a figure could be seen being born by the cloud, amorphous and inchoate, a dark eminence robed in black, it was the Quirkster come bearing the message of the Graeae. Through unmoving lips he proclaimed their wisdom:
“Nonsense. They are all dicks.”
You dumb shit, it took me more than half an hour to write that.
Obviously Bob believes tht NY City, Chicago and San Francisco, Pris and London are all improvement upon nature. That man can only add to the sum total of what Mother Nature provides. That the oil that the Exxon Valdez added to Prudhoe Bay was a net asset, not liability.
As has been noted, previously ...
You cannot fix stupid.
Interesting that Bob thinks that ...
"Desertification, a fancy word for land that is turning to desert,"
is a good thing, and that man does not impact it, but that Jews can cure it.
But not by mimicking nature, but overwhelming it.
Obviously Bob does not consider Jews to be normal men, perhaps he thinks they are aliens.
Nothing sadder than a withered heart