Nature in the News

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

New Home wrote: »

I wonder how they decide who's to strike their prey. Beautiful, all the same.

Yes, indeed. Where to move to must be controlled by only one of the brains. There's also the risk that one head will attack the other.

New Home

Moses Faithful Slime wrote: »

Yes, indeed. Where to move to must be controlled by only one of the brains. There's also the risk that one head will attack the other.

I think the risk would be higher if they were conjoined at a different angle.

recedite

I'd guess they would both strike at the same target. Double whammy.
But then the question arises, who eats it ?

magicbastarder

Doesn't matter, they both get the benefit!

New Home

I doubt they'd manage to do a "Lady and the Tramp".

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

recedite wrote: »

I'd guess they would both strike at the same target. Double whammy.
But then the question arises, who eats it ?

Talking to someone in the know today; it's likely only one would strike at a time and the satisfaction affect of eating is felt, of course, by both. He also said, from similar cases in the past, that the heads could certainly attack each other, as they don't seem to be conscious that the other head is in fact itself. Their survival in the wild is rare because the heads attack each other.

magicbastarder

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/monsanto-weedkiller-harms-bees-research-finds

Researchers claim to have found a link between glyphosate and bee gut health. Not a positive link.

recedite

Chinese scientists previously found

Larvae were reared in vitro and fed diet containing glyphosate 0.8, 4, and 20 mg/L.

and then there was another notorious study that found rats fed on glyphosate sometimes develop cancer tumours.
Personally I don't think these kind of studies are very realistic. If you fed the same animals on washing up liquid they would probably suffer even more, but that would not stop me using it for washing the dishes.

bkrangle

Not really news (yet) but interesting anyway

beluga in the Thames

https://twitter.com/iPterodroma/status/1044535018863890433

keps

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/10/04/drunk-birds-are-causing-havoc-in-a-minnesota-town-police-say-theyll-sober-up-soon/?utm_term=.58dea491945a

New Home

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2018/1005/1001161-baby-turtles-galapagos-islands/

Scum! :mad:

recedite

New Home wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2018/1005/1001161-baby-turtles-galapagos-islands/

Scum! :mad:

Hopefully they will be returned. Its not the sort of animal you can sell down in the local pet shop. The article hints at lack of security, but I don't think that is the answer.
Australians have the right answer with Koala Bears- it is illegal to keep one as a pet anywhere in the world. Even Australians can't do it.
So if you had one, there is no chance of claiming to your friends that you "got it through a reputable dealer" or "it was captive bred".

New Home

Unless they keep them to eat them, or to sell them in the black market...

keps

Today's Guardian


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/10/trees-ireland-biodiversity-sitka-birds-extinction

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

keps wrote: »

Today's Guardian


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/10/trees-ireland-biodiversity-sitka-birds-extinction

Once I read "subsidised spruce plantations cover vast tracts of the Irish countryside" I stopped as the rest of the article has to be just as ill informed.

recedite

Moses Faithful Slime wrote: »

Once I read "subsidised spruce plantations cover vast tracts of the Irish countryside" I stopped as the rest of the article has to be just as ill informed.

Why do you disagree? Forestry grants are a thing.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

recedite wrote: »

Why do you disagree? Forestry grants are a thing.

"Vast Swathes of the Irish Countryside"?????


The reduction in the numbers of those species of birds is not due to any of the meagre forestation in this country.

Capercaillie

Moses Faithful Slime wrote: »

"Vast Swathes of the Irish Countryside"?????


The reduction in the numbers of those species of birds is not due to any of the meagre forestation in this country.

Core hen harrier breeding areas have high levels of closed canopy conifer planations, Hen Harriers cannot hunt in those areas. Those areas have also increased densities of foxes/corvids which negatively affect hen harrier productivity. Hen Harrier breeding pairs continue to plummet in Ireland and the main cause is the increase in closed canopy conifer plantations.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Capercaillie wrote: »

Core hen harrier breeding areas have high levels of closed canopy conifer planations, Hen Harriers cannot hunt in those areas. Those areas have also increased densities of foxes/corvids which negatively affect hen harrier productivity. Hen Harrier breeding pairs continue to plummet in Ireland and the main cause is the increase in closed canopy conifer plantations.

I accept that but the article's assertion that 'vast swathes' of the countryside is forested, when we are one of the least forested countries in Europe with only 11%, is being overly dramatic and is misleading.

OpenYourEyes

Moses Faithful Slime wrote: »

I accept that but the article's assertion that 'vast swathes' of the countryside is forested, when we are one of the least forested countries in Europe with only 11%, is being overly dramatic and is misleading.

In places like Leitrim, Roscommon and other counties in the north/west its a much more significant proportion than counties in the east and south. The majority of the authors experience is with breeding Curlew, so I suspect when she's talking about 'vast swathes' she's thinking of that part of the country.

I surveyed around 20 breeding Curlew sites in those counties in 2017, and every single one of them had a block of forestry beside them, and little or no Curlew/wader breeding activity as a result.

Afforestation of marginal farmland is one of the major threats for ground nesting birds, and is becoming an increasing threat for wintering waterbirds too.

keps

Today's Guardian




https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/13/price-list-shoot-rare-deer-trophy-hunting-woburn-abbey

New Home

:mad:

magicbastarder

i have read comment online that the headline and many conclusions reported are premature - here's hoping:

Britain faces brown hare extinction as myxomatosis ‘leaps species’
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-faces-brown-hare-extinction-as-myxomatosis-leaps-species-rkphfzpl0?shareToken=976c7be16d23a0d0e7ce2e9122d4f7d5

Graces7

New Home wrote: »

:mad:

you are right. there are no words. totally barbaric. Was there not something much lesser here in Killarney National Park a few years ago g

recedite

The deer are specially bred for their antlers. Check out the headgear on these (which are in NZ but there is an international trade in the stud deer)..
http://peelforestestate.co.nz/trophy-masters-looking-pretty-sharp-video/


IMO you can't really complain unless you are already a vegan. selective breeding of livestock for various purposes has been going on for millennia.

New Home

Don't their antlers fall off?

deise08

They look abnormal! Like those Belgian blue bulls... That's not natural selection.

Base price

Graces7 wrote: »

you are right. there are no words. totally barbaric. Was there not something much lesser here in Killarney National Park a few years ago g

Deer have to be culled (manually) in order to maintain the herds health status as they do not have any natural predators. NPWS are the authorised body who carry out these culls.

New Home

That to me is the difference. Having to cull animals that wouldn't otherwise be there to maintain numbers within manageable levels is bad enough when done by official bodies, but trophy hunting, to me, is despicable. Killing anything shouldn't be done for fun, in my view.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Base price wrote: »

Deer have to be culled (manually) in order to maintain the herds health status as they do not have any natural predators. NPWS are the authorised body who carry out these culls.

And that is the difference - a huge difference. The comparison between this story and needful culls in Killarney is muddying the waters unnecessarily. You are perfectly correct on the necessary culling and the proper role of NPWS in it.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

New Home wrote: »

Don't they their antlers fall off?

These people want the complete rack of antlers for mounting, as opposed to single antlers. I've a fair selection of antlers here, that have all been naturally shed.

Base price

Moses Faithful Slime wrote: »

These people want the complete rack of antlers for mounting, as opposed to single antlers. I've a fair selection of antlers here, that have all been naturally shed.

Is it not the case that trophy hunters want the antlers still attached to the scull.

recedite

deise08 wrote: »

They look abnormal! Like those Belgian blue bulls... That's not natural selection.

No its not, its selective breeding. There are various strains of "domesticated" red deer now, some bred for antlers and some for meat.
Also you have to consider that in NZ these are not a native species to be "managed" for any ecological reason. They are farmed livestock. Same goes for a wildlife park/deer farm in the UK. Also I assume the meat is consumed after they have been shot.

If you oppose killing animals for sport, then you have do ask yourself whether wearing leather or fur is really a necessity for you, or whether you can survive without eating hamburgers and/or rashers. Its not easy to draw that line in the sand.
I'm not a vegetarian by the way, nor do I hunt.

Base price

recedite wrote: »

No its not, its selective breeding. There are various strains of "domesticated" red deer now, some bred for antlers and some for meat.
Also you have to consider that in NZ these are not a native species to be "managed" for any ecological reason. They are farmed livestock. Same goes for a wildlife park/deer farm in the UK. Also I assume the meat is consumed after they have been shot.

If you oppose killing animals for sport, then you have do ask yourself whether wearing leather or fur is really a necessity for you, or whether you can survive without eating hamburgers and/or rashers. Its not easy to draw that line in the sand.
I'm not a vegetarian by the way, nor do I hunt.

In fairness leather/skins are a byproduct of the meat industry. Wearing fur is a personal choice.
I do hunt/fish and other than vermin I cook and eat everything.
** I don't hunt deer as I don't possess a suitable rifle but I do enjoy venison.

keps

The 'crazy' desire to shoot wildlife can have a bad ending


Today's Guardian



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/14/british-man-shot-dead-by-hunter-in-france

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Base price wrote: »

Is it not the case that trophy hunters want the antlers still attached to the scull.

That's what makes it a rack.

keps

More bad news I'm afraid


Today's Guardian


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/15/humanity-is-cutting-down-the-tree-of-life-warn-scientists

New Home

:mad: again...

Graces7

Base price wrote: »

Deer have to be culled (manually) in order to maintain the herds health status as they do not have any natural predators. NPWS are the authorised body who carry out these culls.

That is not the incident I was talking about.

although there was deep concern also about the way they "disposed" of the remains which is what sparked the row in the press.

A separate event when the right to kill a stag in the National park was sold to a US hunter. Same idea as this article. I was deeply involved with the NPWS at that time.

Graces7

Base price wrote: »

Is it not the case that trophy hunters want the antlers still attached to the scull.

Indeed yes. My own father had such a pair of "trophies" mounted. Tiny antlers...skull bones and all..they haunted me all my childhood

Graces7

recedite wrote: »

No its not, its selective breeding. There are various strains of "domesticated" red deer now, some bred for antlers and some for meat.
Also you have to consider that in NZ these are not a native species to be "managed" for any ecological reason. They are farmed livestock. Same goes for a wildlife park/deer farm in the UK. Also I assume the meat is consumed after they have been shot.

If you oppose killing animals for sport, then you have do ask yourself whether wearing leather or fur is really a necessity for you, or whether you can survive without eating hamburgers and/or rashers. Its not easy to draw that line in the sand.
I'm not a vegetarian by the way, nor do I hunt.

Re your last para. survive? meat is not a necessity and easy to live without harm nor hurt. and without fur or leather. each to their own..

but yes you are right. needs must be consistent

OpenYourEyes

Mod Note:

This thread is for Nature/News - if people want to continue the above convo DM me and I'll move it to its own thread. Otherwise, lets stick to News in here!

Cheers!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

As if we didn't know....

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/twenty-three-birds-of-prey-poisioned-and-shot-in-state-last-year-1.3665526?localLinksEnabled=false

New Home

Good God... 23?

When I read stuff like that, I really hate people.

cd07

23 is a drop in the ocean if u ask me....

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

cd07 wrote: »

23 is a drop in the ocean if u ask me....

Agreed, the odds of finding a dead bird are huge.

New Home

Oceans are made up of drops, though.

EDIT: Sorry, I misread your posts, I thought you meant that 23 was only a small number and nothing to worry about, whereas I think you actually meant that way more birds are killed but are never found.

cd07

Moses Faithful Slime wrote:

Agreed, the odds of finding a dead bird are huge.

And the odds finding the culprit of a shooting or poisoning are bigger again

magicbastarder

‘Hyperalarming’ study shows massive insect loss
https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/10/15/hyperalarming-study-shows-massive-insect-loss

New Home

On a happier note...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXMfbY8CawY

It's probably old news, but still...