Foraging and feeding ecology of the gray wolf (Canis lupus): lessons from Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA.
Stahler, DR, DW Smith, and DS Guernsey. "Result Filters." National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, July 2006. Web. 07 Mar. 2016.
Foraging and feeding ecology of the gray wolf (Canis lupus): lessons from Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA.
This is the claim for this article. Showing a scientific approach to wolf behavior. This is a scholarly reliable source.
But the losses and damage extend beyond killed animals. Wolves affect ranchers’ profit even if they never kill a calf. The bigger losses of disrupted grazing, lower pregnancy rates and weight loss are harder to measure than dead calves. Wolves also destroy peace of mind.
So the opposition (the wolf lovers) may not understand that livestock are very fickle and complicated creatures. You can't just buy some cows and start a heard, its hard work and work that needs constant re-evaluation. A cow might survive a wolf encounter but the stress associated with that could make her barren for a time. Stress also makes bovine lose weight which is bad when you get paid by the pound.
I think people go to the store or to MacDonalds and there's your beef. They don'y think about where and how that meat gets there. I mean come on there are people that honestly believe the meat is somehow magically made at the store.
When you lose an animal to causes other than wolf predation, you usually find the carcass; wolves may not leave anything at all. “It’s like the animal evaporated. We get paid for confirmed kills, but not the ones that disappear or we find too late to determine cause of death,” Whittaker explains. Bruce Mulkey of Baker, ID, says wolf proponents on a panel discussion at Idaho State University last year claimed wolves were responsible for only 1% of livestock losses, and ranchers lose more calves to disease and other problems.
The reason the statistics are so low is explained here. But even if you take the 1% number, their are almost 5 million cattle in Idaho and Montana, that is still 50,000 head of cattle killed (http://beef2live.com/story-cattle-inventory-vs-human-population-state-0-114255). And that is just cattle, not all other livestock and pets.
This also shows what the opposition base everything off of, just numbers and hearsay. The author is obviously from a ranch back ground with the niche words she uses but she does report both sides. That is good to get rid of the stubborn farmer stereotype.
but the wolves apparently didn’t read the fine print.
The audience is definitely not the sierra club and its members but I believe it's anyone who has grown up in the rural West where you do still have predators. People who have grown up and raised any kind of feed animal or even pets, like dogs. In the city your pet goes missing... its either adopted by someone else, at the pound or hit by a vehicle. In the country when they go missing it's either a predator or a highway. So anyone who grew up in the rural West should be interested in this. We are the ones that have to deal with this disaster while the courts and organizations in the East, so far removed, keep these oppressions on the hard working ranches and farmers that feed them. I am certainly the audience here but I have much more of an elevated tone then the article.
In central/eastern Idaho, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) released Canadian gray wolves in 1995. Theoretically, the wolves were supposed to stay in the backcountry and eat elk, but the wolves apparently didn’t read the fine print.
Claim: Human involvement placed wolves in a small area but wolves are wolves and go where the want when they want and have the know how and stamina to do so. We humans like to think we can tweek nature to our foreseen outcome, but we are idiots. Nature solves itself one way or another. This wolf debacle is a fantastic example of how human involvement just creates more chaos. First off they forgot that there are multiple species of wolves and placed the big bad Canadian version in our back yard, the ones that are built to cover hundreds of miles a day and are bigger and hungrier then the small local population (which has now been killed of driven out by these new wolves). Whoops, now they are everywhere and livestock are being killed on a scale 5% more then usual and those beloved Elk and Deer that everyone loves to watch from their cars on the side of the highway, they are disappearing too.<br> This claim of the author may come of as sarcastic but it carries meaning if you understand that people in a totally different area and culture decide what to do with the land others have pioneered and fought out a living on.
Western Ranchers Fight The Curse Of Introduced Wolves
This web source is all about farm and ranch. Everything from markets to laws to alerts. Wolves are an important thing to this website and it's users. Its easy to say they could be bias towards anything ranch and against wolves, but this article was very factual and pretty objective considering the forum.
Ranchers have been told that wolves are shy and stay away from people.
More excellent research most likely carried out from behind a desk somewhere or at least skewed to cover what wolves really are, very curious and quick learning animals. Just because you don't see that wolf anymore doesn't mean its gone.
Western Ranchers Fight The Curse Of Introduced Wolves
Heather Smith Thomas. "Western Ranchers Fight The Curse Of Introduced Wolves". September 10, 2010. Web. March 6 2016. <beefmagazine.com>
The final sample size included 2,364respondents, who were selected and interviewed using a multistage probabilistic survey design.
The total population in Brazil was recorded at 204.5 million people in 2015. In my opinion, the whole number of people for the survey is too small to generalize as the most of nations’ views. The survey reflect only one out of hundred-thousandth of the entire population of Brazil.
Our study of religion and abortion attitudes in Brazil utilizes data from the Brazilian SocialResearch Survey (BSRS).2The BSRS is a nationally representative survey of the Brazilian adultpopulation age 18 years and older that was administered in 2002 with the objective to explorepublic attitudes and values on a range of social issues.
The research depends on the authority of the Brazilian Social Research Survey (BSRS) to gain credibility from the audience.
Given these considerations, the purpose of our study is toexamine the association between religion and abortion issues in Brazil with regard to the practiceof abortion and abortion policy.
The authors state why they write this scholar journal. It has a scholarly significance to perform the first research which explores the association between religion and abortion attitudes among the Brazilian population.
The Catholic Church’s pro-family discourse and oppositionto abortion is well documented, yet there has not been a systematic investigation of sentimentsabout the practice and policy preferences concerning its legalization among the Catholic laity.
Although Catholic Church’s official dictum is strongly against abortion, the authors suggest that the Catholic laity’s opinion may different from it. It can lead the further research.
Research has yet to examine the role of religious factors on abortion attitudes in Brazil.
The authors present a hypothesis that role of religious factors is related to the abortion attitude in Brazil. There are no published research that reveals the link between religion and public policy in Brazil up to now. Therefore, the authors give the United States’ research result to gain credibility from the audience. However, Brazil has different socioeconomic situation such as the per capita national income, gross domestic product (GDP), or a political posture from the U.S. In my opinion, the authors committee the logical fallacy. It is nonsense to apply the study in Brazil which has different circumstances from the U.S.
The official doctrinal position that abortion is a grave sin is widely disseminated,and under the direct influence of the Vatican and guided by the belief that the “right to life beginsat conception,” the Catholic Church in Brazil has consistently demonstrated opposition to thelegalization of abortion and has propagated this view in a clear manner among its followers.
Catholic leaders still cling to their position strictly that no abortion or contraception for Zika virus.
Consequently, the push to legalizeabortion, at the same time garnering opposition from religious groups, has also become a salientissue for international women’s rights movements and health organizations (Correa 2010).
This sentence regards Brazil as one of the country which has a great influence of religion. Every policy should consider religious groups’ opinions.
A recent groundbreaking study, however, us-ing a ballot box technique to ensure complete anonymity for respondents, found that more thanone-fifth of Brazilian women living in urban areas had received at least one abortion by the endof reproductive age (Diniz and Medeiros 2010).
These statistics is shocking that 25% of Brazilian women had received at least one abortion. The unproven process of illegal abortion can potentially make a negative effect on female health outcome. The situation will be exacerbated due to Zika virus. The Brazil government should prepare several measures before it is too late.
collecting accurate estimates of its actual incidence has been a challenging exercisefor researchers
It shows that Brazil has hostile condition to get an accurate rate about receiving illegal abortion because the women who report abortions receive the fear of social and legal sanctions.
Since 1940, abortion has been illegal in Brazil, except in cases of rape or when the woman’slife is at risk. Despite legislative efforts to liberalize the law, especially from feminist organiza-tions, the current law has not changed significantly since becoming a statute (Correa 2010; Rocha2006).
Historically, the abortion have been prohibited for 76 years in Brazil. The citizens have already recognized that abortion is illegal and they accept the reality and adapt themselves. That is why it is hard to change the abortion law although unsafe illegal abortions in Brazil are widespread and pose a significant health risk for women. However, Zika virus outbreak has prompted quite a commotion in public, so it may affect to revise the abortion law completely.
During theinterim period between the first and second round of elections, the public opposition expressedby the Catholic Church and evangelical groups over Rousseff’s position on abortion promptedher to change her position and draft a letter promising not to change the abortion law if she wereelected president.
Dilma Rousseff is the first female elected president in Brazil. Although she was heavily popular with the public, she faced tough competition due to her position on favoring the legalization of abortion. This episode illustrates that the abortion is not only women’s rights problems but also a divisive cultural issue with moral and religious dimensions.
The most recent presidential election in Brazil, in November 2010, was marked by a con-tentious public debate over the practice of abortion and the future of abortion policy in thecountry (see Correa 2010).
The audience can foresee the situation that a discussion on abortion and its policy in Brazil will be heated by a dramatic rise of Zika virus.
This study examines the association between religion and attitudes toward the practice of abortion and abortionpolicy in Brazil.
The authors formulate a hypothesis that Pentecostals and Catholics tends to the strongest opposition against the practice of abortion and its legalization.
common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities
Malaysia, for the LMDCs, stressed the need to “recognize that the principles of equity and CBDR must be preserved in all their facets and forms.” He urged parties to look at the best available social science to assess modern realities and stressed that civil society must have access to negotiations.
[Article 3bis] (REDD-plus)http://cop21.okfnlabs.org/agreement/#article-3bis-redd-plus
Calling for a REDD+ mechanism to be reflected in the agreement, Panama, for the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, recalled that heads of state sent a “strong” political signal on the role of forests and biodiversity in their speeches.
Emphasizing the need to respond to the urgent threat of climate change on the basis of the [best available] [reliable] scientific knowledge, in particular, the assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
Saudi Arabia, for the ARAB GROUP, emphasized that setting a goal for governments’ efforts “needs to be substantiated by proven science,” provided by the IPCC.