Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

livescience.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 238 posts

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#31

Post by ChuckMcM »

sushibowl wrote: post #29
mkw5053 wrote: post #23

It's amazing the impact that the reintroduction has had. On a recent winter trip there I also learned that the reintroduction literally moved rivers [1]: - Elk quit loitering along streams, so willow and cottonwood shot up, anchoring soil and narrowing channels. - The new woody growth gave beavers lumber; their colonies jumped from one in 1996 to a dozen within fifteen years, raising water tables and rebuilding wetla…

As far as I know, the science on this is far from settled. There is no consensus and the evidence in favor of a trophic cascade in Yellowstone came predominantly from two studies done by the same team/person. Later studies failed to replicate findings. Do wolves fix ecosystems? CSU study debunks claims about Yellowstone reintroduction https://eu.coloradoan.com/story/news/2024/02/09/colorado-sta... A good story: Media…

Both links are paywalled so I can't comment on what they say (positive or negative). That said, I did attend an interesting lecture about systems that looks a bit at the Yellowstone as a cautionary tale about extrapolating how a system works from observational data. Basically it came down to there are secondary and tertiary effects from systems variables that express visibly differently depending on both the magnitude of the system elements influence and the time where it it changes. Thus making "simple" conclusions like 'wolves did this' often insufficient to explain system behavior and sometimes outright incorrect.

However, the introduction of wolves did, incontrovertibly, add a system element that had not been present before. Exactly what that element was, and how it expressed is up for interpretation :-)

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#32

Post by bhaak »

rustyconover wrote: post #18
bhaak wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also possible that wolves hunt in a different way than humans, or different types (regarding age, gender, or health maybe) of elks. It’s an interesting question and this could be empirically tested if human hunting would be slowly reduced.

Yellowstone is a national park, you can’t hunt anything inside the park’s boundaries. Wolves can.

Yellowstone park has a policy of natural regulation (since the 70s IIRC). The surrounding areas not necessarily.

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#33

Post by jebarker »

hagbard_c wrote: post #9
owenthejumper wrote: post #5

It's incredible how much damage we have done to ourselves in the past 250 years, and how much effort do we now need to spend to undo that damage

It's incredible how much good we have done to ourselves in the past 250 years, and how much good we can do in the now and the future.

The question is how much of that power will we use to do good for the rest of the species on the planet? I’ve just finished reading “Not the end of the world” and found it to be an informative and balanced discussion on the topic that recognizes the vast benefits of human development (to humans), the cost to the rest of the planet and the progress we’ve made in the past 50 years in undoing some of the harm. This is a nuanced topic and deserves that kind of debate.

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#34

Post by ysavir »

bluGill wrote: post #28
ysavir wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoted as this comment feels like it's trying to be witty/upshowing the parent comment without actually engaging with it or offering anything of substance. If the comment was along the lines of "yes, but we've also done a lot of good, let's reflect on both", great. But that's not what it was. Instead it feels like a statement that's trying to argue with the parent comment despite the parent comment never saying we…

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. regaurdless of what was intended your downvote and reply shows a lack of good faith.

It wasn't a criticism of what they were saying (a point on which I agree with that poster), but whether the comment itself was contributing to the discussion or not. It was a very low-effort comment that offered no reflection on what the parent said, doesn't tie into the original post, and lacks depth towards its own point.

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#35

Post by quickthrowman »

hagbard_c wrote: post #9
owenthejumper wrote: post #5

It's incredible how much damage we have done to ourselves in the past 250 years, and how much effort do we now need to spend to undo that damage

It's incredible how much good we have done to ourselves in the past 250 years, and how much good we can do in the now and the future.

Are you really promoting the philosophy of Leibnizian Optimism in 2025?

I suggest reading Candide by Voltaire, first published 266 years as a critique to the philosophy you are currently espousing.

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#37

Post by throw83944i888 »

owenthejumper wrote: post #5

It's incredible how much damage we have done to ourselves in the past 250 years, and how much effort do we now need to spend to undo that damage

> how much effort do we now need to spend to undo that

Moving a few wolfs, I would hardly call that effort! Stopping regulations and allowing some hunters in Yellowstone would have similar effects!

It is more like morons, who do not understand biology are in goverment! Overprotection allowed elk overpopulation!

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#39

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

cadamsdotcom wrote: post #6

Yellowstone seems like one of the most resilient ecosystems we do science on, seems it can reorganize to respond to changes in species. Can other ecosystems do this? Or is Yellowstone the only one?

A recent biology teacher of mine claims that military bases often contain ecosystems that are:

- intact enough to have quick bounce back behavior upon species reintroduction and

- small enough for you to have a good idea about which species are present

- come with a built-in control variable: the civilian space on the other side of the border represents what would have happened if we had let economics have its way with the land

Maybe you don't need quite that level of protection to see such effects, but generally you do need some. Throwing some wolves at a once-forest that's now half way to being a desert will not always save that forest.

Re: Return of wolves to Yellowstone has led to a surge in aspen trees

#40

Post by bitexploder »

sushibowl wrote: post #29
mkw5053 wrote: post #23

It's amazing the impact that the reintroduction has had. On a recent winter trip there I also learned that the reintroduction literally moved rivers [1]: - Elk quit loitering along streams, so willow and cottonwood shot up, anchoring soil and narrowing channels. - The new woody growth gave beavers lumber; their colonies jumped from one in 1996 to a dozen within fifteen years, raising water tables and rebuilding wetla…

As far as I know, the science on this is far from settled. There is no consensus and the evidence in favor of a trophic cascade in Yellowstone came predominantly from two studies done by the same team/person. Later studies failed to replicate findings. Do wolves fix ecosystems? CSU study debunks claims about Yellowstone reintroduction https://eu.coloradoan.com/story/news/2024/02/09/colorado-sta... A good story: Media…

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecm.... CSU study
Post reply on HN