Abundance dies twice - in the field, and in memory. One of the greatest struggles facing all restoration-initiatives in conservation is the tyranny of low expectations. People begin complaining about beavers or wolves being overpopulated once their numbers reach over 1/80 km^2
It's the same reason why many ppl in the 1st-world have a seemingly hardened vendetta against gulls. They are some of the only semi-sizeable animals to still make themselves *felt* in the landscape. They are obtrusive, & so a nuisance. Hence countless BBC hit-pieces on a bird.
Many would quite like to live near big animals, but they should be >over there<, out on the field, in convenient photography-distance. Not rummaging about one's vegetable-garden, or blocking traffic, or making startling appearances on afternoon hikes. Seen, not felt.
You cannot have a revolution without a revolution, and you cannot have a living, breathing world without a world that lives and breathes, sometimes in your direction.
@Empty_America Ofc, it MIGHT very well in some cases constitute actual damage, but you cannot simply take that for granted, particularly if the area you are looking at is one which has historically seen unnaturally little disturbance due to prehistoric extinctions
Loading suggestions...