Image: Marc Olivier Jodoin/Unsplash “If conservation only preserves wildlife numbers and bodies without tending to wildlife minds and societies, then it will fail.” Dr. Gay Bradshaw in Carnivore Minds: Who These Fearsome Animals Really Aretress —...
Recent Essays
In the name of progress, we have built the world based on lies that codified our distorted vision of nature. Our anthropocentric worldview turned the wonder of the living world into an object of fear and hatred. No winners, only losers, emerged from the transformation.
Humans and wildlife can co-exist. If scientifically based compassionate measures are tried, if both humans and wildlife are offered a chance to succeed, we could not only save coyotes from unnecessary death but also salvage our own humanity.
In the Western context, the fear of wild animals reflects our distorted perception of risk, not the risk itself. Unfortunately, this is a consequential fallacy that victimizes carnivores.
There is a commonly held assumption that if an animal has become “habituated” to humans (no longer afraid of them), the only option is lethal removal. But the behaviour of individual coyotes that are very persistent in accessing resources and willing to tolerate human proximity can still be effectively reshaped.
Farmers are numerous and they vote. Both bears and beavers have a notoriously poor record when it comes to showing up on polling days, their turn out being even lower than that of young people.
Claiming scientific impartiality in wildlife management is an illusion. Preferences, biases, and emotions inform the mindsets of all the actors, regardless of their position. The question is not who is driven by objective science and who is not, but rather whose values and beliefs deserve greater consideration.