Cyprus-Forum.com

[RichardB]

Whilst wiling away an hour at work I thought I'd have a gander at Ressurection Ecology which I think could have some bearing over the matter of the introduction of sub spiecies into an alien environment and I came acroos this snippet of information

If the original subspecies' habitat is restored, scientists can often use evolution in their favor to recreate the extinct subspecies. By finding a close relative in a slightly different environment, and transplanting that subspecies into the newly restored habitat, ideal conditions are generated to produce a nearly identical subspecies as that which was originally made extinct. While these "new" subspecies are not always exactly the same, the results can be close enough for it to appear to be a true resurrection

I also found this little bit of information which could be considered relavent to the issue of the introduction of subspeicies also

There are up to 38 subspecies of the Gray Wolf throughout the world. How did there get to be so many subspecies? Well, that answer probably lies mostly in genetics. Wolves have been known to mate with coyotes, however this is very rare. This also calls into question whether or not wolves and coyotes are actually separate species. The offspring of such a union are larger than a coyote, but smaller than a wolf. Which could definitely account for variations within the Canis Lupus family such as the Red Wolf and the Dog. Because there are various species and subspecies that are capable of intermingling and creating fertile offspring, these offspring can create children that become a different subspecies. Now, within all these differences being made, there are genetic differences going on. This can result in mutations, that can create different different species that are capable of thriving in environments that others possibly couldn’t thrive in. It would also result in creating subspecies that are completely incapable of surviving

So it appears that some subspecies will mate with other different subspecies to produce a mutation which could survive in its new habitat given the correct conditions or it could be completely incapable of survival

[Oracle]

Whilst wiling away an hour at work I thought I'd have a gander at Ressurection Ecology which I think could have some bearing over the matter of the introduction of sub spiecies into an alien environment and I came acroos this snippet of information

If the original subspecies' habitat is restored, scientists can often use evolution in their favor to recreate the extinct subspecies. By finding a close relative in a slightly different environment, and transplanting that subspecies into the newly restored habitat, ideal conditions are generated to produce a nearly identical subspecies as that which was originally made extinct. While these "new" subspecies are not always exactly the same, the results can be close enough for it to appear to be a true resurrection

I also found this little bit of information which could be considered relavent to the issue of the introduction of subspeicies also

There are up to 38 subspecies of the Gray Wolf throughout the world. How did there get to be so many subspecies? Well, that answer probably lies mostly in genetics. Wolves have been known to mate with coyotes, however this is very rare. This also calls into question whether or not wolves and coyotes are actually separate species. The offspring of such a union are larger than a coyote, but smaller than a wolf. Which could definitely account for variations within the Canis Lupus family such as the Red Wolf and the Dog. Because there are various species and subspecies that are capable of intermingling and creating fertile offspring, these offspring can create children that become a different subspecies. Now, within all these differences being made, there are genetic differences going on. This can result in mutations, that can create different different species that are capable of thriving in environments that others possibly couldn’t thrive in. It would also result in creating subspecies that are completely incapable of surviving

So it appears that some subspecies will mate with other different subspecies to produce a mutation which could survive in its new habitat given the correct conditions or it could be completely incapable of survival

The beauty of sexual reproduction ....

I find the interplay of genetics and the environment endlessly fascinating.

It's one of those hidden mysterious beauties of nature. Through this mechanism or feedback between environmental factors and subtle genetic changes such as recombination or mutation, we can guarantee life will just keep changing, evolving and producing greater diversity.

Bacteria as you know RichardB, have been around for the longest time and yet are so "simple" ... life could have stopped there with them ... as endlessly reproducing DNA in fatty bags!

But it has not, and evolution seems to be about creating diversity ... no one species being superior to another ... just differently adapted for its specific niche ...

OK ... you've set me off now.

I'll dive into a little Darwin or Dawkins for the afternoon ....

[RichardB]

Social darwinism eh

So would you say that Darwinism is an approprite tool to use here?

ie 'Humans like animals and plants compete in the struggle for existence in which natural selection results in the survival of the fittest'

Have you ever read any Kerfoot O?

He gave us the Reg Queen Hypothesis (know I may not get this totally correct) This stems from Lewis Carrols 'Alice in Wonderland' and he believes that the author was talking about evolution in this

"Well, in our country," said Alice, still panting a little, "You'd generally get to somewhere else--if you ran very fast for a long time as we've been doing."

"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that."

He (Kerfoot) says that in evolutionary biology the 'Red Queen Hypothesis' means that predators and prey must evolve like heck just to keep from falling behind .

Probably totally irellevent to the Moufflon thread but I find it very interesting

[RichardB]

Bacteria as you know RichardB, have been around for the longest time and yet are so "simple" ... life could have stopped there with them ... as endlessly reproducing DNA in fatty bags!

Indeed O

The simplist of life forms but as you also know once established a single cell of bacteria can double in size every 10 minutes if allowed to go unchecked a colony would be formed

Alone a single bacteria is pretty harmless but once a colony is established then poisoning is quite probable.

[Oracle]

Social darwinism eh

So would you say that Darwinism is an approprite tool to use here?

ie 'Humans like animals and plants compete in the struggle for existence in which natural selection results in the survival of the fittest'

Have you ever read any Kerfoot O?

He gave us the Reg Queen Hypothesis (know I may not get this totally correct) This stems from Lewis Carrols 'Alice in Wonderland' and he believes that the author was talking about evolution in this

"Well, in our country," said Alice, still panting a little, "You'd generally get to somewhere else--if you ran very fast for a long time as we've been doing."

"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that."

He (Kerfoot) says that in evolutionary biology the 'Red Queen Hypothesis' means that predators and prey must evolve like heck just to keep from falling behind .

Probably totally irellevent to the Moufflon thread but I find it very interesting

The interplay between predator and prey is a major driving force in evolution. The prey needing to stay one step ahead, usually by having large numbers of offspring. The predator outwitting with a larger brain.

Then again, symbiosis where two different species co-evolve to benefit each other.

So much variety. So much evidence of a self-fulfilling system that does not need a guiding creator.

I read "The Red Queen" by Matt Ridley years ago, but don't remember Kerfoot's contribution ... which was obviously another evolutionary milestone from your description.

All good stuff.

[Oracle]

Bacteria as you know RichardB, have been around for the longest time and yet are so "simple" ... life could have stopped there with them ... as endlessly reproducing DNA in fatty bags!

Indeed O

The simplist of life forms but as you also know once established a single cell of bacteria can double in size every 10 minutes if allowed to go unchecked a colony would be formed

Alone a single bacteria is pretty harmless but once a colony is established then poisoning is quite probable.

That's your job discrimination showing!

What about all those beneficial bugs ... like the Vitamin K producers in our guts, or the cellulose degraders in ruminating Mouflon?

[Nikitas]

BOF,

Hunting of moufflon in Cyprus was illegal even during the British occupation.

The most extensive studies of the moufflon have ben carried out by Dr L.Hadjisterkotis a game biologist with the Cyprus game department. The poppulation had fallen to a low 500 individuals in the 70, many were killed after a bombing raid during the 74 war. Now it stands at about 3000 (last cesus figure I came across) and they cause damage to ciltivations.

Predation of young by avian and ground predators was always a threat.

I have never come across any reference to reintroduction of moufflon. It was always treated as a uniquely Cypriot animal and former president Makarios would exempt moufflon poachers from his periodic pardons of prisoners. Poachers served their full sentence!

Moufflon are also found in central Europe and probably there you will find the most vibrant population for a very simple reason- they are managed as a game resource and not as living monument therefore there they produce a usable surplus. Like noted wildlife biologist Raoul Valdez has, if you want to save an animal put a price tag on his head. Valdez by the way is the world's leading expert on wild sheep species. Hungary and the Czech Republic have more moufflon than Cyprus and Corsica together.

Valdez's views are echoed by Potts, ornitholigist and editor of "Birds in Europe", official source for info on European bird populations. Potts has said that management is necessary to ensure maximum biodiversity. Nature left to its own devices often diminishes biodiversity.

It sounds silly to say that Cyprus has more domesticated sheep than people but it cannot increase the number of its wild sheep. To give a parallel with another species which here in Greece is treated as living monument, the roe deer (same size and habitat needsa as moufflon). Greece reports a population of 3000 roe deer. Austria is the same size as Greece and treats roe deer as game and applies relevant management methods.Austria produces an annual bag of 275000 roe deer and an increasing breeding population. In Greece itself, on the island of Sapientza moufflon were introoduced in the 60s specifically for hunting. Sapientza produces an annual bag of dozens of moufflon with a flourishing breeding population. The risk to the island is that its unique flora classify it as a Natura 2000 region and hunting might be stopped, which will mean goodbye to both the sheep and the flora as one will exhaust the other in time. Similar results were observed on the island Dia near Crete when the fully portected wild goats eradicated the vegetation. Dia now is a dry rock with neither goats nor plants, a monument to sterile eco ideology and dogma.

[Oracle]

... Nature left to its own devices often diminishes biodiversity.

I think Darwin would disagree with you.

Man may artificially create pseudo-diversity (e.g. many ugly breeds of dogs, cows that produce unnatural quantities of milk) but without Man's selective intervention, these would very quickly become extinct competing with wild equivalents and the species would resort to "type". Hence in terms of biodiversity we would still have "dogs" (all one species) ... just not Labradoodles, Chihuahuas or Shih-Tzus

What you suggest as "biodiversity", is merely a manifestation of morphological extremes of one species ... hence not diverse genetically.

[Nikitas]

Oracle,

Potts when he delivered his presentation at an international conference (I was in the front row) was not referring to domestic species. He said that the current dogma, ( and I add mostly imposed by well meaning but ingorant eco minded fascists) curtails human management, denies the effects of predation, and often leads to a decrease in biodiversity. So in Britain's parks now there are plenty of rats which compete directly with birds for food and often prey directly on nests. Result is more rats, fewer birds, less biodiversity.

In an experimental management project at the Allerton farm it was proven that keeping down the corvids increases both the species and the numbers of songbirds. Neighboring farms which do not control corvids tend to have plenty of magpies but very few songbirds.

Darwin made his observations in places where the human factor was missing. Whether we like it or not, humans are now everywhere and they have a duty to manage the environment. Pretending that there is such a thing as "virgin nature" (translated from the Greek) and insist on total passivity is bullshit. It is a refuge for former marxists who bring to environmental problems the dogmatism they inherited from their former ideology with a little bit of the original sin thrown in for good measure. You do not do science with such nonsense, you practice wiitchcraft. I note that these people love to threaten the less enlightened with the dire fate that awaits "our children" in case we do not heed their threats.

I see this eco fascism making its first appearances in Cyprus and that is worrying. Cyprus needs practical and sensible management practices, not some assholes treating the environment for political gain or to capture the moral high ground. The moufflon will not benefit by these means.

[Oracle]

Oracle,

Potts when he delivered his presentation at an international conference (I was in the front row) was not referring to domestic species. He said that the current dogma, ( and I add mostly imposed by well meaning but ingorant eco minded fascists) curtails human management, denies the effects of predation, and often leads to a decrease in biodiversity. So in Britain's parks now there are plenty of rats which compete directly with birds for food and often prey directly on nests. Result is more rats, fewer birds, less biodiversity.

In an experimental management project at the Allerton farm it was proven that keeping down the corvids increases both the species and the numbers of songbirds. Neighboring farms which do not control corvids tend to have plenty of magpies but very few songbirds.

Darwin made his observations in places where the human factor was missing. Whether we like it or not, humans are now everywhere and they have a duty to manage the environment. Pretending that there is such a thing as "virgin nature" (translated from the Greek) and insist on total passivity is bullshit. It is a refuge for former marxists who bring to environmental problems the dogmatism they inherited from their former ideology with a little bit of the original sin thrown in for good measure. You do not do science with such nonsense, you practice wiitchcraft. I note that these people love to threaten the less enlightened with the dire fate that awaits "our children" in case we do not heed their threats.

I see this eco fascism making its first appearances in Cyprus and that is worrying. Cyprus needs practical and sensible management practices, not some assholes treating the environment for political gain or to capture the moral high ground. The moufflon will not benefit by these means.

And Potts is a practitioner of "people progress" which is fine for Man's short-term goals ..... But nowhere has man managed to intervene, sorted the problem satisfactorily, without creating another.

In short Potts is a "symptom" treat-er, instead of an ailment alleviator. If he is worried about rat numbers, he should reduce the rubbish Humans discard and not blame the rats that are a manifestation of the problem. The cause being Human debris ....

I am sure he goes fox-hunting as a way to help farmers too.

The only thing man should manage is his ever-expanding population dynamics.

The seeds for Darwin's theories were sown through constant observation over many ecosystems and not a mere "isolation" vessel like the Galapagos.

Indeed though, this merely proves the point that it is the presence of man that reduces biodiversity.

Reduce Human population, and Nature will be as diverse as necessary for producing the best of all possible worlds!

Over-confidence in Man's management abilities, is the root cause of habitat extinction, not the long-term solution to biodiversity maintenance on Earth..