The fundamentals of conservation biology wavered

The late Finnish Professor Ilkka Hanski and his team were at the absolute forefront of metapopulation research, as evidenced by the $500,000 Crafoord Prize awarded to him. The theory, which was Hanski's area of interest, also serves as a central framework for conservation.

According to Wikipedia, "in classical metapopulation theory, each population cycles in relative independence of the other populations and eventually goes extinct as a consequence of demographic stochasticity (fluctuations in population size due to random demographic events); the smaller the population, the more chances of inbreeding depression and prone to extinction."

As conservation has also become an increasingly important sector in political decision-making, as shown by Finland's rejection of the EU Commission's proposed restoration regulation, it was interesting to note a research report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States.

The report modeled the maintenance of the viability of metapopulations in fragmented landscapes by creating more complex, i.e., realistic, as well as simpler landscape structures. The former reflect fragmentation more realistically. The results showed that the findings from simpler models are not necessarily generalizable.

This is because dynamic phenomena that arise in more realistically fragmented landscapes often contradict the conclusions produced by simpler models. Thus, the new research undermines traditional metapopulation theory thinking - and at the same time its practical application in conservation thinking.

It remains to be seen how the research I have presented here will be covered by the European mainstream media. Or how it will affect, for example, the further development of the EU's restoration regulation. Or will it remain below the publication threshold of the media and thus not influence European conservation discussions in any way?

Since I strongly suspect that the research discussed here will remain unnoticed by the public, I decided to highlight the issue in this writing - in English and also Finnish - so that any journalist, politician, or other influencer interested in the matter - who reads this blog - could become aware of it. And could, if desired, read it themselves (the publication is open for reading) and utilize its results in their own activities.

Previous thoughts on the same topic: Preventing future fires in Hawaii is possible, but the question remains: Are animal activists and politicians prepared for the necessary measures? Traditional beliefs turned out to be wisdom Wolfs affect nature conservation

Wolfs affect nature conservation

King Friedrich II of Prussia has been said to have stated in 1789 that "dog is a man's best friend". That may or may not be true, but there is no question that dogs are beloved companions of an extremely high number of people, both men and women.  

But actually, dogs are not a real species but only domesticated wolfs. And the latter ones are definitely not beloved animals, but baddies of children´s fairy tales and hated risks of farmed animals in countryside. Only in urban areas you can find people, who wish the number of these beasts to be increased as an important part of natural biodiversity.  

Therefore it was interesting to read about a research, which analyzed the effect of wolf´s return to the voting behavior in Germany, where the sustained environmental conservation has allowed this large carnivore to make a comeback during the recent years. 

This development has been applauded by conservationists, but not by local residents living in the countryside. Therefore researchers collected data on wolf attacks on livestock and popularity of different German parties. As a result, they observed that wolf attacks were accompanied by a significant rise in far-right voting whereas the Green party suffered electoral losses. 

In other words, increasing the number of wolfs - and thus losses of livestock due to this wild predator - may ultimately lead to a reduction in the popularity of policies intended to restore the environment. And therefore it may prevent the success of efforts to keep sustainable sizes of wolf populations in Europe.

Wolf is also an issue in the Finnish countryside. We have right now a pack of animals that include hybrids between wolfs and dogs. Those are considered as harmful alien organisms, and should thus be removed. 

Accordingly, a permission to shoot them was applied, but hybrids were not executed as environmentalists appealed to a court to save them. That act definitely did not increase the popularity of wolf´s protection in the area, and may lead to a growth in the popularity of parties that are most skeptical to big investments in nature conservation efforts urged by the European union. A reflection hardly lauded by the environmentalists of the country.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
90 years ago in Germany
Leaders infected by a parasite
A new justification is needed for environmental activists