Liste des Groupes | Revenir à rb tech |
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:24:08 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>This is not a cyclist. But it could be (35 seconds)
wrote:
On Tue Feb 18 13:01:08 2025 AMuzi wrote:Yawn. The EPA has nothing to do with wolves.>>
None of us know.
>
Assault, attack by animal, bike crash with serious injury
and no assistance available, heart attack or stroke, all are
possible but details are not clear.
It was Spain, not environmentally friendly US where people like Liebermann argue that there are no wolves in California while the EPA is counting the number of packs and the numbers in each pack. Wild animal attacks are unlikely in Spain and even foraging would be immediately recognizaable. Self inflicted injury by far the most likely cause.
California is importing more wolves. I'm not sure why, but
controlling the number of cyclists seems like a good excuse.
Wolves and wolf pack counts:
<https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=213009&inline>
<https://wildlife.ca.gov/News/Archive/cdfw-captures-and-collars-12-gray-wolves-in-northern-california>
"There are now more satellite-collared wolves in California than ever
before, which is expected to improve understanding and management of
the species in the state."
"CDFW is currently aware of seven wolf packs in California. While nine
packs were reported in the fall of 2024, wolf packs can be fluid. For
example, the Beyem Seyo and Antelope packs recently merged."
7 wolf packs doesn't sound like a serious threat.
More of the same:
<https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Mammals/Gray-Wolf>
<https://wildlife.berkeley.edu/cawolfproject/>
Full disclosure: I'm really on the side of the wolves and not so much
on the side of the humans:
<https://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/jeffl/jeffl-wolf.gif>
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.