I have to disagree on this one. On the Seregeti plains the land is unfenced and roamed a whole suite of great predators yet between 20% and 60% of the wilderbeests starve to death every year. This is as it should be. A hard dry season/winter that really knocks the herbivore numbers back now and again are essential to the functioning of the ecosystem as a whole. The carcasses of the dead enrich the soil. I'm sure the bones especially represent long term sources of calcium and phosphorus in the soil. This fertilization of the soil combined with the reduced grazing/browsing pressure allows for a surge of vegetation to see the survivors of the thrive in the wake of the bleak seasons. When the animals thrive, the plants suffer. When the animals suffer, the plants thrive. If we try to keep either from suffering both will decine over time as the soil looses its feedings of bone and the plants never really get a break from the herbivores. Nature is beautiful and awe-inspiring and is balm to the soul but never mistake Her for kind or gentle in Her ways.
@@Nitka022 But this wasnt nature. The area was fenced, disallowing the movement of the herd to other pastures. Basically they stuck them in a field and allowed them to starve. Would have been better to reintroduce smaller herbivores, maybe beavers, wild boar, which are both good land managers, and a farmed large herbivore, maybe european bison.. which could be kept in check by marketing.
@Legend of the Blue Macerator The predators are rangers with rifles, as the eyes of wolf. They kill the weak and old, which can't survive long dark winter.
But, that is still different because they are fenced and there are no predators, I live really close to the Oostvaardersplassen and also really close to an much bigger forest (Veluwe) and there wolves came back and there are now about 20/30 wolves there, so the chances that wolven are gonna move into the Oostvaardersplassen soon is pretty big, but where I live is also a pretty big forest and that is almost the same as the OVP, but it’s more successful because there is a little more human intervention.
Rewilding implies leaving “management” to nature and is good in principle but, without predators, herbivore numbers will eventually exceed the carrying capacity of the land. This happens even in open landscapes let alone in enclosed areas however big. So herbivore numbers need to be controlled either by the introduction of predators or culling by humans. Introducing predators into an enclosed area where prey species have never experienced being hunted and from which they cannot escape must at best be ethically debatable. I think it would be illegal in the UK. Humane culling by humans seems the lesser of two evils. I hope that lessons have been learned and that the disasters of the recent past will not discourage further attempts at rewilding in this case. But proper rewilding probably needs larger areas.
Fully agree. And larger areas for animals, and plants as well, can only be created (more precisely: left to these) by reducing the number of people living on earth, as far as I can tell.
A similar project called Pleistocene Park has yet to introduce predators as well similar to Oostvaardersplassen, but the main differences are the park is large enough to house that many animals and they do plan on introducing large predators once herbivore numbers increase enough.
It really cant be just wolves or bears that are introduced to manage the population, you also need human hunters. Take Yellowstone as a perfect example. Yes, wolves helped out brining down the elk populations, but at the same time as they were introduced, Montana fish and wildlife also started issuing large number of elk tags for people to use as the elk migrated out of the park every winter. And whilst the wolves did effect elk populations, they've had very little affect on the bison populations, with close to 800 bison being removed from the park every year just to keep the population at carrying capacity. Whether we find it pretty or not, humans are part of the ecosystem, a hyper predator with no specific niche, that can predate on varying trophic levels depending on what the ecosystem needs. So rather than just getting a couple guys to go in and "cull", allow citizens of the Netherlands to harvest these animals to feed their family. Not only will you be providing 100's of tones of meat every year, but you will give locals a reason to keep these animals around, and manage the appropriately in the long term
Meat production as a by product of re-wilding IS NOT a failure as you suggest - it is a sensible approach in the absence of predators. You do not mention why no predators were introduced was this due to Government rules. Your thesis is that this revolutionary rewilding project was a complete failure - I do not agree, there were mistakes made and animals should have been culled as needed to control the population of large herbivores and why would you not then uses this as a food source?
I live really close to the Oostvaardersplassen, and I also live close to the Veluwe that’s a much bigger forest, and there the wolves came back in the Veluwe there are now about 20/30 wolven and there is a really big chance that in a few years wolves are gonna move into the Oostvaardersplassen, and there where a few wolf sightings around the Oostvaardersplassen but they haven’t settled yet. Also lynxes are coming back in Germany, and probably they are also gonna move into the Netherlands, and that would mean a lot, another big predator!
@@klaasdeboer8106 ja wolven komen echt overal waar ze willen, er zijn wel eens op camerabeelden gezien dat ze over een hek van 4/5 meter “klimmen” en ze zijn ook heel slim dus op een stukje waar het hek wat losser zit ofzo, Dan graven ze een beetje en dan gaan ze eronder door, of ze gaan bij de ingang van mensen naar binnen, dat is een hek van 1 meter, dus een hek of iets is geen probleem voor ze, het is meer dat de Oostvaardersplassen niet heel veel schuilplaatsen bied het is vaak heel open en wolven zijn schuw dus dat zou eerder reden zijn dat ze er niet permanent blijven, en de Oostvaardersplassen is ook niet heel groot, dus met 1 roedel zit het al gelijk vol, maar er is een plan om een strook natuur te maken waar dieren doorheen kunnen, van horsterwold naar Oostvaardersplassen, en als dat er zou zijn dan is en gelijk plek voor zo’n 3/4 roedels
I don’t think that one can *enjoy* this video. However, I hold you in high regard for presenting such a touchy subject. From an eagle’s perspective, the Netherlands aren’t an ideal country for rewilding efforts due to its overly high (human) population density of 508 per km^2. In contrast, the population density of Scotland is only 70 per km^2, so a priori a rewilding effort in Scotland has a substantially higher chance of succeeding.
@@thekraken1173 I‘m not (yet) a specialist in this area, but I can say that , all other things being equal, the lower the population density, the easier rewilding becomes. A low population density reduces the potential for conflicts. I‘m watching such conflicts between farmers and beavers in real time in our neighborhood. I think, with a population density of 110 per km^2, the chances of rewilding efforts being successful are pretty decent, but are heavily dependent on the will of decision makers.
These are animals we're talking about, not robots. The initial numbers introduced were quite small, but their populations naturally increased until they reached a ceiling of food availability.
As you said, entirely predictable - I think that the only way to rewild relatively small areas with large herbivores successfully is to take the Knepp farm approach and sell enough of the animals for slaughter to keep numbers within acceptable limits. Letting nature get on with it is all very well, but I think that as it is we who are creating the environment for the animals, we do have a certain duty of care to make sure that we don't cause an unnatural amount of suffering.
You’re right I agree with everything you say, maybe they could of released an apex predator to help control that population, like what usually happens. It confuses me how they just let animals breed and breed and breed without having a control on that population. If done right rewilding can be very very beneficial!
@@spencersanderson1894 I read somewhere (George Monbiot I think) that it was done deliberately, in effect to see what happened, and that they didn't understand peoples objections to 'nature's way' - it seems mad to me and rather predictable, both the unnecessary cruelty and peoples reaction to it. What I haven't seen explored is what the damage done by overgrazing and then starving animals did to the rest of the environment and any knock on effects there may have been. Apex predators definitely need to be involved, but in certain circumstances - like this and the Scottish highlands, that's us, even though I'm vegetarian!
@@carlpeberdy9086 Oh right, that’s interesting, I wonder why they would do that, I mean surely it would be obvious that the outcome would be that of starving animals? And yes the people’s reaction would be in support of the animals as it is cruel to do such a thing. Yes they certainly do, if not then at least they need to be culled by humans, as you pointed out, we are the apex predators in certain places.
@@RCSVirginia yeah but if they wanted to rewild they shouldve introduced carnivores, that would probably help the ecosystem there out. But idk how big it was so idk if it could handle the large predators needed
@@CaioRodrigues001 From what I have read, Oostvaardersplassen was far too small to accommodate large, natural predators. It was more like a British deer park. Therefore, humans had to be the predatory force that stepped in to regulate the numbers of the large herbivores.
Het is een mooi mislukt praatje van iemand die een vóóroordeel heeft. Het jaartal 1968 wat zij noemde klopt alléén voor Zuidelijk Flevoland. In de aanvang gescheiden van Oostelijk Flevoland (ingepolderd in 1957) door de Knardijk die tussen Lelystad-Haven en Harderhaven loopt. 1e Bewoners Lelystad vestigden zich in 1967. Toen waren de dorpen Dronten, Swifterbant en Biddinghuizen er al. Ik woon al sinds 1971 in Lelystad. De kritiek die deze (praatgrage) jonge dame heeft over de Oostvaardersplassen plaats ik wél kanttekeningen bij.
Thanks for this video. Great summary for the Ecology module at Uni. Very sad. But it's true and it happened. Hopefully we can learn from this and create better next time!
In retrospect it looked inevitable, but without reading up on the case I'll bet the management teams responsible were left powerless by beurocratic incompetence. If they weren't, then... there can't be many valid excuses.
The public policy of the time was 'No Intervention Allowed'. Because? Because the policymakers accepted annual losses of 30%. The public however did not. Also there is substantial opposition to culling or hunting which is is a necessity. Moving animals around can only do so much. I object to two fragments. Labelling the reserve as a meat market is really not what its about. They simply had to clean up what all the vegans created with their 'no culling' practice. Then about the linking zones. The linking zones where never there when the rewilding idea was implemented. Not even on the drawing table. So you can not keep calling for the zones if there is no longer a majority. The stupidest thing was the zones in this province were never linked up to nature areas on the mainland. The zones in Flevoland would have acted as a hideout for a very limited period of time.
So what you are saying is that was a problem a few years ago, but that they have learnt and made the appropriate changes. So it’s not a fail anymore then.
Simon Barrow I am glad that you noticed that, too. Harvesting the excess population of herbivores is a good practice, and if the meat is being sold in markets, it could help raise funds for the reserve itself, and for other reserves, as well.
Yep. No corridors as originally intended. As I said in the vid some scientists have stated that it was never appropriate in the first place! 😢 animals were left to starve.
@@AnimalEducate "animals were left to starve" That's life on Earth though. That has always been life on Earth for virtually every animal. It's just that you can see it clearly when it plays out in an area that's small enough to make it clear to you.
I know the Oostvaardersplassen from about 1976 and the next 4 to 5 years. It was rewilding by natural processes, not by clumsy administrative processes. Half hobby, half experimental, presumably no detailed and scientific monitoring. The introduction of large grazers without predators is not a good idea when the area cannot sustain the herds in dire seasons. The large grazers also required fences to avoid conflict with traffic (the railroad on the eastside). Poor thinking, poor management and a (dutch) preference for economic gains. That is a formula for disaster.
Name one wild area in the world where large herbivores don't suffer similar die-offs on a cyclical basis due to weather and other natural factors. I could be wrong, but I don't believe one exists. Not even those which do have predators.
@@jbjaguar2717 Well, one of the important reasons for seasonal migrations is "availability of food" driven for instance by weatherpatterns. The bison, the gnoes, elephants, all animals with a big impact on food abundance made, and still make arduous and perilous journeys to move from areas with low abundance of water and food to areas with a bit more of both. The Oostvaardersplassen were not inhabited naturally by big grazers. Big grazers were led into a fenced-in area. For that reason it cannot be compared with "wild areas". Population growth in times of abundance and die-off in times of shortages can be quite natural. The land around the Oostvaardersplassen can sustain more animals and the grazers would certainly try to reach it (colissions with trains and cars) if the fences were not there.
@@alwaysfourfun1671 As I understand, the area was reclaimed from the sea, so it had no (land-based) natural inhabitants at all. The idea was to create a habitat that would mimic the natural ecosystem of the area from thousands of years ago, before large-scale human settlement. Of course, this was limited by the demands of modern land-use in one of the most densely populated neighbourhoods in Europe. Was it ever viable to have a sustainable population of large herbivores living without human intervention in what was essentially a small artificial island? Nature would have decided that for itself, given time. One thing is for sure though - if it WAS viable, it would have still been subject to periodic die-offs. Just as similar herds are in Africa today (including migratory ones, by the way). Modern urban humans don't actually want real nature, they prefer a managed nature reserve (an artificial human creation). That is what we discovered from this experiment.
@@jbjaguar2717 Thank you for your extensive respons. I also enjoyed other responses under the item. Lot's of good insights to optimize the rewilding process in the area of the Oostvaardersplassen. Let's live and learn on behalf of nature.
I'm not an expert at all, but I can imagine that if there was a corridor, the herbivores would have migrated to a place where they might find food if they could. That alongside a predator species would bring more balance I believe and alleviate the cruelty (even though herbivores would still die, it would be a part of the ecosystem and not because of human fault). But I'm interested in all that I don't know about yet.
No, that is not correct. The herbivorer population will just continue to grow, until the total land area in all corridors and connected areas has reached the maximum grazing capacity, and the same result will follow. Even though the animals roam after new food, other flocks spread over the area will also roam after new food, until the whole area has reached capacity. The Serengeti also reaches maximum capacity, and in a dry year where that capacity is much lower, the animals starve or get killed by predators. I totally agree that predators and hunters could lessen the strain of bad years, but but they can’t alleviate it completely.
Who are greatest conservationists of all time......hunters ....think about that.....allow limited hunting and use the fees collected to sustain the reserve.....
The problem is that it’s a synthetic circumstance in the first place .. the problem once again is US. You can’t recreate the landscape that existed without us in a reclaimed piece of land that’s fenced in. Do you think animals don’t starve in the wild ?! They do all the time for the same reason…us. Even us who are vegan /vegetarian. We have taken over vast swathes of this planet. Whatever solutions we find we have to find ones where we are intrinsic to the planning, because sadly we are now unavoidably intrinsic in the strategy.
You can rewild most areas I reckon, but you have to re-introduce predators aswell as prey. Introducing the wolf and bear was necessary here. Actually the bear is to big,but the wolf definitely. I agree with you on both counts if we are going to re wild do it everywhere and introduce apex predators including human beings.
This happens with deer in suburban areas in the U.S. No predators, hunting is not allowed. So diseases, starvation and destruction to landscape, agriculture and the environment is common. . Lyme disease spread by deer ticks is common in humans. Culling animals in this unbalanced ecosystem is the only way to deal with it.
Hey Harvey, yes I made mistakes with this video. This video required more research and less judgement. It’s very difficult to form an accurate educated opinion on something when you’re going off of thin secondary research (and emotion). I prefer filmmaking because at least I get to speak with people involved instead of reading from what may be unreliable sources. I’ve learnt my lesson with this one! I’m very busy with my film and teaching atm but once I’m able to I’ll be creating another video regarding this matter. I will take a far more balanced approach. I’m not saying I agree with management decisions as such, but I’ll lose the judgement and include what did go right. Thanks for your comment and hope all is well 😊✌️
Its diffict to watch this. Particularly in Europe were people and animals are well fed. We have a different view when we watch wild animals in Africa dying from drought or starvation. Nobody protests....
So it's a sucess The goal were reached They just didnt care about ethic, it's the question of does the end justifies the means We can still and we should use it as a rewilding farm Konik, heck, deer in surpopulation should be released in other region for rewilding program Because for me shot the animal and eat him is barely less crual than just say "let's them starve" It was predictable Small territory And in rewilding is generally just recreate the natural process like predation and in bigger territory with possibility to move
Netherlands is way overpopulated and produced. Such work would do better in eastern europe with plenty of space. Hungary has lots of space that can be reused for such works.
Rewilding and managed correctly don’t go together! That’s why we have farming. Farming can be nature sensitive, a land sharing approach can take place. Unfortunately rewilding is attached to a much greater agenda that will see humanity being further separated from nature, becoming increasingly dependent on synthetic and unnatural things
Problem with the Oostvaardersplassen is that it was a wasteland. So there isn't a real ecosystem. That's the problem of the Oostvaardersplassen. However the wolf returned to the Netherlands. It might happen that an ecosystem can be complete with the wolves in the Oostvaardersplassen.
Add back the wolves, bears, lions and some elephants and you’ll have a complete ecosystem, it’s already fenced and the predators will keep the prey in check
@@sparkymark68 can you elaborate for the viewers and research please 😊. Yes I agree I should have done more research. Anything you have to contribute would be appreciated
@@AnimalEducate Oostvaardersplassen has been inspirational in the rewilding movement, your click bait headline says it's a failure but it's clearly not the case. It proves the links in natural processes and is limited by the human constraints we place upon it. We've learn so much from studying the site.
@@AnimalEducate Where do you want to start? Wood pasture theory, the interconnectivity of natural processes, interference having unintended consequences. Animals die off in times of famine both in the wild and in rewilding spaces. Unpleasant as it may be it's part of the natural cycle. This isnt Disney, it's reality. Maybe if you hadn't started with a click bait headline and been more balanced in your approach, you'd have received different comments? Oostvaardersplassen has not been a failure by any stretch of the imagination.
This is why when you rewild, you NEED predators, large and small. Wolves, big cats, bears, lynx, pine martens, badgers, wolverines, hawks, eagles, owls, etc. Once predators are introduced, they’ll keep the herbivore numbers in check. Another thing they did wrong was make the habitat too small. When you release that many herbivores, you need a MASSIVE amount of space to house them all. With plenty of different habitats, to accommodate many different species.
"When you release that many herbivores, you need a MASSIVE amount of space to house them all." They only released 32 Heck cattle, 18 Konik horses and 40 red deer. The problem is that the herbivores grew in number and eventually bumped up against the carrying capacity of the land. Making the park bigger wouldn't change that. It would just kick the can down the road. Infinite growth is not possible on a finite planet(or a finite nature reserve).
I think this is a poor take on the subject. I can only speak for the UK's rewilding efforts but blame should not be apportioned to those in charge of the project in terms of the non introduction of predators, Here in the UK every time the concept of predators is floated it is met by red tape from different political areas, usually those acting in the best interests of farmers who voice their displeasure at the idea. The choice to not intervene and come what may is what rewinding is all about. The whole point is to get projects to a point where nature can be left to its own devices. This is all the project managers are hoping for, but its impossible to make that happen when you have a majority speaking out against some of the core practices that are needed for rewilding to succeed. Rewilding as a concept cannot succeed without the introduction of native predators, greater areas of land and more support from those that can make a difference. Sadly much of the uproar from farmers is bred from ignorance of the subject and the benefits rewilding could offer to their own land and business and also the farmers who are so stuck in the family generational workings of their farm they are not willing to change. So that being said the project managers most likely didn't expect to have to be dealing with mass starvation. At the beginning of their grand idea their plans probably included the future addition of predators. Its safe to say that the blame for this lies elsewhere.
Is it really a 'failure' of rewilding though? Or does it simply represent the harsh truth that nature involves a significant amount of suffering? You mention predators as a solution, but that would lead to the herbivores being torn apart by wolves instead of starving to death - I'm not sure they'd see that as a kindness. Not to mention that in wild wolf packs, the majority of cubs don't survive to adulthood. Ultimately rewilding is not about animals, it's about humans, just like all human projects. And there is no choice that does not involve suffering - habitat destruction causes suffering, habitat creation causes suffering, livestock agriculture causes suffering... All that said, I think the solution arrived at here in Oostvarderplassen was actually NOT a failure - on the contrary it may have been a qualified success: the animals get the best of both worlds, being under human protection which offers them a humane death, but living a free-range life in relatively natural surroundings, which is more than can be said for their cousins in industrial agriculture.
The Netherlands* The problem is that my country is highly densily populated. 18 million people live on a land area not bigger than Delaware, just a little bit bigger than Rhode Island.
2020 they killed 150 koniki, ? 15 Heckrunderen, 1500 red deer 2021 they kill 200 Koniki, 100 heckrunderen, 2000 red deer So it's not oke!!!!! Oostvaarders plassen NationaalparkNieuwland The Netherlands
I have to disagree on this one. On the Seregeti plains the land is unfenced and roamed a whole suite of great predators yet between 20% and 60% of the wilderbeests starve to death every year. This is as it should be. A hard dry season/winter that really knocks the herbivore numbers back now and again are essential to the functioning of the ecosystem as a whole. The carcasses of the dead enrich the soil. I'm sure the bones especially represent long term sources of calcium and phosphorus in the soil. This fertilization of the soil combined with the reduced grazing/browsing pressure allows for a surge of vegetation to see the survivors of the thrive in the wake of the bleak seasons. When the animals thrive, the plants suffer. When the animals suffer, the plants thrive. If we try to keep either from suffering both will decine over time as the soil looses its feedings of bone and the plants never really get a break from the herbivores.
Nature is beautiful and awe-inspiring and is balm to the soul but never mistake Her for kind or gentle in Her ways.
Nature is a ruthless killer...but surprising all comes good at the end...how it should be...there is always balance...if we let it happen
@@Nitka022 But this wasnt nature. The area was fenced, disallowing the movement of the herd to other pastures. Basically they stuck them in a field and allowed them to starve. Would have been better to reintroduce smaller herbivores, maybe beavers, wild boar, which are both good land managers, and a farmed large herbivore, maybe european bison.. which could be kept in check by marketing.
@@lyndawilliams8434 You are correct...I was agreeing more with Tad comment without stressing the point of no fences AND the need for predators...
@Legend of the Blue Macerator The predators are rangers with rifles, as the eyes of wolf. They kill the weak and old, which can't survive long dark winter.
But, that is still different because they are fenced and there are no predators, I live really close to the Oostvaardersplassen and also really close to an much bigger forest (Veluwe) and there wolves came back and there are now about 20/30 wolves there, so the chances that wolven are gonna move into the Oostvaardersplassen soon is pretty big, but where I live is also a pretty big forest and that is almost the same as the OVP, but it’s more successful because there is a little more human intervention.
Rewilding implies leaving “management” to nature and is good in principle but, without predators, herbivore numbers will eventually exceed the carrying capacity of the land. This happens even in open landscapes let alone in enclosed areas however big. So herbivore numbers need to be controlled either by the introduction of predators or culling by humans. Introducing predators into an enclosed area where prey species have never experienced being hunted and from which they cannot escape must at best be ethically debatable. I think it would be illegal in the UK. Humane culling by humans seems the lesser of two evils. I hope that lessons have been learned and that the disasters of the recent past will not discourage further attempts at rewilding in this case. But proper rewilding probably needs larger areas.
Yellowstone national park being the prime example
Fully agree. And larger areas for animals, and plants as well, can only be created (more precisely: left to these) by reducing the number of people living on earth, as far as I can tell.
A similar project called Pleistocene Park has yet to introduce predators as well similar to Oostvaardersplassen, but the main differences are the park is large enough to house that many animals and they do plan on introducing large predators once herbivore numbers increase enough.
It really cant be just wolves or bears that are introduced to manage the population, you also need human hunters. Take Yellowstone as a perfect example. Yes, wolves helped out brining down the elk populations, but at the same time as they were introduced, Montana fish and wildlife also started issuing large number of elk tags for people to use as the elk migrated out of the park every winter. And whilst the wolves did effect elk populations, they've had very little affect on the bison populations, with close to 800 bison being removed from the park every year just to keep the population at carrying capacity. Whether we find it pretty or not, humans are part of the ecosystem, a hyper predator with no specific niche, that can predate on varying trophic levels depending on what the ecosystem needs. So rather than just getting a couple guys to go in and "cull", allow citizens of the Netherlands to harvest these animals to feed their family. Not only will you be providing 100's of tones of meat every year, but you will give locals a reason to keep these animals around, and manage the appropriately in the long term
This is false
Meat production as a by product of re-wilding IS NOT a failure as you suggest - it is a sensible approach in the absence of predators. You do not mention why no predators were introduced was this due to Government rules. Your thesis is that this revolutionary rewilding project was a complete failure - I do not agree, there were mistakes made and animals should have been culled as needed to control the population of large herbivores and why would you not then uses this as a food source?
Dude this video is obviously some peta distorted hyperbolic crap
I live really close to the Oostvaardersplassen, and I also live close to the Veluwe that’s a much bigger forest, and there the wolves came back in the Veluwe there are now about 20/30 wolven and there is a really big chance that in a few years wolves are gonna move into the Oostvaardersplassen, and there where a few wolf sightings around the Oostvaardersplassen but they haven’t settled yet.
Also lynxes are coming back in Germany, and probably they are also gonna move into the Netherlands, and that would mean a lot, another big predator!
Mooi! Ik wist niet dat de wolven al aan de oostvaardersplassen zijn komen snuffelen! Enig idee of ze ook door de afrastering kunnen?
@@klaasdeboer8106 ja wolven komen echt overal waar ze willen, er zijn wel eens op camerabeelden gezien dat ze over een hek van 4/5 meter “klimmen” en ze zijn ook heel slim dus op een stukje waar het hek wat losser zit ofzo, Dan graven ze een beetje en dan gaan ze eronder door, of ze gaan bij de ingang van mensen naar binnen, dat is een hek van 1 meter, dus een hek of iets is geen probleem voor ze, het is meer dat de Oostvaardersplassen niet heel veel schuilplaatsen bied het is vaak heel open en wolven zijn schuw dus dat zou eerder reden zijn dat ze er niet permanent blijven, en de Oostvaardersplassen is ook niet heel groot, dus met 1 roedel zit het al gelijk vol, maar er is een plan om een strook natuur te maken waar dieren doorheen kunnen, van horsterwold naar Oostvaardersplassen, en als dat er zou zijn dan is en gelijk plek voor zo’n 3/4 roedels
@@klaasdeboer8106 die wolven komen overal doorheen.
I don’t think that one can *enjoy* this video. However, I hold you in high regard for presenting such a touchy subject.
From an eagle’s perspective, the Netherlands aren’t an ideal country for rewilding efforts due to its overly high (human) population density of 508 per km^2. In contrast, the population density of Scotland is only 70 per km^2, so a priori a rewilding effort in Scotland has a substantially higher chance of succeeding.
That number is as little as 8 per sq km in the Scottish Highlands, and represents one of the best fitted places for rewilding in Europe.
@@myusernameissoobnoxiouslyl9407 Are you active involvement the rewilding UK efforts?
In my country density is 110 per km2. Is that suitable for rewilding?
@@thekraken1173 I‘m not (yet) a specialist in this area, but I can say that , all other things being equal, the lower the population density, the easier rewilding becomes. A low population density reduces the potential for conflicts. I‘m watching such conflicts between farmers and beavers in real time in our neighborhood. I think, with a population density of 110 per km^2, the chances of rewilding efforts being successful are pretty decent, but are heavily dependent on the will of decision makers.
@Legend of the Blue Macerator rewilding that is - damn autocorrection
Lol don't blame them. They want to connect the oostvaardersplassen with hosterwold and the veluwe but farmers don't want that. So blame them
i like the idea off the isle of sheppy in kent becoming a rewilded island one day since the human population is srinking and its about 35 square miles
Seems odd they didn’t calculate the number of herbivores the reserve could sustain.
you cant do that because its the number left alive after winter here or summer in africa and that changes with climate breakdown
These are animals we're talking about, not robots. The initial numbers introduced were quite small, but their populations naturally increased until they reached a ceiling of food availability.
As you said, entirely predictable - I think that the only way to rewild relatively small areas with large herbivores successfully is to take the Knepp farm approach and sell enough of the animals for slaughter to keep numbers within acceptable limits. Letting nature get on with it is all very well, but I think that as it is we who are creating the environment for the animals, we do have a certain duty of care to make sure that we don't cause an unnatural amount of suffering.
You’re right I agree with everything you say, maybe they could of released an apex predator to help control that population, like what usually happens. It confuses me how they just let animals breed and breed and breed without having a control on that population. If done right rewilding can be very very beneficial!
@@spencersanderson1894 I read somewhere (George Monbiot I think) that it was done deliberately, in effect to see what happened, and that they didn't understand peoples objections to 'nature's way' - it seems mad to me and rather predictable, both the unnecessary cruelty and peoples reaction to it. What I haven't seen explored is what the damage done by overgrazing and then starving animals did to the rest of the environment and any knock on effects there may have been. Apex predators definitely need to be involved, but in certain circumstances - like this and the Scottish highlands, that's us, even though I'm vegetarian!
@@carlpeberdy9086 Oh right, that’s interesting, I wonder why they would do that, I mean surely it would be obvious that the outcome would be that of starving animals? And yes the people’s reaction would be in support of the animals as it is cruel to do such a thing. Yes they certainly do, if not then at least they need to be culled by humans, as you pointed out, we are the apex predators in certain places.
Why havent they re-introduced carnivores? That was completely horrifying... thank you for informing us that so that doesnt happen again
Caiorod001
Human hunters are now the carnivores who are keeping the herbivore population in check.
@@RCSVirginia yeah but if they wanted to rewild they shouldve introduced carnivores, that would probably help the ecosystem there out. But idk how big it was so idk if it could handle the large predators needed
@@CaioRodrigues001
From what I have read, Oostvaardersplassen was far too small to accommodate large, natural predators. It was more like a British deer park. Therefore, humans had to be the predatory force that stepped in to regulate the numbers of the large herbivores.
Hopefully lessons can be learnt from this tragedy.
It is not a tragedy it’s a succes
Het is een mooi mislukt praatje van iemand die een vóóroordeel heeft. Het jaartal 1968 wat zij noemde klopt alléén voor Zuidelijk Flevoland. In de aanvang gescheiden van Oostelijk Flevoland (ingepolderd in 1957) door de Knardijk die tussen Lelystad-Haven en Harderhaven loopt. 1e Bewoners Lelystad vestigden zich in 1967. Toen waren de dorpen Dronten, Swifterbant en Biddinghuizen er al. Ik woon al sinds 1971 in Lelystad. De kritiek die deze (praatgrage) jonge dame heeft over de Oostvaardersplassen plaats ik wél kanttekeningen bij.
Thanks for this video. Great summary for the Ecology module at Uni. Very sad. But it's true and it happened. Hopefully we can learn from this and create better next time!
La información que me das es muy buena desde el punto de vista cientifico!! Estoy de acuerdo en la reintroducion del Lobo en habitad 👍
In retrospect it looked inevitable, but without reading up on the case I'll bet the management teams responsible were left powerless by beurocratic incompetence. If they weren't, then... there can't be many valid excuses.
We learn from failure. The experience will make restoration efforts around the world more likely to succeed, knowledge being key.
Yeah Im sick of people using this as a case study for rewilding these days - looks as bare as a pool table these days
The landscapes look beautiful 🤩 very interesting I have learnt now about tragic rewilding very understandable thank you for the video!
The Flevopolder is the biggest artificial island of the world and is an engineering wonder.
As much as I would like to let nature take care it’s self for large parts of the world we must assume our responsibility as caretakers.
What's your thoughts on reintroducing cheetahs in India ?
Yes provided that they're Asiatic cheetahs. At present these only live in Iran.
They should have seriously looked at the plan again and again and again
Can’t even call it management… shameful
At least we know how hard it will be to re wild in the future
The public policy of the time was 'No Intervention Allowed'. Because? Because the policymakers accepted annual losses of 30%. The public however did not. Also there is substantial opposition to culling or hunting which is is a necessity. Moving animals around can only do so much.
I object to two fragments. Labelling the reserve as a meat market is really not what its about. They simply had to clean up what all the vegans created with their 'no culling' practice. Then about the linking zones. The linking zones where never there when the rewilding idea was implemented. Not even on the drawing table. So you can not keep calling for the zones if there is no longer a majority. The stupidest thing was the zones in this province were never linked up to nature areas on the mainland. The zones in Flevoland would have acted as a hideout for a very limited period of time.
So what you are saying is that was a problem a few years ago, but that they have learnt and made the appropriate changes. So it’s not a fail anymore then.
Simon Barrow
I am glad that you noticed that, too. Harvesting the excess population of herbivores is a good practice, and if the meat is being sold in markets, it could help raise funds for the reserve itself, and for other reserves, as well.
Captivating
Awesome content, keep it coming
Interesting story, thx for sharing
Glad you enjoyed it
so the issues were that 1 no predators and 2 no space
Yep. No corridors as originally intended. As I said in the vid some scientists have stated that it was never appropriate in the first place! 😢 animals were left to starve.
@@AnimalEducate "animals were left to starve" That's life on Earth though. That has always been life on Earth for virtually every animal. It's just that you can see it clearly when it plays out in an area that's small enough to make it clear to you.
They probably didn't use the Verhulst Formula.
I know the Oostvaardersplassen from about 1976 and the next 4 to 5 years. It was rewilding by natural processes, not by clumsy administrative processes. Half hobby, half experimental, presumably no detailed and scientific monitoring. The introduction of large grazers without predators is not a good idea when the area cannot sustain the herds in dire seasons. The large grazers also required fences to avoid conflict with traffic (the railroad on the eastside). Poor thinking, poor management and a (dutch) preference for economic gains. That is a formula for disaster.
Name one wild area in the world where large herbivores don't suffer similar die-offs on a cyclical basis due to weather and other natural factors. I could be wrong, but I don't believe one exists. Not even those which do have predators.
@@jbjaguar2717 Well, one of the important reasons for seasonal migrations is "availability of food" driven for instance by weatherpatterns. The bison, the gnoes, elephants, all animals with a big impact on food abundance made, and still make arduous and perilous journeys to move from areas with low abundance of water and food to areas with a bit more of both.
The Oostvaardersplassen were not inhabited naturally by big grazers. Big grazers were led into a fenced-in area. For that reason it cannot be compared with "wild areas". Population growth in times of abundance and die-off in times of shortages can be quite natural. The land around the Oostvaardersplassen can sustain more animals and the grazers would certainly try to reach it (colissions with trains and cars) if the fences were not there.
@@alwaysfourfun1671 As I understand, the area was reclaimed from the sea, so it had no (land-based) natural inhabitants at all. The idea was to create a habitat that would mimic the natural ecosystem of the area from thousands of years ago, before large-scale human settlement. Of course, this was limited by the demands of modern land-use in one of the most densely populated neighbourhoods in Europe.
Was it ever viable to have a sustainable population of large herbivores living without human intervention in what was essentially a small artificial island? Nature would have decided that for itself, given time. One thing is for sure though - if it WAS viable, it would have still been subject to periodic die-offs. Just as similar herds are in Africa today (including migratory ones, by the way).
Modern urban humans don't actually want real nature, they prefer a managed nature reserve (an artificial human creation). That is what we discovered from this experiment.
@@jbjaguar2717 Thank you for your extensive respons. I also enjoyed other responses under the item. Lot's of good insights to optimize the rewilding process in the area of the Oostvaardersplassen. Let's live and learn on behalf of nature.
They should of maintained hoof-stock populations by sending them out to other rewilding projects
I'm not an expert at all, but I can imagine that if there was a corridor, the herbivores would have migrated to a place where they might find food if they could. That alongside a predator species would bring more balance I believe and alleviate the cruelty (even though herbivores would still die, it would be a part of the ecosystem and not because of human fault). But I'm interested in all that I don't know about yet.
No, that is not correct.
The herbivorer population will just continue to grow, until the total land area in all corridors and connected areas has reached the maximum grazing capacity, and the same result will follow.
Even though the animals roam after new food, other flocks spread over the area will also roam after new food, until the whole area has reached capacity.
The Serengeti also reaches maximum capacity, and in a dry year where that capacity is much lower, the animals starve or get killed by predators.
I totally agree that predators and hunters could lessen the strain of bad years, but but they can’t alleviate it completely.
This is an eye opener indeed. How horribly "managed" . Very sad.
What do you mean “managed”
Who are greatest conservationists of all time......hunters ....think about that.....allow limited hunting and use the fees collected to sustain the reserve.....
if we introduce herbivores into an environment with no predators that means humans need to start doing their job in keeping a healthy population
without conectivity the rewilding is imposible at this scale
Netherlands should learn from India in terms of wildlife animal conservation and environmental protection.
The problem is that it’s a synthetic circumstance in the first place .. the problem once again is US. You can’t recreate the landscape that existed without us in a reclaimed piece of land that’s fenced in. Do you think animals don’t starve in the wild ?! They do all the time for the same reason…us. Even us who are vegan /vegetarian. We have taken over vast swathes of this planet. Whatever solutions we find we have to find ones where we are intrinsic to the planning, because sadly we are now unavoidably intrinsic in the strategy.
Overly dramatic. Some horses died who gives a fuck? Good to see the dutch trying to re-wild a bit. More power to them
You can rewild most areas I reckon, but you have to re-introduce predators aswell as prey. Introducing the wolf and bear was necessary here. Actually the bear is to big,but the wolf definitely. I agree with you on both counts if we are going to re wild do it everywhere and introduce apex predators including human beings.
This happens with deer in suburban areas in the U.S.
No predators, hunting is not allowed. So diseases, starvation and destruction to landscape, agriculture and the environment is common.
. Lyme disease spread by deer ticks is common in humans. Culling animals in this unbalanced ecosystem is the only way to deal with it.
Not a fail. Real shame of a video.
Hey Harvey, yes I made mistakes with this video. This video required more research and less judgement. It’s very difficult to form an accurate educated opinion on something when you’re going off of thin secondary research (and emotion). I prefer filmmaking because at least I get to speak with people involved instead of reading from what may be unreliable sources. I’ve learnt my lesson with this one! I’m very busy with my film and teaching atm but once I’m able to I’ll be creating another video regarding this matter. I will take a far more balanced approach. I’m not saying I agree with management decisions as such, but I’ll lose the judgement and include what did go right. Thanks for your comment and hope all is well 😊✌️
@@AnimalEducate brilliant well done, keep up the good work.
tell me you don't understand ecology without telling me you don't understand ecology
Predators are key to rewilding. No predators = short term success. Im mot an ecologist or government official and even i know that via common sense.
If they let in wolves, which are allready present in a nature area nearby, then things will probably improve
Its diffict to watch this. Particularly in Europe were people and animals are well fed. We have a different view when we watch wild animals in Africa dying from drought or starvation. Nobody protests....
So it's a sucess
The goal were reached
They just didnt care about ethic, it's the question of does the end justifies the means
We can still and we should use it as a rewilding farm
Konik, heck, deer in surpopulation should be released in other region for rewilding program
Because for me shot the animal and eat him is barely less crual than just say "let's them starve"
It was predictable
Small territory
And in rewilding is generally just recreate the natural process like predation and in bigger territory with possibility to move
A success? Short lived….
Franz Vera argues that this is natural because there are large seasonal herbivore starvation in sub Saharan Africa
They should of opened up the fences
Netherlands is way overpopulated and produced. Such work would do better in eastern europe with plenty of space. Hungary has lots of space that can be reused for such works.
Why are you only showing what went wrong beccause of the ovp the eagle is back in the netherlands. so are alot of small birds.
Rewilding and managed correctly don’t go together!
That’s why we have farming. Farming can be nature sensitive, a land sharing approach can take place.
Unfortunately rewilding is attached to a much greater agenda that will see humanity being further separated from nature, becoming increasingly dependent on synthetic and unnatural things
Problem with the Oostvaardersplassen is that it was a wasteland. So there isn't a real ecosystem.
That's the problem of the Oostvaardersplassen. However the wolf returned to the Netherlands.
It might happen that an ecosystem can be complete with the wolves in the Oostvaardersplassen.
Add back the wolves, bears, lions and some elephants and you’ll have a complete ecosystem, it’s already fenced and the predators will keep the prey in check
Animals die in the wild. They provide food for other animals.
How is that a fail?
You've got this one badly wrong I'm afraid.
@@sparkymark68 can you elaborate for the viewers and research please 😊. Yes I agree I should have done more research. Anything you have to contribute would be appreciated
@@AnimalEducate Oostvaardersplassen has been inspirational in the rewilding movement, your click bait headline says it's a failure but it's clearly not the case. It proves the links in natural processes and is limited by the human constraints we place upon it. We've learn so much from studying the site.
@@sparkymark68 thank-you for this. What did you learn? X
@@AnimalEducate Where do you want to start? Wood pasture theory, the interconnectivity of natural processes, interference having unintended consequences. Animals die off in times of famine both in the wild and in rewilding spaces. Unpleasant as it may be it's part of the natural cycle. This isnt Disney, it's reality. Maybe if you hadn't started with a click bait headline and been more balanced in your approach, you'd have received different comments? Oostvaardersplassen has not been a failure by any stretch of the imagination.
This is hunting should be managed and allowed to kull populations and raise money.
This is why when you rewild, you NEED predators, large and small.
Wolves, big cats, bears, lynx, pine martens, badgers, wolverines, hawks, eagles, owls, etc.
Once predators are introduced, they’ll keep the herbivore numbers in check.
Another thing they did wrong was make the habitat too small.
When you release that many herbivores, you need a MASSIVE amount of space to house them all.
With plenty of different habitats, to accommodate many different species.
"When you release that many herbivores, you need a MASSIVE amount of space to house them all." They only released 32 Heck cattle, 18 Konik horses and 40 red deer. The problem is that the herbivores grew in number and eventually bumped up against the carrying capacity of the land. Making the park bigger wouldn't change that. It would just kick the can down the road. Infinite growth is not possible on a finite planet(or a finite nature reserve).
They should of only introduced castrated hoofstock
I think this is a poor take on the subject. I can only speak for the UK's rewilding efforts but blame should not be apportioned to those in charge of the project in terms of the non introduction of predators, Here in the UK every time the concept of predators is floated it is met by red tape from different political areas, usually those acting in the best interests of farmers who voice their displeasure at the idea.
The choice to not intervene and come what may is what rewinding is all about. The whole point is to get projects to a point where nature can be left to its own devices. This is all the project managers are hoping for, but its impossible to make that happen when you have a majority speaking out against some of the core practices that are needed for rewilding to succeed.
Rewilding as a concept cannot succeed without the introduction of native predators, greater areas of land and more support from those that can make a difference. Sadly much of the uproar from farmers is bred from ignorance of the subject and the benefits rewilding could offer to their own land and business and also the farmers who are so stuck in the family generational workings of their farm they are not willing to change.
So that being said the project managers most likely didn't expect to have to be dealing with mass starvation. At the beginning of their grand idea their plans probably included the future addition of predators. Its safe to say that the blame for this lies elsewhere.
Is it really a 'failure' of rewilding though? Or does it simply represent the harsh truth that nature involves a significant amount of suffering? You mention predators as a solution, but that would lead to the herbivores being torn apart by wolves instead of starving to death - I'm not sure they'd see that as a kindness. Not to mention that in wild wolf packs, the majority of cubs don't survive to adulthood.
Ultimately rewilding is not about animals, it's about humans, just like all human projects. And there is no choice that does not involve suffering - habitat destruction causes suffering, habitat creation causes suffering, livestock agriculture causes suffering...
All that said, I think the solution arrived at here in Oostvarderplassen was actually NOT a failure - on the contrary it may have been a qualified success: the animals get the best of both worlds, being under human protection which offers them a humane death, but living a free-range life in relatively natural surroundings, which is more than can be said for their cousins in industrial agriculture.
Holland is small and flat,not ideal
The Netherlands*
The problem is that my country is highly densily populated. 18 million people live on a land area not bigger
than Delaware, just a little bit bigger than Rhode Island.
2020 they killed 150 koniki, ? 15 Heckrunderen, 1500 red deer
2021 they kill 200 Koniki, 100 heckrunderen, 2000 red deer
So it's not oke!!!!!
Oostvaarders plassen
NationaalparkNieuwland
The Netherlands
Facebook: Edelherten Heckrunderen konikpaarden van de Oostvaarders Plassen