In the 1970s, the bison were reintroduced to Paynes Prairie Preserve (https://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/wildlife/Watch-Where-does-the-buffalo-er-bison-roam-Apparently-in-Micanopy_168042110/). I think the only thing that prevents the bison from roaming all around are urban areas and lack of suitable habitats. I personally consider them wild, but I see that all observations of them in Florida have been marked as captive. I was just wondering what other people thought on the matter.
iNat’s criteria for captive/cultivated are here: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/help#captive . For reintroduced populations, the general distinction is that the original individuals placed there by humans are captive/cultivated and their offspring are wild/naturalized so long as the population doesn’t require human intervention to persist.
Apparently, American bison have a life expectancy of 15 years in the wild and 25 years in captivity, so no animals from the original 1975 introduction would have survived after 2000. The only reporting I can find that covers ongoing human interaction with bison at Paynes Prairie Preserve focuses on culling to reduce numbers, which suggests that they’re persisting fine without human intervention.
On that basis, I’d regard the bison at Paynes Prairie Preserve as being naturalized and not captive.
yeah, this topic has been discussed at depth, in particular in https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/the-category-of-cultivated-is-problematic-for-plants-in-urban-landscapes/2317 . Probably better to continue the discussion there, and i can move these posts there if you want. Those bison or similar ones have come up before, they are a grey area, but anyone who sees bison observations in Florida can infer the situation.
I would agree with this
And will do my part to hit the wild and not captive button
This is funny as I’m voting them as wild I have someone right behind me voting me down
Time to send a chain msg out to fix this mess
Thanks! I believe their original number was 10 and now it’s 50 ish, and with their life expectancy, your conclusion makes sense.
You can move these posts if you want. I just made a separate thread because of how specific my questions was.
it’s not a problem! I’d just say if we want to continue discussing it a lot we may want to do so in the other thread so it doesn’t inevitably get buried.
I do use the DQA, but since so many have been marked as captive, the iNat bot has been marking them as captive too.
I mean… wouldn’t it get buried either way? And I’m not too sure how related the two topics are.
Keep using it I’ve done what I can
I have a large mammal researcher
Who will review these this evening
If he feels they are wild he’ll vote to
It’s just a matter of the whole community
Taking the time and putting in there input
Thank you for bring this up
I was taking to someone the other day about a issue similar to this
Thanks, I appreciate it!
I would consider them to be wild. They are fending for themselves, reproducing by themselves, and aren’t receiving ongoing human care, and they’re not the same individuals originally released.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.