Bottomless Women Gallery

Dossier - Franco Zunino

Difendiamo l'orso da chi dice di amarlo! Franco Zunino  da: www.wilderness.it
Ancora un appello in difesa dell’Orso marsicano da parte di chi quest’animale per primo studiò in modo “scientifico” oltre quarant’anni or sono, ed una critica, anch’essa ennesima, alla continua inerzia delle autorità tutte.
ENNESIMA ANALISI DEL PROBLEMA Qualche anno fa ricevetti una lettera da una persona che si diceva un amico dell’orso, una persona (Marco Novelli) che poi finii per stimare per il suo impegno in difesa di questo animale, tanto più essendo egli originario di uno dei paesi del Parco. In quella lettera stavano però racchiusi tutti i problemi del perché l’Orso marsicano sia sempre più a rischio di estinzione. Eccola, leggermente adattata alla situazione di oggi: «Il disturbo turistico non è il problema principale per l’orso, o meglio forse è quello che più facilmente può essere decisamente ridimensionato. Certo, ci vuole coraggio a impedire che anche d’estate la seggiovia di Pescasseroli sforni in quota pedoni pigri a ciclo continuo. Se si ritiene che in determinati periodi  si possano chiudere dei sentieri si può fare (come da qualche anno avviene per le creste Iorio-Tranquillo), il fenomeno turismo escursionistico (escluso magari ferragosto), se si volesse, e sarebbe controllabile. Nel passato le nostre montagne non were less busy, indeed! My ancestors were shepherds and woodcutters do not think even the most innocuous of unbearable hikers. I will be biased, but I do not see the hiking tourism as the largest threat to the bear. I am concerned rather than the development of roads penetrate the forest, ever larger and ever more "busy" (not the tourists!), I am concerned about the trivialization of the shores of Lake Barrea, the stray dog \u200b\u200bout of control, disinterest el 'intolerance of the majority of local arson attacks in previous years, the lack of financial support for crops "to lose", the load eccessivo di bestiame in alcune località, la leggerezza con la quale si ricorre al bracconaggio di rivalsa, la competizione spazio/alimentare con cervi e cinghiali ecc. ecc.. Mi rendo perfettamente conto, tuttavia, che non è semplice attuare misure di gestione per una specie vagabonda ed esigente quale è l’orso, anche nei parchi nazionali che ormai lo sostengono, perché nessuna categoria di fruitori vuole fare rinunce di sorta. Continuiamo a fare ricerca e poi ce li avvelenano incollarati e in pieno Parco!». Sembrerebbe, questa, una tesi condivisibile. Peccato che sia vecchia forse quanto old is the Parco Nazionale d'Abruzzo. All reasons, except to say that some, but not that save the goat and cabbage. Ensure all rights to men, and especially to the people of the city, tourists, but rarely those of the bear. analysis, therefore, not acceptable. It is the same (shell), which claimed many more than forty years ago (and we know how that turned out: more than 100 bears no more than about 40/50, if all goes well), with all the reasons cited, including those that appear to harm the bear, but that is only for environmental damage, and certainly not the things they do fuggire l’Orso dal Parco. Come ho avuto altre volte modo di scrivere, non sono state la speculazione edilizia o le sciovie a far fuggire l’Orso, ma il turismo escursionistico; il turismo di chi dice di amare l’orso e  che dice di amare le sue montagne, ma che pertanto non rinuncia o non vuole rinunciare a visitarle e ad incontrare l’orso. Il fatto che un tempo ci fosse più gente di oggi in montagna è anche questa una vecchia diceria, che però non ha confronto con il turismo, dalla primavera all’autunno (ma anche all’inverno, in certi casi). I pastori, come i boscaioli, si facevano i fatti propri e per pochi mesi year. Tourists however are just looking for the bear to "sfruculiare" in his world, to look for tracks, wanting to see and photograph. There is a gulf between the two types of admissions. Better that ten one hundred pastors tourists! roads, yes, are those which promote tourism, because I'm not sure were to destroy the bear poachers, poachers that there have never been, because then they would have done one hundred and extinguish several years ago (poisoners of bears or the pastor who shot to defend his flock, can not be counted among the poachers). The trivialization of the lake is an ugly reality but, also, this is not damaging the Bear: No urban developments in the valleys and human disturb the bear: they disturb us, if anything, and ruin the natural setting in which the bear lives, and only this should be prohibited (such as wind and solar today that almost every municipality in the park would be constructed). Nor are the stray dogs to threaten the bear, much less fire (which often create biodiversity). As long as we aim to rectify these things to save the bear would certainly improve the park, but the bear did not save him ever. E 'known that hikers do not feel fault: no one feels guilty because I felt guilty would mean having to give up going to see the bear and go to the mountains. It 's a position autoassolvente of many. Species of the naturalists who justify everything for his own selfishness. And this is precisely the problem. More who defends the bear for years not seek him out and is content to know that live there among the mountains and forests, that those who claim to love him but then to satisfy their selfish love's going to break the boxes everywhere and at all times. Even those who also studies the behavior and inventory every place, every cave, every sensitive site, with the justification of a protezione che poi raramente viene applicata (perché se lo fosse, almeno avrebbe un senso fare tutto ciò) incide negativamente sulla sua vita. Negli anni è una giustificazione che ho sentito da tanti, troppi, amici e amanti dell’orso e delle montagne, amici che non vogliono rinunciare ai propri piaceri, e poi si chiedono (e mi chiedono) come mai l’orso le abbandoni! Tutti cavillano per dimostrare di non averlo disturbato. Io sinceramente non me la sento di dire la stessa cosa nei passati casi del mio incontro con l’orso: il più delle volte per motivi poi peraltro rivelatisi un disturbo. Ora, se questo disturbo è solo occasionale, come could be in my day, is not a serious thing. But if this condition occurs frequently, as is the case today, telling me there the line to try to see the bear, and in a valley and another, and from mountain to mountain, the obvious that sooner or later ' bear moves up to find places where no one bothers him: that's how you experienced the phenomenon of emigration-dispersive. Certain areas are closed to all, at least in certain seasons, are not open to a limited number (for more pay, favoring only the wealthy tourists!). In certain areas should not go there no one, not even the park rangers or scientists, except for reasons stated. Why Park mountains are not as large and wild as they are often described: a small paradise. And in many places just very little, just one person, to create disorder. The wild boar and deer? Here's a real problem. They look cute for tourists, show animals on the streets, but for too many years have been among the most depleted habitat are proposed to bear without a handle. And yet wild boar are among the largest competitors with the bear, the looting of the resources that are methodical life, especially those in the past sought the Bear in the autumn prior to hibernation in the spring and just let le tane d’inverno. Nonostante questo oggi è proibito uccidere il cinghiale anche fuori Parco! La stessa piantagione di meli è una delle tante cose inutili fatte (più per soddisfare chi vuole contribuire a salvare l’orso che non per una reale necessità); perché nel Parco ci sono migliaia di alberi che producono mele (“ ampiamente sufficienti ai quei pochi orsi rimasti ”, dice l’ex Guardiaparco Lillino Finamore), e quelli piantati produrranno frutti, se mai lo faranno, tra decine di anni; cioè quando l’orso forse non ci sarà più. Sono queste le cose inutili che si fanno. Granoturco bisogna seminare, non piantare meli! E invece proprio quelli che oggi studiano l’orso ci vengono a dire che di queste coltivazioni l’orso non ha bisogno, scoprendo l’acqua calda delle ampie risorse alimentare naturali presenti nel Parco (cosa già da me segnalata quarant’anni or sono!), ignorando tutto l’aspetto comportamentale, quasi un imprinting , che caratterizza gli individui di questa popolazione, alcuni vecchi di decine di anni ed abituati a queste risorse “artificiali”, più gustose di quelle naturali, e più abbondanti. Voler ricreare, con questo metodo, un orso “selvatico” in Abruzzo, come vorrebbero gli attuali studiosi, vorrà means to create in fact, as is already happening, the syndrome of Yellowstone bears with more domestic, more and more in the vicinity of towns and farming valleys in search of food easy and tasty, but make them real wild! Stray dogs? A non-issue and considered that only those who understand little about animal behavior. For the bears dogs are nothing but "wolves" that is, animals of their world, they're used to, even if they flee when attacked: they have known for hundreds if not thousands of years, as the pastors know that if they are next to raw or close to stazzo. They are the "men tourists" who gli orsi non conoscono, a cui non sono abituati da generazioni. I pastori hanno il pregio di portare le pecore, i turisti portano solo disturbo. E anche se ai turisti gli orsi si abituassero, essi (i turisti) non farebbero altro che creare un fenomeno di addomesticamento, quel fenomeno che non per nulla si è creato negli ultimi decenni, e mai si era verificato prima. “Ho visto gli orsi e pur avvertendo la nostra presenza non davano segni di disturbo”, dicono molto turisti. Ma è proprio così che si crea il fenomeno di addomesticamento! Nell’immenso Yellowstone, uno dei primi provvedimenti per salvare il Grizzly è stato quello di chiudere al turismo ampie aree selvagge da riserva solo a loro. Down by three and now the bears hunt them too. By us (we are not certainly a Yellowstone), continue to quibble to justify our "right to the environment, caring about the right of the bears. That is why, as I wrote at other times: God save the bear who says she loves him! STILL AND ALWAYS COUNTS AND CENSUS After decades of surveys and research during which they were spent, according to an estimate released by the newspaper La Repubblica , as many as 12 million euro! (You could buy almost all of the Park of Abruzzo - because this Americans would do if they could decide how they spend all that money!) may seem like good news this year that date by the Presidency of the Park, on the decision to block the activities of the capture of brown bears Marsica; catch that lasted for years and that have left many doubts about their usefulness for conservation of the population (and even some train never very clear about the phenomenon of domestication of more and more individuals and the presence of bears impaired), except for a more accurate census. Forty years of attempts to survey that accompanied the research, started in 1970 and not yet completed. One wonders never have that sense questi infiniti censimenti? Che senso abbia dire oggi che abbiamo solo più 40 orsi, se poi non si fa niente per impedire che diminuiscano ancora? Tra vent’anni ci sarà chi parteciperà ai censimenti per stabilire che gli orsi sono solo più 20! Quarant’anni di censimenti durante i quali si è passati dagli oltre 100 individui stimati nel 1970 nella zona del Parco e sue strette vicinanze, ai forse meno di 40 individui stimati oggi secondo le ultime notizie, e distribuiti su gran parte dell’Appennino centrale. Addirittura, secondo gli studi recenti, oggi si vorrebbe far credere che la sostenibilità ottimale sia di soli 50 orsi nel Parco Nazionale d’Abruzzo e suoi dintorni; un’indicazione che sembra want to turn a defeat into victory, if we consider that up to forty years ago in the Park and its surrounding areas for over 100 bears he lived. In reality the situation is still far from afford to breathe a sigh of relief, since no recovery of growth was still recorded, if not good (but not exceptional) of 10 children born in 2008 and 6 in 2009. Everyone had the illusion that this was a sign of a recovery, when in reality is only in accordance with a birth variable from year to year, as always happens in nature between the populations of animals (but also in the field of plant). All the illusion that those 16 puppies (but now speaks of the Park 22 children in the last 3 years) would reach adulthood, when it is well known the high rate of juvenile mortality of this species, compared to the low birth rate. Indeed, perhaps only half of them, or even less, will come to adulthood, ignoring, then, the natural (and also incidentally) mortality of individuals as adults. Well then have made the park authorities to put an end to unnecessary and dangerous catch (bears roam in the park today without one of the front legs!). The problem is that they stop the catch, but the research (which will last at least until the batteries will last Bears Radio-equipped, we imagine a long, long time considering the new storage systems or even solar-autoricaricantisi!), for which the money are always scarce as more and for concrete measures. They stop the catch, but continue the searches, and serious, never dismantled so many "catch pens" made in various areas of the park, the real environmental changes in a National Park should be subject to immediate restoration . Now is the time to act (for forty years is expected this time!), And we hope that the park authorities, at the suggestion of the researchers, they can eventually take those measures deemed necessary to grow the population, hoping that relate to the increase in food sources "anthropogenic" (crops and pasture to lose) and an even stricter control of tourism, which provides great natural areas to be reserved for the bear (and not the closures with access ... in the face of hefty payments!) and the usual requests for extension of the National Park just to close the hunt still other areas, territories, however, that the Park does not seem to be equally concerned to safeguard the many wind farms and solar projects that are threatening them. At the bottom of the commitments made with PATOM should be directed to the defense of the bear brown bear and its habitat, not only to the study of his bioetologia has famously become known and the fight to hunters, because, by all authorities, the so-called scientific world to the environmental movement, is always just to expand the park and closing of hunting is heard speak, as a solution which would increase the population of this animal, while the authorities themselves and the scientific world view as unnecessary initiatives obvious recovery of the crops or an increase of grazing sheep, a strict control of the tourist trails, a habitat conservation increasingly eroded by the projects of "use of land," a drastic reduction of competitors such as food are wild boars (but also environmental noise, as the deer), an incentive and a reduction in the sheep than cattle and horses almost alien to the ancient pastoral world of Abruzzo (and anyway, with a prompt and fair compensation for damages , which instead is that only on paper). Again with the usual single enemy to be killed: the hunter! And always there to assess, visually or with DNA, as if the bears have served to raise the population! To compensate PASTORS AND FARMERS laws to compensate the herders and farmers in general the damage they suffer due to predation by wolves and bears are now decades old. When they approved it seemed a success, the resolution of conflicting issues that have always had divided the rural areas of the Apennines from the city environmentalist, a staunch defender of bears and wolves and wildlife in general. Unfortunately, these laws have only alleviated the problem, because we then thought the bureaucracy to complicate things, slowing down to get the compensation practices, allowing a technicality that has often prevented an ambulance and, above all, fair reimbursement for damages. In fact, the laws do not foresee ever indirect damage (eg, the loss of sheep to cattle, pregnancy or lack of growth of lambs and calves; not to mention the emotional damage that often exist even though many are a little laugh to hear him define it!), or damage to be calculated according to the real market price. But this would be less. The problem is that often, for various reasons (this is the case here, to say, of "piddling"), not all losses are compensated, then there are the payment delays, delays that become unbearable for shepherds and ranchers who consider themselves unfairly damaged. In Abruzzo, Lazio and the recent protest, a "crying in the wilderness" of farmers who have suffered losses of tens of animals eaten by wolves and bears, and that for unknown reasons (at least to the public) were not compensated. E 'recent protest by farmers who complain about the delay even up on the spot checks by the enforcement staff (veterinarians, park rangers and forest guards), with exposed even to the courts to protect their rights. It is true that these farmers often can not properly be said to be strict on compliance with environmental regulations on the use of pasture land allocated to them, perhaps it is also true that in some cases of wolves and bears it, but dogs malnourished or hypothetical "stray or feral. " But if you do not want to read more news soon of bears and wolves poisoned or impallinati is necessary that the authorities: to put aside their qualms on compensation or not to give only a certain doubts about the animal predator who has caused or for other reasons; crackdown to regulate grazing in protected areas at least, possibly by promoting the sheep (perhaps with incentives) to the equine and cattle, more impactful on the environment and less useful for wildlife food webs; severely punish those who break the rules, but also immediately and reimburse fully the damage to those who suffer. Delaying when the inspections are promptly reported to the killing of livestock, cavillare sul fatto se trattasi o meno di lupo o di cane o se si poteva o meno pascolare in certe aree è un modo perfetto per incattivire persone già predisposte a difendere i loro armenti con propri mezzi. Ed incattivire e rendere nemico dichiarato di lupi ed orsi un allevatore è il miglior modo per spingerlo ad atti di autodifesa di propri diritti ed interessi; atti che rischiano di portare all’estinzione se non il lupo, almeno l’orso marsicano. Poi sarà solo inutile, di scarsa soddisfazione e costoso, dargli la caccia giudiziaria! I pastori e gli allevatori possono essere i migliori amici di lupi ed orsi, ma anche possono trasformarsi nei loro peggiori nemici, come si è già seen in the recent past. Thinking only to punish the perpetrators of crimes after they occurred is of little value and the considerable costs, especially now that the only loss of an individual Marsicano brown bear threatens the survival of the entire population. Always compensate the shepherds and farmers for the damage that report, welding them the real price of these losses is the best way to reduce that of bears and wolves. Also a way to preserve a rural which is increasingly disappearing, even to the detriment of the biodiversity of the Apennines. Have pastors become the best friends of the bear is also a way to save it. Do not pay for the loss of a chief disputes with regard to who killed him, badly paid and / or paying late the damage suffered by a farmer is like not paying, why not relieve his anger, nor the instinct of revenge towards predators. A DEFEAT FOR A SUCCESSFUL RUN Now every year we review (we environmentalists) to the news about the presence of bear more and more tame, less fearful of man's presence. A defeat for those who really care about the survival of the remaining population of the species Abruzzo brown bear, but a defeat that many consider a success for the tourist attraction that give rise to these bears. Even a defeat for those researchers who dream of "feral" bears all the Parco Nazionale d'Abruzzo "subtracting" their crops and flocks of sheep. Yes, that's right, while the Wilderness movement is trying to revive the cultivation of corn fields in some areas of marginal habitat for this species (in some cases with the help of the Park), scholars dream of to return to the wild bears in the Park, as you can keep these animals, a large amount of natural food resources (which the writer pointed out already 40 anni or sono, ma convinto anche dell’importanza di continuare a lasciare agli orsi campi di granoturco e pecore, risorse “artificiali” alle quali essi sono abituati da migliaia di anni). Ora siamo noi a dirlo: siamo in Abruzzo, non nello Yellowstone! Quest’anno nel volgere di poco meno di un mese, cinque sono state le notizie andate sulla stampa locale ed anche nazionale, di questi orsi domestici (“problematici” li definiscono gli studiosi, i quali sembrano non porsi il problema del come mai siano divenuti tali!), prima a S. Sebastiano di Bisegna, poi in Valle di Rio del Comune di Alvito, poi ancora nella solita Scanno abruzzese (con servizi andati in onda also on national TV), another in S. Donato Val Comino, and Settle, fourth in Campoli Appennino, always in Frosinone, and finally to Alfedena Civitella in Abruzzi. All laudatory articles and news, aimed at highlighting the tourism element in a light animalistic, that bear good, "fellow citizen of habit," as he wrote in a newspaper, going to eat every night in the house where someone prepares " a kind of feast! 's so that this population lead to the extinction of wild animals, killing out of revenge, partly due to damage not compensated, or not fairly compensated, in part by making individuals more and more households, so the valleys and forests of the park are increasingly preferring not those of the wild Frusinate or forges, where agriculture and still thriving, and also putting them at risk of nocturnal encounters with criminals, or collisions with cars. Who can forget the praise for these domestication uttered by the then President of the Park Fulco Pratesi? It was the beginning of this process. The authorities have realized that this was a wake-negative, whereas it stubborn to consider it a useful toy for tourists, thinking only to continue its nth counts and useless studies of biology, without doing anything serious to reverse the negative trend. Other years have passed and the Three Bears "problematic" were removed from their wild world captive and locked in vain, and it seems that things have changed a lot. It resign environmentalists, people of Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise, soon we will read in the newspapers of the death of the last bear Marsicano. Then someone will ask, and we say as it was possible to exterminate an animal so easy-going and domestic ?! FINALLY, GOOD NEWS Summer last was with great pleasure that many have received a press release by the President of the National Park of Abruzzo, a press and appreciated that I share in all of its content, glad to finally see the authorities move with conviction to try to keep some peace in this beautiful animal. comfortable with the news of the sighting of as many as 10 bears in the area of \u200b\u200bramneti, a number that recalls the sightings of the early decades of the last century, and which I hope is a harbinger of a real population growth after a decline that for decades, even if it does not hide the fact that such a high presence is certainly a sign of high frequentazione di persone dalle quali sono venute le segnalazioni, siano essi dipendenti del Parco o semplici turisti (ed è notorio che più persone riescono a censire il territorio più alta è la possibilità di osservazioni). Bene ha comunque fatto la Presidenza del Parco a ricordare a tutti che esiste un’ordinanza che se non vieta del tutto (come sarebbe il caso e come da decenni avviene - severamente applicata - nella Mission Mountains Tribal Wilderness Area da parte dei nativi americani delle tribù Salish e Kootenai), almeno limita il libero accesso alle zone delicate per quest'animale. E particolarmente piacere mi ha anche fatto l’ultimo ammonimento del Presidente Giuseppe Rossi: dobbiamo cominciare a pensare che ci si debba accontentare dell’idea che l’orso esiste anche se non lo possiamo vedere; un pensiero che ci dovrebbe allietare a prescindere dal suo avvistamento, che è un diritto non più consentibile a tutti, se non, appunto, nell’ideale pensiero di una consapevolezza della sua esistenza là, nelle sue montagne, da mantenere le più selvagge possibile. Nelle autorità deve quindi farsi strada l’idea di Aree Wilderness, perché è in questa forma di conservazione del territorio e dell’ambiente che è racchiuso il concetto di un controllo e di una limitazione alle presenze nelle aree più selvagge dei Parchi di tutto il mondo. L’orso bruno marsicano è anche una risorsa turistica; ma lo è preservando l’idea della sua esistenza tra quei monti ed in quelle foreste, non trasformandolo in un animale da baraccone che per forza tutti devono vedere. Diritto di tutti è preservarlo selvaggio, non osservarlo, magari addomesticato a razzolare nei cortili o, peggio, attorno ai bidoni di rifiuti dei paesi e dei centri turistici del Parco!