US Edition"Inefficient, Economically Unjustifiable and Ethically Questionable": the Destruction of Disputed Foxes
12 Articles
12 Articles
According to one study, the destruction of mustelid foxes and corvids is more costly than repairing the damage caused by these species in the fields. ...
A study of the National Museum of Natural History shows that the mass destruction of so-called "weak" species in France costs much more than the damage they cause. Researchers believe that this public policy, which is ineffective in regulating animal populations, should be reassessed.
A study shows that the elimination of so-called "harmful" species in France, such as foxes and ravens, is inefficient and costly, and does not reduce economic losses and do not affect the decline of targeted animal populations.
Every year, 1.7 million foxes, mustelids and corvids are killed to reduce economic losses and health risks. But according to a study, these measures have an “eight times higher cost”.
Researchers at the National Museum of Natural History have looked at the effects of systematic hunting of "species likely to cause damage." They show that these destructions cost more than the agricultural damage caused by animals, and that they do not reduce them.
The massacre of millions of animals "susceptible to cause damage" in France does not reduce the damage attributed to them, according to researchers at the National Museum of Natural History in a study published this Monday, March 9.
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 50% of the sources lean Left, 50% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
