316 | Human Effects on Animal Behavior or humans For example, badgers in the United Kingdom play a role in the transmission of bovine tuberculosis that infects cattle A move to cull badgers to control the spread of this disease was met with substantial public resistance; 96 percent of about 47,000 people polled throughout England said no to the planned cull, many favoring better farming practices Years ago this sort of response was not very usual; people either ignored the problem or favored the wellbeing of humans or domestic livestock This example, along with the treatment of prairie dogs, shows that as time passes more and more people are showing concern for how we interact with other animals Consider also the reintroduction of grey wolves to Yellowstone National Park, an area in which humans exterminated wolves about eight decades ago because of their predatory habits The project is considered by many people to be successful, in that numerous wolves now roam the Yellowstone ecosystem However, in the process some of the wolves who were moved from Canada and Alaska have died, and the newcomers have killed numerous coyotes in various parts of the park Did we harm when we removed wolves from one area to bring them to another locale? Are we robbing Peter to pay Paul? Should we favor ecosystems and species over individuals? These are some of the difficult questions with which conservation biologists are faced Some people argue that individual wellbeing should come before the fate of a given species or the integrity of an ecosystem, whereas others believe that it is acceptable for a few individuals to die for the good of the species as a whole There also are other questions that need to be considered, because not everyone favors bringing wolves back to Yellowstone Ranchers and farmers believe that wolves are responsible for significant losses of livestock due to predation, although available data not support this claim Consider also the reintroduction of Mexican wolves in New Mexico, and how federal gunners are free to wipe out the Nantac pack, despite the fact that these wolves haven’t stabilized or reached suitable numbers to increase the likelihood that they will survival The federal predator control program has been responsible for reducing the population of wild Mexican wolves from 55 at the end of 2003 to 44 at the end of 2004, and 35 at the end of 2005 During May 2006, federal gunners killed 11 wolves, including six pups from one pack To sum up, the big questions with which we must be concerned include whether it is permissible to move individual wolves from areas where they a have thrived, and place them in areas where they might not have the same quality of life, for the perceived good of their species, and whether it is permissible to interfere in large ecosystems that have existed in the absence of the species to be reintroduced, and remove animals from an ecosystem in which they play an integral role Many animal behavioral scientists believe that the major guiding principle is that the lives of the animals whom humans are privileged to study should be respected, and when we are unsure about how our activities will influence them, we should err on the side of the animals, and not engage in these practices until we know the consequences of our acts This precautionary principle will serve the animals and us well Indeed, this approach could well mean that exotic animals so attractive to zoos and wildlife parks need to be studied for a long time before they