We don’t know why the Island has no foxes

Re: “No foxes or coyotes on Vancouver Island,” column, Feb. 17. Science journalists require a basic grasp of the subjects on which they are reporting to translate accurately scientific concepts into layman’s terms. Such a grasp prevents science from being misinterpreted and wrongly portrayed to the public.

Perhaps that is what happened in Lawrie McFarlane’s column, as there are several biological inaccuracies in his explanations, including a misconception about the minimum number of animals required to sustain a population.

McFarlane states that 4,000 animals are needed to guard against inbreeding and harsh winters, making that the minimum required to sustain a breeding population. He says Vancouver Island could not support 4,000 foxes or coyotes, explaining their absence.

This is not true. Both wolves and cougars on Vancouver Island have populations well below 4,000 (about 150 wolves and 600 to 700 cougars). Having many individuals does decrease the chances of a population going extinct, but is not necessary.

Take Hawaii, for example. Most of the species that arrived there did so as individuals or small groups, not as flocks of 4,000 individuals, yet they managed to establish lasting populations.

Misconceptions about science due to inaccurate science reporting are unfortunately all too common, and can have major impacts on public opinion — just ask any climate scientist. As for why we have no foxes or coyotes on Vancouver Island: While we have many theories, the truth is that we simply don’t know. Dave English Willow English Sidney