new "Establishment means" : Re-Introduced (RI) ?

[Lincoln Durey]

I searched the group posts for "introduced", and read most of those, but didn't quite find what I'm looking for.  The interesting case of Bison bison recently got my attention:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/8251325  (and I encourage you to read the very detailed commentary there")  but in summary, I'm wondering if we can/should have a new establishment means of "Re-Introduced (RI)" to cover organisms that are like this:

1) organism was originally (before human intervention) naturally native to an area
2) the virus Homo sapiens was bad and extirpated said organism
3) More enlightened Humans discovered food webs, pred/prey cycles, etc, and decided to fix their wrongs
4) Humans put the same organism back where it was supposed to be, and said organism is completely self sufficient now that we aren't bothering it.

This would cover my Bison bison in Teddy's NP problem : "Historically Endemic, Human Extirpated, Human Re-Introduced, Naturalizing in the area."
if we just had establishment means "RI" set on Bison bison in SD.  Then people can have their RG observations, and if you use the exported data, and don't like re-intros, you can drop it.

This would also be the marking for Canis lupus in the big western National Parks  https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/wolf-restoration.htm
And would probably be the marking for Canis lupus on ISRO if the NPS does actually replace the packs that died off there recently:
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/12/reversal-us-park-service-aims-move-new-wolves-isle-royale
(as a child summering in north MN, I learned a lot about the pred/prey cycle of the ISRO wolf/moose on visits there.  It is (hopefully) well known that they got there themselves originally on lake ice, and were until recently a critical component of ISRO eco health https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolves_and_moose_on_Isle_Royale
I'm sure MN "natural" wolves would chase a moose back to ISRO on the ice, but our global warming habits make that ice unlikely.

Perhaps this would be useful for things I know nothing about, like African elephants, hippos, rhinos, etc

Or perhaps those neat https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/34-Grus-americana that we taught to migrate again ... The Necedah National Wildlife Refuge in Wisconsin population is there because we put them back: https://www.nwf.org/Educational-Resources/Wildlife-Guide/Birds/Whooping-Crane
The "RI" badge would go right next to the "EN" badge for those sighted in WI.

[Charlie Hohn]

i'd just mark them as present, and for those who really want to drill into that detail they can use fields. Beavers were extirpated from Vermont and re-introduced but I don't see much need to document that every time I see a beaver. It's a known fact anyhow. There are other situations where it might make sense, for instance plants planted in their native range but not native populations, but for animals that move around, it seems really hard to disentangle. 

[Lincoln Durey]

Hey Charlie,
I guess what I'm really after isn't something that regular users would ever need to fiddle with, certainly not on a per-observation basis.  I'm after the case here where the Teddy NP Buffalo herd is getting marked "captive/cultivated" b/c they are doing _too_ well, and are being culled yearly for export (to NA Indian tribes).  If these are marked not-wild (even tho they belong here, and breed here), then our SD map will show no Bison bison.  The not-wild argument stemming from the fact that they are not allowed to leave.  So, if we had a one-time-set "Establishment means = Re-Introduced" for Bison bison in SD, then they could: (be marked wild, be RG, show on maps, etc), with the RI flag at the top next to "EN"... it would work just like the Invasive flag, which you never have to fiddle with.

[Charlie Hohn]

Yeah, i think this is one of these grey areas. For plants it's a bit simpler. If a human put it where it is, cultivated. if it got there on its own, wild. There are grey areas there too but it's easier to draw the line. But animals move around. Due to habitat fragmentation nearly all animals are not allowed to roam where they naturally would, because the habitat is gone or blocked off. I would personally say if the animals are able to roam in a somewhat natural ecosystem and are reprodicing on their own, they should be left as wild. These are native animals in a native ecosystem doing their thing. (of course, invasives are considered wild too...) The captive/cultivated tag is there so that we can separate out two things: native species in their natural range, and invasive/naturalized species. It isn't to follow the 'taint' of reintroduction and human activity down through generations of animals. And i just don't like the idea of all restoration projects' progeny being tagged as 're-introduced' forever. 

Others may have a different take I suppose. I don't do a ton of animal stuff.