I think the narrative needs to move away from ‘reintroduction’, to introduction. I believe in certain cases they can be a good proxy for S.Bison. But it’s not a reintroduction as they were never present. I believe they can be used as a good tool in the right circumstances/setting/climate.

I’m undecided on E.Bison introduction. And being an enigmatic species, of course it holds public appeal. But perhaps, in the right circumstances (not dry, arid ,and increasingly hotter climates) they can be used as a proxy for Steppe Bison.

In Portugal for example introduced bison have focused on stripping bark and killing invasive acacia trees. Cattle, even introduced Taurus cattle, in the same area do not do this. They fill different niches.

‘It could be also argued that the extensive livestock that already exists there would presumably fulfill an equivalent function to extant bison (Velado-Alonso et al., 2020).’

From what I have seen this is not true, but specially in northern Spain.

However in northern Spain the climate (bar lacking very cold winters) is not dissimilar to that of the E.Bison’s natural range.

The introduction of E.Bison should be seen as a proxy replacement, not a reintroduction as it is often sold as.

The article mentions…