With RTL News··Modified:
RTL
Two wolf experts say the animal could not have been bitten by the girl who was attacked by a wolf near Leusden last month. The two have examined photographs which show that teeth were not the cause of the injury.
The pictures show the young girl who was injured. Psychologist Glenn Lelieveld, one of the experts who looked at the images, says they show scratches near the baby’s navel. “The mouth of a wolf is not so big that it would bite it short on the side (as said, ed.), injuries would be near the navel.”
Dick Klees, an expert from Wolves’ knowledge platform in the Netherlands, agrees. He calls out slight damage to the skin on the wounds and says that the space between the wounds does not match the distance between the teeth of a wolf.
Klees: “What we saw doesn’t look like a bite. There has been an incident, but it looks like a wolf ran into the child. It’s possible that the wolf walked with its mouth open so the teeth had split the child’s skin.”
In the photos, Klees saw ‘further scratching’ consistent with a wound caused by falling into a blackberry bush. “It’s the wolf’s fault, but there’s nothing to indicate a real bite.” According to Lelieveld, it is important to the public whether the wolf bites or not. “Scratching a child from falling feels different than a wolf biting a child,” he says.
It is also important to the wolf itself. “If it’s really about an attack, you’re dealing with a problem wolf. A problem wolf gets the bullet, but for a wolf that’s causing a problem situation, there are other options is where the wolf lives,” says Lelieveld.
Pedestrians in Utrecht previously told RTL News to be careful because of the wolf:
The after school care center the child was with claims the girl was bitten by a wolf. The shelter released a statement about the incident on July 17. “The worker who was standing right next to the girl during the incident said that she saw the wolf bite the child’s side. This has been confirmed by the child’s parents. The bite was it was very short for the girl on the child’s side, the wolf didn’t bite and she let the girl go immediately, and then she fell,” he reads.
‘big event’
After the incident, a damaged piece of clothing was analyzed for DNA in the Utrecht area. It turned out that the girl was against a wolf. According to the province, there was a possible tooth mark on the clothing, but this was not investigated. “That’s not the laboratory’s knowledge,” said a spokesman for the province. Experts Lelieveld and Klees say that the damaged clothes do not show how the damage happened.
“It was important for us to know if a conflict with a wolf had occurred,” the spokesperson continues. “Whether it bites or not, if a wolf comes that close to a child, it is a very bad event for us.” Since the province of Utrecht believes that the wolf that may or may not have bitten the child at the end of July, they are preparing a hunting license.
Lelieveld agrees with the severity of the incident. If a wolf comes within thirty meters of a person, it speaks of a difficult situation. But he does not think it is necessary to shoot the wolf that is causing the problem situation. “Explaining what happened is very important,” he says. “In a difficult situation you have other options besides shooting, such as running away, closing off areas and capturing the animal and sending a GPS transmitter. in.”
When asked, the out-of-school care center where the child attends said it stands by the July 17 report and does not comment on the experts’ findings.
2024-08-13 12:12:44
#Werewolf #experts #dispute #Den #Trek #girl
