Large species within carnivora are large carnivores.

Abstract

Wolf & Ripple [1] is a global study that explored the potential for large carnivore reintroductions, identifying protected areas and other regions with low human footprint that warrant further investigation as possible locations for rewilding. In his comment, Miranda [2] raised a number of points related to Wolf & Ripple [1]. His primary points are that Wolf and Ripple (i) used terminology (carnivore, apex predator, and guild) incorrectly, (ii) selected an inappropriate group of species to study and (iii) listed some unsuitable sites for large carnivore reintroductions. However, each of these criticisms is fundamentally flawed and only acts to hinder conservation efforts. Miranda stated that the species selected by Wolf and Ripple ‘were neither necessarily apex predators nor carnivores, but a subset of the mammalian order Carnivora, […]'. However, Wolf and Ripple did not claim that the species being studied are apex predators. In fact, the term ‘apex predator' does not appear anywhere in the main text or supplement of Wolf and Ripple. The species selected included 25 large carnivore species with a body mass greater than or equal to 15 kg that have relatively accurate historic and current range maps. The scope and purpose of Wolf and Ripple was to identify potential reintroduction sites for large-bodied members of order Carnivora without regard for whether each individual species was an apex predator, which is in itself context dependent. For example, coyotes ( Canis latrans ) may be considered mesopredators when wolves are present, but apex predators when wolves are absent [3]. Had Wolf and Ripple focused on potential reintroductions of a different taxonomic order, such as Primates, would Miranda then critique that the paper did not focus enough on other groups of vertebrates? Miranda is incorrect in his claim that the species selected are …