About 15 years ago, I bought a new car. My old license plates were pretty weathered and there was no way I was going to put them on my new ride, so I set out to order a replacement set.
On the form they gave me, one of the options presented was to help out an endangered species, the Wisconsin gray wolf. Their numbers had been dwindling to the point of near extinction, and they were being shot arbitrarily, and illegally, by hunters. So for an extra 25 bucks a year, I could contribute to the effort to protect them.
Seemed like a great idea. I’ve always been a fan of conservation and protecting species. And the plate was really cool, replete with a stately photo of a wolf, acknowledging my contribution. I had it from 1997 until 2006.
And it worked. The wolves were taken off the ‘endangered’ status in 2004. And irony of ironies, there are now “too many” wolves. So many that there is a hunting season scheduled to start in October to bring their population “back in line.”
This troubles me. I know there are some theoretically “sound” reasons put forward by the DNR, about wolves infringing on humans in the North Woods, about the threat the wolves pose to livestock. And I know I’m probably in the minority on this, but I don’t like the idea of a wolf hunt at all.
Let’s examine what we’re doing here. The gray wolves are the largest members of the dog family. Yep, they are canines. Wolves are extremely intelligent and are very social animals, living in a family group or pack. A wolf pack’s territory may cover 20-80 square miles, about one tenth the size of an average Wisconsin county.
The wolf is thought to be very gregarious when compared to other wild species. I guess they’re not that gregarious though because they are carnivores, and prey on elk, deer, moose, bison, sheep and the like. The danger to livestock and small animals comes when this kind of prey isn’t readily available and the livestock grazing land infringes on the wolf’s territory.
Wisconsin is one of about a dozen states in the country where gray wolves exist in the wild, and Wisconsin’s number has grown from only low double digits 15 years ago to over 800 now. Despite being taken off the state endangered species list, the wolf is still listed as a “Protected Wild Animal” by the Wisconsin DNR.
But after nearly being eradicated, and after making a simply remarkable recovery – no small thanks to my annual contribution – the wolf is again a target, regardless of being protected.
As I said, I’m probably in the minority. I know a lot of people support the hunt, including the Journal Sentinel in its Sept. 4 editorial: “The rebounding population far exceeds the initial goal of a sustainable wolf population, and the natural predator has started to come in conflict with the human population in the North Woods.” They go on to say that “The hunt is a testament to the success of the effort to rebuild a once-devastated wolf population in Wisconsin. Moreover, it’s a hunt Wisconsin needs to bring some balance to the wolf population.”
The concept of saving them only to kill them doesn’t make sense. This appears to be the beginning of an extremely vicious circle with no winner and lots of tax dollars spent.
No, I don’t have a solution, short of constructing electrified fences around livestock areas, which of course isn’t economically feasible for the farmers and ranchers whose livelihoods are at stake every year, especially in this drought-stricken 2012. But something says that it’s wrong to shoot, or “harvest” as the DNR is calling it, these highly intelligent, stunningly beautiful creatures.
And let’s be clear, the gray wolf is still endangered. While we have 800 in our state, there are only another 4,000 or so in the rest of the country. So we have fewer than 5,000 wolves in the continental US, which doesn’t seem like over-population to me.
According to wildlife experts, a wolf hunt isn’t necessary to keep their numbers in check. The prominent cause of death for wolves is starvation, due to their limited natural habitat, as well as the whole survival of the fittest concept, where the weak animals are overcome by the strong. So ultimately their population will control itself.
And there is an interesting dynamic at work when we hear people complain about how animals like the wolves get in the way of human comfort. I would implore us to think about the way human habits devastate animals’ homes and habitats. Maybe we ought to look at it that way for a change.
The web site Mother Jones opined that “Gray wolves and elk have been coexisting for 10,000 years. The problems really stem from people, who are contributing to habitat degradation and forest fire suppression. Studies show that wolves play vital roles in maintaining healthy ecosystems, and could even help stave off some of the effects of climate change.”
C. Douglas Nielsen, the Las Vegas Journal’s outdoor columnist whose job it is to write about hunting, says it best: “The purpose of spending millions of dollars to bring an endangered species back to their natural roles in the wild should not be to forever keep them teetering on the edge of decline.”
The wolf is in grave danger. Shooting them isn’t the answer.
—
Follow me on Twitter: @jpalmer7890
