Wolves cool off after unsuccessful elk hunt (1st two pictures); aftermath of pack’s failed hunt for bison calf (3rd picture) – Hayden Valley, Yellowstone National Park
Few species elicit such a mixture of love and ire as the Gray Wolf. In recent history, The Gray Wolf was extirpated (removed from a part of its range) in the Northern Rockies. In 1995-1996, the fate of the wolves was reversed by the re-introduction of 31 wolves from Canada and the northern US in Yellowstone Park, and 35 into the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness in Idaho. Today an estimated 1,700 Gray Wolves live in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), which encompasses Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks, seven National Forests and three National Wildlife Refuges – almost 20 million acres of contiguous public lands.
Far from celebrating the recovery of Gray Wolves, the three states surrounding the GYE – Montana, Wyoming and Idaho – have delisted wolves from their former endangered status. In addition, they have re-instituted hunts and trapping that have so far have resulted in the killing of 1,100 wolves in their respective states. You might call this a backlash, backsliding or just plain backward. It has elements of all three.
When one of my participants from U.K. on a Naturalist Journeys tour of Yellowstone Park heard about this, he was incredulous. Why would the U.S. invest in wolf recovery aided by the Endangered Species Act and public opinion, only to have the entire effort sabotaged by a few rogue states through delisting and hunting? It was and still is a good question.
Two tour groups I guided this summer had the pleasure of seeing wolves in Yellowstone National Park. It was pure magic watching a small pack of four wolves alternately resting, then splashing across the Yellowstone River to first hunt a Bison calf and later a juvenile elk (both hunts unsuccessful), prior to cooling off and drinking in the river. This slice of wolf life took place in the Hayden Valley for an hour, enchanting at least 100 onlookers. For some, including all in of our group, this was a highlight of their trip.
None of us should take this experience for granted, nor should future wolf-watchers. As Kathy Lynch wrote in The Wildlife News article Yellowstone Still the Best Place for Watching Wolves despite Many Killed in Hunt, “With only around 70 wolves in Yellowstone National Park, watchers hoping to see a wolf in the wild must be very patient and also very lucky.” Apparently, we were both.
Tourism, like the kind my groups engage in, is big business for the three states that opted to shoot and delist wolves. Consider these statements from each of the three state’s websites:
· “Tourism is Montana’s fastest-growing industry, supporting 37,000 jobs and 7% of the total state workforce.”
· “The mineral extraction industry and the travel and tourism sector are the main drivers behind Wyoming’s economy.”
· “Tourism is the #5 industry in Idaho, employing 47,000 people and accounting for 7% of its workforce”
Yellowstone and Grand Teton Park have four million tourists per year. Seeing wolves and other wildlife in these parks is a tremendous draw. One wonders where the disconnect is here in the three state’s wolf policies. Isn’t shooting wolves the equivalent of a collective foot-shooting of their state economies?
Beyond tourism, there are significant ecological values that wolves provide. These were brought into sharper focus by Oregon State University and Washington State University researchers who recently found that Yellowstone grizzlies consume more berries now that shrubs are starting to recover since the re-introduction of wolves, which reduce over browsing by elk herds. The vegetative recovery extends to other species as well. Removing wolves from Yellowstone Park in the early 1980s resulted in increased browsing by elk herds that led to the demise of young aspen and willow trees, shrubs and tall herbaceous plants. These trees and plants have since recovered, providing food and shelter for a wide variety of animals and birds.
The entire GYE is richer and more diverse with wolves in it. But what about the elk, you might ask? They are still numerous: 3,915 were counted in Yellowstone Park this winter according the Billings Gazette, down 6% from last year’s 4,174 count. This puts the Northern elk herd that spends summers in Yellowstone and winters in Montana squarely within the 3,000 – 5,000 objective of the Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks Department for maintaining it at a sustainable level.
Shooting wolves also has the obvious negative effect upon wolf family structure and packs. According to Michael Robinson of the Center for Biodiversity “Hunting wolves disrupts family bands, can leave pups to starve, and contribute to the dangerous genetic isolation of wolves in Yellowstone.” One of the packs we normally see on my tours in Slough Creek, Yellowstone National Park, has dissolved after its alpha male was fatally shot outside of the park in Wyoming’s newly legal hunt.
There is another side of this story. Wolves do predate on significant numbers of livestock – especially sheep. Not coincidentally, the three states – Montana, Wyoming and Idaho – with the largest numbers of wolf predations are the same states that have delisted Gray Wolves and legalized wolf hunts. The wolf-killed livestock numbers, however, are still small when compared to other causes of livestock fatalities. Carter Niemeyer, a former trapper and predator control agent in Montana puts wolf predation into perspective in his fascinating and insightful Memoir “Wolfer:” ”It is a fact that wolves kill so few livestock that the predators barely register on the pie chart of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Statistics Service. It’s respiratory and digestive diseases, birthing problems, old age, poisonous plants and weather that cause most livestock deaths, although Coyotes can be hell on sheep.” Niemeyer should know, because in his words “Between 1987 and 2000 I skinned every animal in Montana that the wolves were accused of killing.”
Nonetheless, Defenders of Wildlife, one of the leading wolf advocacy nonprofits, has acknowledged wolf predation and has raised more than $1 million in payments over the past decade to compensate farmers and ranchers for wolf predation of their livestock. Defenders provides compensation when wolf predation is the actual, versus supposed cause of mortality. It used to be Niemeyer’s job to determine this.
Wolf management is not a simple issue. There are legitimate claims on both sides. There is also hyperbole and mis-information being disseminated, sometimes by high-profile people. Butch Otter, the governor of Idaho has implied that wolves are a direct threat to humans. This is not supported by any factual or scientific information. As Jim and Jamie Dutcher of Living with Wolves wrote: “Since wolves were re-introduced in 1995, not one violent encounter between wolves and human beings has taken place anywhere in the lower 48 states.” Unfortunately, Little Red Riding Hood and the Three Little Pigs still influence societal attitudes toward wolves – especially in Idaho.
As we attempt to achieve responsible wolf management, let’s allow science and facts to inform the debate instead of fairy tales and rural legends. Second, let’s work with all parties involved, including environmentalists, ranchers and farmers, the latter who suffer livestock predation, and find ways to compensate/protect their herds. Wolves test our tolerance, compassion, ecological understanding and wisdom. Will we as a society move forward or lurch backward in our policies toward them?
