Switchboard, from NRDC › Louisa Willcox's Blog

The Weight of the Wolves

2008-05-29T14:49:26Z

My husband is nervous, and he shows it by being quiet. And hardly eating anything. Right now Doug has the weight of the northern Rockies wolves on his shoulders. Tomorrow a federal court judge may decide the fate of Yellowstone and northern Rockies wolves.

This is the second time since the day, about 13 years ago, when wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone and Central Idaho ecosystems, when Doug appeared in front of a federal judge to keep wild wolves from being killed. The last time was when Farm Bureau attorneys tried to destroy the 20 or so Alberta wolves, quivering in crates after being trapped, drugged and transported hundreds of miles into Yellowstone. He won, almost lost and then ultimately snatched victory from the mouth of defeat, thanks to a ruling by the 10th circuit court of appeals.

He got grey and not enough thanks for his efforts. But the other side got the worse end of the deal: the government attorney got a kidney failure (hospitalized before the day of the first scheduled hearing) and the Farm Bureau attorney had a stroke. After trying to take a sabbatical after the first debacle, when some of our allies called him names in the papers, Doug forced himself to come out of semi-retirement to argue in court why wolves should stay alive in the region. He won.

Wolves knew nothing about the drama, only that they were not dead and that a wide open expanse of wild country lay before them, and it was full of elk. Since then, those few wolves have multiplied and defied the obstacles, mostly people with guns, to grow to a population in the region of 1500 or so animals. They have recreated a healthy ecosystem in Yellowstone, improving songbird habitat, grasslands, and the right conditions for pronghorn antelope to reproduce. As the only species lost in Yellowstone since the Lewis and Clark expedition journeyed across the West two hundred years ago, the wolf has been restored, and again serves, with the grizzly and the mountain lion, as one of the ecosystem’s major carnivores, maintaining the balance between predator and prey.

With the stroke of a pen, it could all be lost. Tomorrow, a federal court judge could order that the state plans and laws, which would allow the killing of hundreds of wolves, are adequate to manage wolves, and that recovery levels of 300 wolves are enough. We could then witness a slaughter of over a thousand wolves, executed as we have seen in recent weeks, on the backs of snowmobiles (one tracked over 35 miles before being shot), as well as by trappers, aerial gunners, and guys stalking wolves near elk fed grounds or protecting den sites, where wolves are trying to raise their young.

Tomorrow Doug, an attorney with Earthjustice, representing NRDC and 11 other conservation organizations, will try to convince another judge why these wolves should be saved. Not just to maintain the biological integrity of the some of the wildest places left in the lower-48 states, but to save that part of our souls that needs wildness.

Doug is in the bathtub now, trying to find that place of peace and wholeness, where his best arguments come from, arguments that a judge might understand. He has read thousands of pages of briefs and he has done his homework. He needs now only rest, and the force of wolves.

May the spirit of wild wolves be with us.

Half the Buffalo. All the Problems.

2008-04-30T17:38:00Z

We already knew that this has been a gruesome year for the buffalo of Yellowstone National Park. But a recent flight by park service personnel has given us a new understanding of just how terrible the toll has been on America’s iconic free-roaming herds.

The flight was an aerial survey to assess the health of the rapidly diminishing herds. The resulting park service estimates surprised even those of us who have been fighting for fundamental changes to the unnecessarily brutal buffalo management practices of the park service and State of Montana. Their population models estimate that only 1,950 to 2,150 buffalo are left in the park. That means that more than half of the 4,700 animals that were a part of the herds going into the winter were killed off---most of them rounded up for slaughter by Montana wildlife officials as the buffalo approached park boundaries. This is the largest death toll since the 19th century, when we nearly wiped the species off the planet.

With the population plunging, state and federal administrators of the Interagency Bison Management Plan "may" take steps to stop any further slaughter. But with winter’s grip still strong in the park, and the calving season underway, the herds’ most vulnerable animals must be protected now.

This is why NRDC has proposed a way out of the needless slaughter. Every year mothers head to a unique area west of the park to give birth and find food for their calves. The Horse Butte peninsula offers a unique set of conditions that should eliminate the concerns of those who oppose buffalo leaving the park. Typically, Montana officials would haze or capture buffalo in this area for slaughter once they have strayed outside the borders of the Yellowstone. However, NRDC and our partners from the Buffalo Field Campaign and Gallatin Wildlife Association has called for a moratorium on these techniques in the Horse Butte area west of the park. They are just plain unnecessary. Simply put, there is no conflict between the needs of the buffalo and people in this place, so there should be no killing.

A couple weeks ago, NRDC sent letters and publicly called for the governor and administrators to make immediate changes in the management of buffalo at Horse Butte. The new numbers from the park service make the need for action all the more obvious. Our proposal is a good start. It protects a lot of the buffalo at no cost to taxpayers. The state and federal authorities can protect all the buffalo in the calving grounds of Horse Butte today without spending a single cent.

Yellowstone’s buffalo are a national treasure. It is time we treated them that way.

Buffalo spirits on the wind

2008-04-24T20:47:34Z

April 15th, blizzarding in Yellowstone. It was almost a whiteout as I drove south along the Yellowstone River toward the Park, until I got to Yankee Jim Canyon when the sky lifted a little. But wind continued to roar and howl—fitting for the day’s ceremony to release the spirits of more than 1600 buffalo slaughtered needlessly this winter. Not since the 19th century had so many wild buffalo been killed in one season. The previous slaughter had been part of a government-sponsored effort to eliminate the native peoples, whose livelihood and culture depended on the buffalo. But somehow both had survived. And both were here today: buffalo and a group of Lakota Sioux who had traveled from the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota to pray for them.

I parked my car, bundled up and joined the others as they walked past a sign: “Authorized Personnel Only, Corral Operation”. This is forbidden territory, where the public typically not allowed, for fear they could witness the buffalo being captured and shipped off to slaughter by the National Park Service. We walked about 1 mile to the site of the ceremony, where 100 people stood in a circle. Above us loomed white mountains, including Sepulchre peak, a name befitting recent deadly events. A flock of bluebirds, maybe 35, total erupted and whipped past me by the wind—a flurry of bright blue against the backdrop of white and bare dirt.

Near the fence of the buffalo capture facility, I caught a glimpse of one buffalo, head down facing the wind, 1 of about 200 inside the pen. Already this morning 20 had been hauled off to slaughter.

At the center of the circle was a white buffalo skull from a Park buffalo that had been killed in March. “Now we are bringing him home”, said one of the Lakota. Leading the ceremony, sponsored by Buffalo Field Campaign and the 7th Generation Fund, was Chief Arvol Looking Horse, a tall, imposing man with an eagle feather headdress. He is the 19th generation Keeper of the White Buffalo Calf Skin. Next to him stood Rosalie Little Thunder, also Lakota, who had been arrested in 1996 when she had prayed near this spot for buffalo as they were gunned down by National Park Service officials. Translating for Looking Horse, Rosalie said: “in Lakota tradition, when buffalo die, we must honor them with songs so they can come back.” The ceremony was necessary to help the buffalo move on and return.

Rosalie’s translation of Arvol’s words broke up in the wind. But I caught some pieces:

“today I came to the sacred site of Yellowstone National Park to pray. A place that is known as a wildlife refuge, the first recognized national park in U.S. history. A place set aside for all wildlife and plant species to be protected in their natural way of life… I would like to send a message to President Bush in Washington D.C.: to humbly ask him to have a heart for the people. To hear the voices of my nation, that see our way of life connected to the Buffalo Nation: the Dakota/Lakota, Nakota, Oyate (people), the Buffalo People. Listen to the many other voices that are standing in disagreement with this senseless massacre…Let the last of this wild buffalo nation, ones that still have a migration pattern, what little that is left intact, live in a place of dignity, honor and respect”.

Respect. Dignity. These words rang through me like a bell. Because the whole process of capture, slaughter and buffalo management was anything but respectful and dignified. Not just for the buffalo, but for the National Park Service and state officials, who do the killing. For the Native people, whose fate is intermingled with that of the buffalo. For the public who has been effectively shut out of the entire debate. For the conservation community trying to promote coexistence with buffalo outside Yellowstone Park boundaries.

This senseless and disrespectful situation is being driven by an outdated plan, which is primarily about killing buffalo under the myth that brucellosis, an infectious disease, will be transmitted to cows—which has never happened in the wild. Cattle ranchers do not even use most of the area around Yellowstone Park, because of its harsh winter climate.

In Horse Butte, west of the Park, hundreds of buffalo have been captured and slaughtered this winter, after all of the cows had been removed, and the affected landowners had expressed their support for buffalo on their property. In partnership with Buffalo Field Campaign and Gallatin Wildlife Association, NRDC has called for a moratorium on the killing in Horse Butte.

As I stew about how crazy this whole situation is, I’m hit with another blast of wind. The ceremony continues. Arvol Looking Horse pulled out a rawhide rattle, tobacco and brightly colored beaded pouch containing the white buffalo calf pipe. He kneeled, loaded the pipe, and prayed, then stood, turning to the North, West, East, South, skyward, and earthward, with all the people in the circle turning in synchrony with him.

Then one of the Lakota pulled my friend Mike Mease, founder of the Buffalo Field Campaign, into the center of the circle to honor him. The honor was as fitting as the gale wind blowing the buffalo spirits away under Sepulchere Mountain. For more than a decade, Mike has been fighting for the buffalo, supervising volunteer crews in sub-zero weather as they monitor buffalo and document, on film and in words, the magic of these animals, and what is happening to them. I don’t know how Mike and others at BFC cope, especially in a year like this. Yet today, Mike greeted me with a hug, saying, “something positive is going to come of this. This is an opportunity for a change”. That’s true, if we all get involved. And turn prayers to action.

Rosalie ended the ceremony: “go in peace.” Yes. For the sake of the buffalo, the buffalo spirits—and our own.

Remember Wolf 253: originally published in High Country News, Writers on the Range

2008-04-21T23:03:11Z

His was a very American story. He was a survivor who never let a handicap curb his wanderlust. At his popularity’s peak, an army of photographers and fans followed his every move. But it all came to a tragic end when he was shot down for “sport.”

Does this sound like a rock star? To some, Wolf 253M had the same larger-than-life persona and history.

On March 29, the day after the gray wolf was released from federal protection in the Northern Rockies under the Endangered Species Act, wolf 253M was shot near an elk feeding ground outside Daniel, Wyo. He was doing nothing wrong, just preying on elk, an animal wolves have relied on for thousands of years. But he was in the wrong place. Wyoming’s free-fire zone, which includes about 90 percent of the state, has become a killing zone where wolves can be shot on sight.

Alive, 253M was a symbol of our ability to restore an endangered species and reverse the tragic history of wolf extermination in the lower 48 states. His death is a harbinger of more violent things to come in the Cowboy State. We could see a wave of killing that could reverse the hard-fought gains toward wolf recovery in the Northern Rockies.

253M embodied characteristics that earned him respect and admiration. He had a limp, the result of a fight with another wolf. But despite the injury, he lived a wild life. He was a tough team player, working with the other members of the pack to bring home dinner -- a dangerous pursuit, since elk are many times larger than wolves. Born into Yellowstone National Park’s Druid Peak pack, 253M’s limp and black coat made him one of the most recognizable animals in one of the most famous wolf packs. As the pack’s number two male wolf, he became a canine star.   Wolf paparazzi snapped his picture, wolf “groupies” shot video as he and his pack mates played, hunted and snoozed. Some human fans even proclaimed their affection by putting “253” on their license plates.

253M traveled thousands of miles in his lifetime, even visiting Utah. His travels show that connections between wolf ecosystems are possible in Yellowstone, Idaho and Canada, which is something scientists believe is crucial to their survival. Wolves can go the distance, if we humans, the wolf’s primary predator, learn to show a little self-restraint.

253M seems to have avoided creating any problems with people or livestock. But, as with other wolves, trouble came looking for him whenever he ventured outside the protected area of Yellowstone Park. In Utah, he was caught in a coyote trap and then moved to Wyoming, where he found his way back to the Druid Peak pack.

Then came his fatal encounter near an area where elk are artificially fed through the winter – an activity that naturally attracts wolves. Well-armed anti-wolf vigilantes had been scoping out the feed grounds, prior to the date when federal protections were removed.   253M, the 253rd wolf to be born in Yellowstone after the animals’ reintroduction, was among the first casualties of the new policy.

In just 16 days since delisting, at least 16 wolves have been killed in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. If this killing rate continues, wolves will be pushed back to the brink of extinction.

The blogging and bragging about wolf killing from Wyoming is chilling. This appeared online: “Let’s get ‘er done.” And: “word on the street… is that they had a hell of a fine weekend wolf hunting -- a town wolf hunt…and that on a weekend when most of the rednecks in Jackson (went to) the Snowmobile Hill Climb. Should be a hell of a hunt next weekend.”

Such quotes serve to remind us how far we have yet to go to develop a different kind of relationship with nature and, indeed, each other, a relationship defined by compassion that recognizes the interdependence of humans and animals, and commits to saving some space for creatures that have nowhere else to go.

Wolves like 253M deserve better than a bullet when they seek out their natural prey in some of their last remaining habitat.

Bush, Wolves, and the Perversion of Democracy

2008-02-27T21:09:04Z

In announcing the decision to remove endangered species protections from wolves in the Northern Rockies last week, Deputy Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett emphasized the change in public attitudes toward wolves over the last hundred years. Indeed, attitudes have changed—and far more than Scarlett and the Bush administration acknowledge. Nowhere in the delisting decision or supporting documents did Fish and Wildlife Service reveal the fact that 98% of the 92,000 comments submitted last year to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the delisting rule opposed the Bush administration’s decision, and supported stronger protections for wolves. If wolf management had been the subject of a vote, the administration would be redoubling wolf protection, rather than loading their guns.

As we have seen in so many other natural resource issues, the Bush administration has shown a remarkable ability to ignore public opinion, including views of scientific experts—even in its own agencies. Fortunately with environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act, citizens have legal recourse. And we have used our access to the courts effectively, stemming the tide of many Bush administration decisions that would have harmed the environment. Hopefully, for the sake of wolves in the Northern Rockies, the courts will again cast a favorable eye on our cases to stop the administration’s recent decisions to allow the killing of hundreds of wolves—decisions that defy common sense as well as scientific knowledge about what is needed to ensure wolf recovery.

Ultimately, we must prevail in the court of public opinion. And we must make sure that the next administration understands just how much the public cares about maintaining wolves in their last refuges.

Following are a few opinions expressed by citizens in comments submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on wolf delisting last year. The Bush administration certainly won’t publicize these, so we are. I hope you enjoy!

First a few of my favorite one liners.

You people are EXPERTS – What did you THINK they were going to eat? Potatoes?
Oh, don't do it folks - You delist these wolves and every crack pot with a gun will see how many he can hang over his fence till we're right back where we started.
If you do this the only animals you will see running free are cattle and sheep.
I cannot believe that you would turn over wolf management in the State of Idaho to the chest thumping Neanderthals apparently running the state.

If you have the stamina, here are a few more excerpts. While comments were submitted from people all over the country—and indeed the world—these selected comments are largely from people in the region, because the state game agencies maintain that citizens of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana support their proposal to kill hundreds of wolves.

I experienced coming face to face with a wolf on the Madison river 18 months ago as it chased a cow elk into the river in front of me. I stood in awe for the brief few seconds the wolf and I faced each other and then it spun on its heels and ran back into the forest. It was a beautiful creature. I thought to myself, if I never catch another fish again, I have seen it all and have been blessed. Idaho

I have lived in Montana with my husband Hank for 27 years and we have enjoyed the beauty of this state. Montana's wildlife is an essential part of that beauty.I am opposed to delisting the gray wolf as it will result in another mad slaughter of this beautiful animal. Our creator is responsible for the existence of this animal, and the wolf has his rightful place in creation. I am aware that there is big money involved in hunting in the Western states. I am suspicious that these big money influences are behind this delisting move. Also, cattle ranchers would like to see the wolf eliminated again, I'm sure. Montana

Why can’t one see how important the wolf is to our ecosystem, pleasure, and balance to this earth? As a hunter I am glad to see a wolf take down a sick or weak animal. Does society not see that this keeps our deer and other animal population strong and healthy? I love to hear their howls at night when I am sitting at a campfire. I do not own livestock but I do like to hunt. I was lucky that I had a father who taught me to respect life even if that life was a plant, animal, or human being. He would always say, “We are the keepers of life. We take only what we need to live on. We never deplete what the Lord has given us. For each living thing has a purpose.” I would like to add to that: ... and if we disrupt the balance of nature, we as humans will suffer at the mercy of an unbalanced world.” We will no longer enjoy life as we knew it.” Tennessee

Hasn’t enough killing been done to populations in the USA? I speak of the buffalo, 2 million wolves, and of course native people. You-we need a new paradigm in the way you think about such animal life. No wolves have ever harmed people. To hear them howl is a magnificent spiritual experience. Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, South Dakota

I am a fourth generation Wyoming native. When I was a child in the 1950s, many species were becoming rare or had been killed off completely, including eagles, wolves and grizzlies. I believe that a diversity of wildlife is Wyoming's most important resource. Wildness is so scarce any more that people travel from all over the world to experience it. They love our state and the beauty of it but are very confused by our seeming hatred of animals they have come so far to see. If Wyoming does not preserve it's wilderness and wildness for the future of our children, who will? Without large predators, the completeness of the ecosystem is compromised. Wyoming

I can’t believe the level of ignorance that exists, that science is ignored for the benefit of cattle! Wake up! We need predators to keep the balance in check, not an abundance of cattle. It is time that wolves are appreciated for they are a part of our food chain, preying on only the sick and the weakest of animals, strengthening the genetics of the future generations of other animals. Wolves are a endangered species and needed to be treated as such. This reminds me of some kind of "ethnic cleansing" but instead of it being against a human ethnic race it's against an animal for the sake of another animal that isn’t even native to our country! Oregon

Having grown up in the Black Hills area, and now living much closer to Cheyenne, I have always been fond of Wyoming as a state that loves it's wildlife. Are we big enough to share the state with a few families of wolves? If they take some elk, won't this just get us closer to the desired elk population for the state? Isn't it true that big game herds are essentially healthier in areas that have wolves? Please put my vote in for a fair shake for the wolves. Wyoming

I'm an archery hunter, and am delighted to see the grey wolf back in the west. Wapati and their ancestors have flourished in the presence of grey wolves on 3+ continents for over 12 million years. There's an old rhyme about this "What but the wolf's tooth whittled so fine The fleet limbs of the antelope". Your ancestors and mine and the wolves have been hunting side by side for tens of thousands of years. In that time, we've made a very good living competing against them with nothing but sticks, rocks and our wits. For thousands of generations he's been right outside our campfires, sometimes so close we took him into our family and called him "man's best friend". I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not afraid of the big bad wolf. He belongs there alongside me, and he's just going to make me a better hunter. Bring him on. The real threats to wildlife and our hunting is the same as it ever was: HABITAT LOSS. Washington

The gray wolf holds a sacred place within the culture of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes. Consequently, the Tribes are interested in the maintenance of a healthy, sustainable, and genetically diverse gray wolf population throughout the Northern Rocky Mountain region. We do not believe that the state management plans ensure healthy populations into the future. We do not believe that the minimum population level documented in the states wolf management plans, defined as 30 breeding pairs will result in a healthy, sustainable, and genetically diverse population into the future. Reducing the wolf numbers from its current size to the minimum levels set by the states is simply irresponsible, shortsighted, and unsustainable. Wolves are often singled out as the lone reason for the decline of elk numbers. However, wolves and elk have co-existed as part of our ecosystem long before the arrival of the non-Indian people. Primarily, human-based activities such as grazing hunting, recreation, and overall habitat destruction have led to reduced elk populations. Meanwhile, the important role that wolves play in the ecosystem is often overlooked. Ultimately, if the wolf was not necessary, the Creator would not have put them here. Lastly, we expect to see certain control methods, such as poisoning and helicopter shooting banned. Shoshone-Paiute Tribes

I live in "wolf country" in Idaho and it is extremely rare to encounter a wolf in the wild. Wolves deserve to be given the status as a non-game species and not a game animal. The science behind the Idaho Department of Fish and Game opinion on this matter is really not a matter of science as much as it is a political bias against predators. I am told by numerous Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game wildlife biologists' that they oppose the delisting and that the Fish & Game Dept. is driven by politics from the Governor down and not by good science. Many of these biologists have stated their opposition to Idahos' plan for wolf management in private but fear political retribution if they were to voice their true opinion regarding wolf management, in public. Idaho

As former Mayor of Buffalo, I am sorry to see that reason and good science do not prevail when government and agency officials claim the wolves are decimating our wildlife herds, particularly elk. The numbers tell a different story. The WGF divides the elk population into Herd Units for management purposes. The WGF simply keeps elk numbers at unnatural levels and ends up having to feed this high number of extra elk, just to placate the hunters. As a rancher in Buffalo, I am ashamed that Wyoming’s livestock producers are clamoring that wolves are destroying the state’s agricultural industry. Surely ranchers know that market driven forces are the number one contributor to what is driving the industry, not wolf depredation and the numbers substantiate this claim. Dogs, auto accidents and disease are responsible for more deaths than wolves. Wyoming

There is a very frightening and distinct lynch mob mentality that is common among wolf demonizers here. It goes way beyond mere hunting. It is frightening to envision these people turned loose in the woods with wolf tags. And, I'm not looking forward to the horrible, sick feeling, upon seeing the inevitable wolf head mounts these sick cretins will flaunt on their truck grills. Idaho

Dear Montanan Ranchers, I am from Greeley, Colorado. This place was also once known for its farming and ranching. Now, Greeley is in the #1 growing cattle county in the U.S. I grew up in a town once made up of rural values. Churches, apartments, and condominiums are now on this once farmed and ranched land. Shopping complexes and shopping malls are now on this once farmed and ranched land. Currently, the still standing farmers and ranchers are struggling to survive through severe drought conditions. These farmers and ranchers are just trying to make it through one season at a time. If I could I would trade all of these problems in for your one problem with wolves. I mean this from the bottom of my heart. Why? Because then I could still go home and call it home. My message is this:Be grateful that you still can call yourself a rancher.Be grateful that you still own your own lands.Be grateful that your problems are with wolves. Colorado

Wolves are beautiful creatures put on this earth by God. No one should be able to take them off but God! We've come a long way in the past fifteen years towards repairing a century of damage. Let's not undermine all that we accomplished just to cater to archaic misinformation and fear. Where life on Earth is concerned, ignorance is no longer an affordable luxury. One of humanity's greatest crimes against the planet is assuming mastery of the world without taking responsibility for it. As stewards of the earth, we cannot allow whole populations of animals to be slaughtered because of fear or commercial interests. We must learn to live in harmony with the other living things on this planet or we don't deserve to be here. Montana

Wolf Blues

2008-02-19T23:36:33Z

He could have been the lead singer in a blues band, the lone gray wolf. His voice was wild, tremulous and it filled the valley with the sound of longing. His message was unmistakable: “I want a woman”.

His audience was the Druid pack, 16 wolves strong, languishing in the snow, meat drunk from a recent kill. They looked at the lone wolf from across the Lamar River with mild interest.

No one knew where he had come from, but everyone knew what he was there for. For days he had shadowed the Druids, one of the most bad-ass packs in Yellowstone, and he hadn’t been picked off yet. He was taking his time, keeping a respectful distance, hoping with his serenade to be accepted into the pack, or to seduce one of its females into joining him.

It’s wolf mating season here in Yellowstone, when pheromones—the smell of sex—fill the air. Alpha females are cranky—and every wolf around knows it. The alpha female usually breeds with the pack’s alpha male, but in the soap opera history of the Druid pack, that’s not always been the case. (This pack has violated a lot of what scientists think are the norms of animal behavior, including once, the incest taboo).

Pups will be born two months after mating, in April, in a den sheltered from the wind and weather. The Druid’s litter will likely be four to six pups, which will be born deaf and blind. More than half the litter will likely die—from diseases, hypothermia from later winter storms, and sometimes other predators.

Pups will be raised not just by parents, but by members of the whole pack, who demonstrate enormous generosity with the little terrors. Playing, eating, and sleeping, pups grow up surrounded by adults with seemingly infinite patience for their sharp teeth and boundless curiosity.

By this time next year, the wolf pups will be physically full grown—about 80 to a maximum of a 140 pounds. If they are lucky, they may live 13 or 14 years. For life in the wilderness is rough. There are parasites and diseases, like mange and canine distemper. There are injuries inflicted by moose and other prey—skull fractures, broken ribs and legs. And there are the highly publicized incidents of wolf being killed by wolves from other packs—a kind of gang warfare.

Surviving in the wild when you rely on killing animals 2 to 10 times your body weight is no mean feat—even if most of the pack is engaged in bringing down dinner. But wolves somehow make it. All they need is a little compassion from their only real predator: the one with two legs. The ones who wiped out 95% of them in the lower-48 states. The ones who are set to do it again in the Northern Rockies in a few short weeks, after so much work to restore wolves here—unless we stop them.

As this lone wolf sings the blues, let’s help him with the chorus: keep the wild in our lives—and the wolves.

Howling Mad

2008-01-29T21:09:20Z

Federal wolf recovery coordinator Ed Bangs knows how to disarm an audience. Last Thursday, on a conference call with members of the media announcing the Bush administration’s new rule for managing Northern Rockies wolves, Bangs started out with: “I’ve had three lattes this morning, I’m going to warn you”. Laughs on the other end of the line. For the next 20 minutes, Ed’s performance was a tour de force of euphemisms and double-speak, that confused the real meaning of the federal government’s decision to revise 10(j) rule for managing the central Idaho and Yellowstone wolf populations. He went so far as to say: “overall wolf numbers won’t change.” Really?

The decision, published yesterday in the Federal Register, allows the states to kill all but 600 of the approximately 1500 wolves in the region. The rule applies to wolves descended from the roughly 60 wolves that were reintroduced in the Northern Rockies in 1995 and 1996. The new rule lowers the bar for wolf killing when a state determines that wolves may be having an impact on big-game populations. The Bush administration says that the rule change is necessary because the previous standard required states to show that wolves were the primary cause of a decline in big-game numbers. That threshold proved impossible to meet, because nearly all herds in the region are above state objectives and wolves have never been found to be the primary cause of a population decline.

The decision responds to major pressure from officials in Idaho and Wyoming, who have repeatedly stated that they want to manage wolves down to minimum numbers allowable by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In the case of Idaho, this means killing 500 or more wolves from approximately 700-800 individuals, to about 200 under the new rule. And the state already has developed plans to kill 60 + wolves in the Clearwater area. In Wyoming, it means killing potentially as many as 100 wolves near Yellowstone Park.

Wolf numbers won’t change? What kind of math are you using, Ed? While it may be true that the states won’t use this rule to kill wolves right away, if the decision to remove wolves from the endangered species list, expected next month, is delayed by litigation, the states have made it clear that they intend to use this rule to kill hundreds of wolves.

The pressure for this move comes from a minority of hunters who resent what wolves need to do to make a living: kill big game. With elk numbers at an all-time high throughout the region, wolves are hardly making a dent in the big-game population. In fact, by killing the weak and sick, wolves actually improve the strength and vitality of big-game herds. And, since reintroduction, scientists have found that wolves are restoring overall balance to the ecosystem, allowing recovery of riparian willows, aspen and other vegetation which have been over-browsed by elk.

But this debate has never been about the facts. On one side, it has been about an unreasonable hatred of an animal that some call “Satan’s dog,” an animal that represents lust, aggression and violence—traits that, perhaps subconsciously, we fear in ourselves. (Why else would we have gone to such extraordinary lengths historically to kill wolves—poisoning and trapping them, shooting pups in dens with revolvers, pulling wolves apart with ropes from horses, burning whole forests down to kill a few wolves?) It has been about hunters fear of losing hunting opportunities—no matter how many elk there are. It has been about raw political power too, the states bullying the federal government—bullying that seems to have been rewarded here.

The other side of the debate, which has far more public support, has gotten far less attention: the side that recognizes wolf recovery in the Northern Rockies as one of the most significant endangered species success stories in recent decades. The side that espouses a more charitable view of wolves, which work together as model families, taking care of the young and the old and the sick, and bringing home dinner to share with those unable to hunt. On last week’s call and in yesterday’s documents, FWS never mentioned that this side of the debate was supported by an overwhelming majority of the comments submitted by the public, including hundreds of scientists, on the draft rule.

Today, the countdown started for massive wolf killing—from land and air—in the Northern Rockies. And so, without other recourse, yesterday, we filed a lawsuit to overturn the rule.

What’s as outrageous as the decision itself is the agency’s callousness toward the wishes of the public, as well as the euphemisms and distortions used by the federal government to describe its action. In case you feel compelled to read the rule, you might appreciate the following translations and clarifications.

FWS: “We need to provide more wolf management flexibility.” Read: “We need to make it easier for the states to kill wolves.”

FWS: “Don’t worry, the decision won’t hurt wolves, because we will rigorously oversee any wolf killing proposal, which will be scientifically justified and evaluated by outside peer reviewers.” Reality: the states will pick peer reviewers who will do what the states want: justify the killing proposals. And the peer reviewers will be limited to using the states’ definitions for measuring adverse impacts on big game—definitions that do not need to be science-based. The states could simply say they don’t want wolves in a particular area—as Idaho has done with the Clearwater. Despite the veneer of federal oversight, the state’s essentially have a blank check to do what they want.

FWS: “killing wolves is good, because it improves local tolerance for wolves.” Using that analysis, the killing of over 500 wolves in the Northern Rockies since their reintroduction should mean that the locals love wolves.

Like many others who have been engaged in the wolf debate, I am tired of the double speak and the double standards when it comes to wolves. I long for a government that says what it means in plain English, and delivers what the public overwhelmingly asks for: the protection and recovery of a magnificent predator that has been vilified for far too long.

Wolf Storm in Yellowstone

2008-01-17T00:14:15Z

The wolves were barely visible, with so much snow falling heavy and fast. Across Yellowstone’s Lamar Valley, a black wolf was tussling with a pale gray one, on its back, feet in the air. In a flash, the gray rolled over, jumped up and playfully snapped at the black, who leaped to the side and came back for the other’s legs. Two other wolves lay curled up nearby. Behind them were about 30 buffalo, plastered with white. A few were taking the storm lying down, but most were grazing placidly, pushing the deep snow from the grass with their huge heads. Three ravens erupted from a draw near the wolves, sign of a recent kill. And a reminder that a wolf kill feeds more than the immediate family.

I needed this trip—we needed this trip, my husband and I. And we needed to see wolves especially, the animal that we had been working so hard for. In fact, we had worked ourselves through the holiday, and many, many months before that, preparing for the moment, perhaps a week away, when the federal government would decide to allow the killing of hundreds of wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and central Idaho. First would come a revised “10(j)” rule under the Endangered Species Act, then—even worse—the government would remove federal protections altogether. Under both rules, massive numbers of wolves would be killed.

But wait a minute. Aren’t these the same wolves that Americans had made a commitment to restore, after they had been shot, poisoned and trapped out of 95% of their former range in the lower-48 states?

Yes. With the help of the Endangered Species Act, wolves like these four had done well. From 66 wolves brought into Yellowstone and central Idaho from Canada in 1995 and 1996, the population had grown to roughly 1500 today in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. A big reason was plentiful big game, especially elk, which are now at record-high levels in the region, partly because of a series of mild winters. More than enough elk to feed wolves, bears, wolverines—and people too.

But there are always a few who will remain unsatisfied, no matter how many elk there are. And now a minority of politically influential hunters and livestock producers have succeeded in pushing the federal government to revise the Endangered Species Act 10(j) rule to allow the killing of hundreds of wolves. I know some of these hunters and ranchers, and had talked to a bunch at hearings over the last year on the issue—like the one in Cody, where the catcalls from 600 angry cowboy hats made it difficult for we few wolf supporters to testify. Afterwards I had talked to some of them. But the discussions were not rational, couldn’t be rational, because the debate—like the one I had with a Cody outfitter a few inches from my nose—wasn’t really about what wolves are or what they actually do. Wolves had somehow become a surrogate for other problems, such as changing socio-economic climate and the role of the federal government in their lives. People like this Cody outfitter were afraid—not about wolves per se, but about the rapid changes in their lives; the cost of living, the loss of traditional logging and outfitting jobs. He felt helpless. He had to take his frustration out on something. And he could not do anything about international beef prices, or subdivisions, or the transition of the region’s economy away from its historical base of resource extraction to one based on clean air and the natural environment. But he could work to “fix” the wolf problem. Killing wolves was something.

And the killing could happen fast, especially with aerial gunning and radio collars on virtually every wolf pack. And it’s especially easy in the winter when wolves are more visible in the snow. With the help of traps, guns and airplanes, what has generally been considered one of the greatest success stories for conservation in recent decades could be rewritten as a tragedy in short order.

That is why we’ve been working so hard, preparing for the inevitable legal challenge of both the final 10(j) rule, as well as the next decision that will hurt wolves more: delisting. Removal of wolves from the Endangered Species Act would return management authority to the states. And the states of Idaho and Wyoming brag about being anti-wolf and their plans to reduce numbers to minimum allowable levels—about 100 in each state.

When I first started working on this issue over a year ago, it seemed unimaginable that hundreds of wolves could indeed be killed, but then I started listening to the rhetoric of key decisionmakers such as Idaho Governor Butch Otter, who announced “I’m prepared to bid for that first ticket to shoot a wolf myself.” And I read the small print in the many state plans and regulations that will affect wolf management after delisting. For example, Idaho’s plan (p. 31) says explicitly that its goal is to manage for 104 wolves—down from the current 700-800 animals living in the state. Idaho and the other state plans are all about killing wolves, not conserving them. And now, all three states are in the process of designing wolf hunts—processes that, of course ran over the Christmas holidays, in an apparently deliberate attempt to frustrate public comment.

Question: why would the government be revising the rules by which wolves are managed under the Endangered Species Act if it’s about to remove these protections anyway? Answer: because it knows that the delisting decision is legally vulnerable, and it wants to make sure that if we block it in court, that hundreds of wolves can be killed even if they are still listed under the Endangered Species Act. And this isn’t my own cynical interpretation: Ed Bangs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wolf recovery coordinator said as much in numerous public meetings over the last year.

The hostility that some hold toward wolves, and the lengths that they will go to kill them, continues to amaze me. I wonder if their minds would change if they spent some time out here in the Lamar Valley on a winter day, looking at four wolves play and nap in a snowstorm. I look again at the wolves through my binoculars. All are now lying down, heads tucked in. Braced for the snow—and blissfully unaware of the political storm around them. They are just wolves, doing what they have done for thousands of year. We have our work cut our for us to keep it that way.