Wolves in U.S. parks

The reintroduction of wolves into the national parks of the United States is an issue that has sparked a strong debate. The predators, which were driven out of their natural habitats as the result of human expansion, have been bred and reintroduced into the wild in the country's national park system. While many proponents argue that such programs simply restore balance to the ecosystem from which the wolves were rejected decades prior, many others insist that the issue is not that simple.

At the center of the debate is the potential impact wolves have on the way of life for residents adjacent to these parks. These predatory mammals do not understand the borders of these parks and commonly enter private ranches and farms, endangering livestock and the livelihoods of those who own them. Compounding the issue is the frustration such residents have expressed over the involvement of the government, which has pledged to compensate residents for wolf-related losses, but may not be able to do so fully if wolf populations continue to grow and wolf-related incidents increase. In the meantime, much of the debate is politically charged, with both sides showing little signs of compromise.

Understanding the Discussion

Ecosystem: An ecological community with each of its residents (such as plants and animals) functioning as a unit.

Endangered Species Act: A 1973 law designed to protect imperiled species from extinction.

Habituated: Position in which an animal uses human waste and food as a primary food source.

Trophic Cascade: Situation in which one organism has an impact on the rest of the ecosystem; specifically, a cascading effect that the changing size of one population within a certain ecosystem has on the populations below it.

History

The history of wolves in the US has largely coincided with the development and expansion of the country itself. In the nineteenth century, wolf populations thrived in many forested areas of the country, including most of the northern states. However, the relationship between wolves and humans was far from amicable, particularly as both farming and cattle ranching grew into thriving and vital American industries. Although wolves had very little interest in humans, they would consistently attack livestock. These attacks increased in frequency as humans continued to deplete the populations of wolves' primary prey, such as moose, bison and elk. Long feared by humans, wolves now became a public enemy that warranted eradication.

At first, the elimination of wolves was a privately conducted activity. Farmers and ranchers in the early and mid-nineteenth century trapped, poisoned and even brutalized wolves. Even famed naturalist John James Audubon (who would inspire the creation of the environmental activist organization, the Audubon Society) was known to take part in wolf killings, saying that the farmers were only repaying the wolves that attacked the farmers. At the turn of the twentieth century, however, farmers and ranchers' complaints about a perceived infestation of wolves led the government to intervene. In 1906, the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Biological Survey (an agency originally charged with surveying insects and birds) began a campaign to eradicate the wolf from these areas.

By all accounts, the effort to destroy and drive out wolves from cattle country was a success. By the mid-twentieth century, nearly all wolf populations had been decimated. However, before they could be completely wiped out, several researchers conducted a number of studies on the importance of the wolf to game populations and the ecosystems in which they had previously lived. Public opinion began to shift against wolf eradication, and in 1967, wolves in the lower forty-eight states were placed on the endangered species list.

In 1986, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, began a plan to reintroduce red wolves into the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in North Carolina, with the first release taking place the following year and an additional release into Great Smoky National Park in 1992. Also in 1987, the FWS initiated a similar plan to reintroduce gray wolves into Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. The ideal location for this reintroduction was Yellowstone National Park. Previous attempts to reintroduce wolves in the wild had seen only limited success, largely due to the resistance of people living in those areas. The rationale behind using the national park system was that such parks are dedicated to the preservation and protection of the country's natural resources and wildlife. Here, the wolves could live and breed without interference from humans. After an exhaustive four-year study process, which took into account a wide range of local, state, and federal laws and regulations, thirty-one grey wolves captured in Western Canada were released into Yellowstone in 1995. Evidence revealed from a number of studies taken after the reintroduction suggests that the wolves are returning to their place in the ecosystem, reducing populations of moose, elk, and other traditional prey. A few years later, in 1998, eleven Mexican wolves—a gray wolf subspecies deemed extinct in the wild—were released into Arizona's Apache National Forest.

The reintroduction of wolves to national parks in the United States has had two major effects. The first impact is on the wolves themselves, who have thrived in their new surroundings to the point at which they have graduated from the Endangered Species list in several areas around the country. The other result is the increasing tension between the wolves and the ranchers and farmers outside of the western parks, with wolf attacks occurring on livestock more frequently as the wolf population increases. Although some allowances have been made on both sides, the reintroduction of wolves into US national parks remains a major issue for the people living near those parks and across the country.

Wolves in US Parks Today

The debate over the decision to reintroduce wolves into the US national park system has settled into two camps. The first of these sides is composed of those who believe that the wolf is an important species that was severely endangered by humans. In the wolves' absence, the ecosystems in which they used to exist suffered. According to a number of environmental scientists, when wolves eat animals such as elk and moose, the resulting reduction in their populations keeps a number of tree species from dying, as they are extremely sensitive to overgrazing. Additionally, the reduction of moose, elk, and deer means that more beavers are able to move into the parks and use the trees that are not killed by overgrazing. The beavers create more ponds, which in turn create new ecosystems. This concept of one organism having a cascade effect on the ecosystem is known as a "trophic cascade." Advocates of reintroduction assert that the wolves' absence had a negative impact on the regions' respective ecosystems and insist that the wolves' return is restoring that balance.

In addition to the trophic cascade wolves present to the national parks, there are immediate gains to the park's wildlife. After they kill, wolves do not cover the carcasses of their prey, nor do they pick it clean. This fact means that scavengers, such as bears and eagles, have access to more food because of the predatory patterns of wolves.

On the other side of the issue, however, are the negative effects of wolves on nearby farms and ranches. Wolves do not know the boundaries of the parks in which they have been reintroduced, and frequently travel beyond them to hunt and breed. Outside of the parks are the cattle ranches and farmers, with young calves and other farm animals easily targeted by the predators. The fears are not unfounded—wolf attacks on livestock are frequent near areas in which wolves were introduced in 1995. In 2009, for example, 120 young sheep were killed on a ranch in Dillon, Montana; that ranch lost twenty-six sheep only a month earlier to what was believed to be the same pack. Even when the wolf attacks are not fatal, a calf or lamb that is scarred or handicapped as a result is difficult to sell, so the impact on the rancher's finances is often the same as if the animal were killed.

The number of wolf attacks on livestock has increased as the population of those predators grows. In 2006, there were thirty-two such attacks in Montana, and in 2008, there were seventy-seven. Sheep fared even worse, with 4 kills confirmed in 2006 and 111 in 2008. With sheep costing an average of $180 per head, such attacks are costly to the ranchers' business. Ranchers have also observed reduced breeding, changes in grazing patterns, distrust of guard dogs and ranchers, and defensive movements in livestock that are threatened by wolves. Some conservation and wildlife groups offer some compensation to ranchers, but such financial assistance is viewed by many to be insufficient and unsustainable. In the early twenty-first century, the government only allows for wolves to be hunted when their populations reach certain levels determined by state and federal authorities.

Since it is now law and wolves are thriving in national parks, there are few who believe that a return to eradication policies of the nineteenth and early twentieth century is a viable option. However, in light of the increasing number of attacks and their economic impact, many believe that the ranchers should be given more flexibility to prevent wolf attacks and protect their herds.

Recently, state and federal authorities have shown some sympathy to ranchers and hunters who compete with wolves for prey animals like elk. In July 2010, the state of Montana set a quota of wolf kills at 186, although that quota was challenged in the courts by environmental groups, and as of 2018, the quota was set at a maximum of 100. Meanwhile, the FWS allowed Montana and Idaho to remove the Rocky Mountain gray wolf from the endangered species list, giving residents more flexibility in dealing with wolves. However, delisting has only occurred in some states, and other policies for addressing rancher and hunter needs have yet to fully satisfy this side of the issue. A 2014 ruling delisted gray wolves in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, and Washington State, but classified them as endangered in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, and threatened in Minnesota. An 2017 appellate court ruling delisted gray wolves in Wyoming as well.

According to the FWS, the gray wolf population, including Mexican wolves, in the United States in 2017 was estimated to be between 13,380 and 16,880. In the United States, the wolf population is recovering significantly in many states, most notably in Wyoming, home to Yellowstone National Park. The Northern Rockies had a total gray wolf population of 1,704 in 2015, and Yellowstone was home to approximately 528 gray wolves.

The issue of wolves in US national parks has engendered both celebration and anger. The federal and state governments involved must walk a thin line between these two conflicting viewpoints, working to protect the predators from returning to a state of near extinction but seeking to protect the interests of the people who must live with them. Meanwhile, the gap between environmentalists and ranchers remains wide. Still others contend that both sets of interests can be respected and protected by using nonlethal means of livestock protection to deter wolf predation.

• These essays and any opinions, information or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services.

Bibliography

Books

Coleman, Jon T. Vicious: Wolves and Men in America. New Haven: Yale UP, 2006. Print.

Smith, Douglas W., and Gary Ferguson. Decade of the Wolf: Returning the Wild to Yellowstone. Augusta: Lyons, 2006. Print.

Periodicals

Fritts, Stephen H., et al. “Planning and Implementing a Reintroduction of Wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho.” Restoration Ecology 5.1 (1997): 7–27. Print.

Hermans, Adam Pérou, et al. “Wolf Reintroduction: Ecological Management and the Substitution Problem.” Ecological Restoration 32.3 (2014): 221–28. Print.

Metz, Matthew C., et al. “Seasonal Patterns of Predation for Gray Wolves in the Multi-Prey System of Yellowstone National Park.” Journal of Animal Ecology 81.3 (2013): 553–63. Print.

Miller, Brian J., et al. “Tropic Cascades Linking Wolves (Canis lupus), Coyotes (Canis latrans), and Small Mammals.” Canadian Journal of Zoology 90.1 (2012): 70–78. Print.

Morell, Virginia. “Yellowstone Park Research Wolves Killed by Hunters.” Science. Amer. Assn. for the Advancement of Science, 26 Nov. 2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/11/yellowstone-park-research-wolves.html.

Santiago-Avila, Francisco J., et al. "Killing Wolves to Prevent Predation on Livestock May Protect One Farm but Harm Neighbors." PLOS ONE, vol. 13, no. 1, 2018, p. e0189729. Public Library of Science (PLOS), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0189729. Accessed 12 Oct. 2018.

Schardt, Hannah. “Making Connections.” National Wildlife Apr.–May 2009: 24–31. Print.

Smith Thomas, Heather. "Wolves’ Economic Bite on Cattle Goes Way beyond Predation." Beef Magazine, 2013, www.beefmagazine.com/pasture-range/wolves-economic-bite-cattle-goes-way-beyond-predation.

Way, Jonathan G., and Jeremy T. Bruskotter. “Additional Considerations for Gray Wolf Management after Their Removal from Endangered Species Act Protections.” Journal of Wildlife Management 76.3 (2012): 457–61. Print.

Websites

"Gray Wolf (Canis lupic): Current Population in the United States." US Fish & Wildlife Service, US Dept. of the Interior, Apr. 2018, www.fws.gov/midwest/wolf/aboutwolves/WolfPopUS.htm. Accessed 12 Oct. 2018.

“Wolves in Yellowstone.” National Park Service. Dept. of the Interior, 18 July 2018, www.nps.gov/yell/naturescience/wolves.htm. Accessed 12 Oct. 2018.