While posting on social media during the last campaign to stop Montana’s killing of Yellowstone wolves, I often received two passionate comments: “Why do people want to kill wolves?” and “How do we stop the killing?” I think that our narrative about wolves, the way we describe our relationship with wolves, helps answer both questions.
Narrative 1: By partnering with wolves we can prosper
Some experts says that before recorded history Homo sapiens may have partnered with Canis lupus. Wolves hunted then as they do now: sorting and sifting a herd and selecting the most vulnerable prey. Once they separated their target from the herd, their most dangerous job began: taking the animal down. But humans could move in, use weapons to make the kill, and keep wolves from dying while trying to dine. Wolves and humans could share the kill. Humans could have learned that by partnering with wolves we can prosper.
Narrative 2: Wolves must die so we can prosper
But that partnership unraveled once our ancient ancestors claimed land and began raising livestock in wolf country. With livestock nearby and easily preyed upon, wolves took some and were no longer seen as partners. Instead, wolves became harmful competitors to be eradicated. The new narrative: wolves must die so we can prosper.
Wolf-human history quickly degenerated from an inspiring tale of two species partnering to a sad story of one species with a powerful arsenal—and few thoughts of long-term consequences—waging a war against an enemy that never fought back.
The Middle Ages provides a good starting point to view that war. In France in the 800s, the government hired an elite corps of hunters to control the wolf population. In England in the late 1200s, King Edward ordered the extermination of wolves in some parts of the country. In 1427, James of Scotland passed a law requiring three wolf hunts a year, even during denning season. By the early 1500s, wolves had been hunted and trapped to extinction in England. The war continued after the Middle Ages ended. Wolves were eradicated from Scotland by the late 1600s and from Ireland by the late 1700s.
Colonists from Europe brought the war against wolves to America. Even though most colonists had never lost livestock to wolves, had never even seen or heard wolves, they stepped off the boats believing that wolves must die so we can prosper.
They immediately declared war on the two million or so wolves that then roamed North America and northern Mexico. In 1630 the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed the first wolf bounty. In 1632 Virginia followed suit. In 1697 a New Jersey law established payment for wolf carcasses.
As wolf killing ramped up, wolves disappeared from Massachusetts by 1840, Ohio by 1850, Illinois by 1860, West Virginia by 1887, Pennsylvania by 1892, and from New York and Kentucky by the late 1800s. The war moved westward with trappers and settlers and wolves vanished in the West.
Narrative 3: Wolves belong and we must protect them
By 1970 less than a thousand wolves remained in the Lower 48. Around this time a new narrative emerged: wolves belong and we must protect them.
The remaining wolves in the Lower 48 received protection under the Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966, the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973. With federal protection, the number of wolves slowly increased.
Narrative 4: Wolves belong and we can coexist
As the population of wolves slowly increased under federal protection, wolf-human conflict also increased—but not as much as anti-wolf misinformation would have you believe. Much of this conflict is still presented in the age old message of wolves kill too many livestock. In answer to this conflict a new narrative has appeared: wolves belong and we can coexist. Scientific research and on-the-ground experience proves that we can keep wolves and livestock separate and alive.
Anti-wolf groups have history on their side
Anti-wolf groups easily promote the well-worn message that wolves must die so we can prosper. Though these anti-wolf groups represent a minority of Americans, they are politically connected and powerful. They are behind the new anti-wolf legislation in Montana and Idaho. They are behind the drive to kill lots of wolves in the Great Lakes states. They are behind the drive to keep wolves out of Colorado.
Anti-wolf groups easily promote old myths and new misinformation that portray wolves as ruthless killers. They claim that wolves take so much livestock that the livelihood of ranchers is threatened. They claim that wolves take so many elk that hunters go empty handed. They claim that the only solution is to kill more wolves.
While there is no reputable science-based rationale to support these claims, anti-wolf groups have proven effective at keeping this ancient anti-wolf sentiment alive and well. Not just in the general population, but more importantly at the level of local, state, and federal decision making.
I’ve seen this in action while attending the Montana legislature and Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission hearings. So many commissioners, representatives, and senators ignore science and profess to believe false claims that they have enacted legislation with the goal of gutting Montana’s wolf population. Spreading false claims while ignoring science also ramps up the war on wolves in Idaho, Wyoming, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan.
The challenge for pro-wolf groups
While anti-wolf groups easily spread false claims, pro-wolf groups face a much more difficult challenge. The narrative that wolves belong and must be protected is new—only fifty or so years old. The narrative that wolves belong and we can coexist is even newer. Neither narrative is readily accepted by many of the people who have been conditioned to believe the centuries-old narrative that wolves must die so we can prosper.
The battle is obvious where I sit in Montana. Our state’s previous administration limited the killing of wolves that wandered out of Yellowstone and into Montana. The message was that those wolves belong and should be protected.
But a new administration took control last year and wasted no time in changing the narrative back to wolves must die so we can prosper. The killing of wolves in Montana, including many Yellowstone wolves, has become institutionalized.
Of course, we who believe that wolves are worth fighting for will continue to fight. But our successes are few and that frustrates and disheartens us while motivating anti-wolf groups.
We face an incredibly challenging task: protect wolves from senseless killing, convince others that wolves belong, and promote coexistence.
The Endangered Species Act can provide the much needed protection. To get wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains relisted under the ESA will take action by the US Fish and Wildlife Service or an emergency relisting by the Secretary of the Interior. To get wolves in the rest of the Lower 48 relisted under the ESA will require winning court battles.
While winning wolf protection, we have to change the narrative from wolves must die so that we can prosper to wolves belong and we can coexist. I believe that accomplishing this will require the federal government to devise, implement, and enforce what I call a national wolf coexistence plan. Such a plan would share some similarities with the national wolf recovery plan from several years ago.
A National Wolf Coexistence Plan
The national wolf coexistence plan would be based on science, not on myths and misinformation. The plan would protect wolves across the Lower 48 and enable them to establish viable populations in areas such as California, Oregon, and Washington that now have only small, recovering populations. The plan could promote recovery in areas like the southern Rockies, Dakotas, and Adirondacks, which have suitable wolf habitat but no established gray wolf populations.
But most importantly, the national wolf coexistence plan would acknowledge that our centuries-old war against wolves need not continue. The plan would include a national curriculum that teaches how wolves are essential and beneficial, not useless and harmful. The curriculum would teach that wolves belong and must be protected until we can overcome the anti-wolf belief that history has ground into our culture. The curriculum would teach the many ways we can coexist with wolves.
I’ll write more about a national wolf coexistence plan in a future post. But for now we fight to simply protect wolves. It’s a valiant and much needed fight. But it’s only one part of a very long-term battle: changing the narrative from wolves must die so we can prosper to wolves belong and we can coexist.
To Learn More About:
The start of the European war on wolves
The war on wolves arrives in America
Award-winning Indie author Rick Lamplugh writes and photographs to protect wildlife and wild lands.
His award-winning book In the Temple of Wolves; its sequel, Deep into Yellowstone; and its prequel, The Wilds of Aging are available signed. His books are also available unsigned or as eBook or audiobook on Amazon.
You can also join Rick in his latest writing adventure, a free weekly letter to subscribers entitled Love the Wild. You’ll find excerpts from his books, podcasts, photo essays, opinion pieces, and more. All aim to excite your mind and warm your heart.
Photo of wolf by Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.