Photo: Photo provided by Jayne Belsky, Associated Press
- Article by: MAUREEN HACKETT
- Updated: September 8, 2013
A recreational hunt doesn’t follow the DNR’s stated management plans.
The recent article,
“Despite wins, Minnesota’s endangered species list up by 180” (Aug. 20,
2013) quotes the Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) endangered
species coordinator as stating, “We’ve got to learn how to manage
species on a larger scale.”
The state’s list of species that have
gone extinct and of those that are endangered and threatening to go
extinct has grown tremendously.
One of the first steps in the
large-scale management referred to by the DNR is to keep in place the
vital assets already provided by nature. This is particularly relevant
to the Minnesota wolf population.
A Romanian proverb says, “Where wolves
roam, forests grow.” Having wolves on our landscapes and ecologically
active is vital to maintaining the natural balance for all wildlife.
There is ample science and thinking that
supports this management strategy, and innovative new ways to reduce
wolf conflicts with livestock, including nonlethal methods (only 2
percent of the Minnesota farms in wolf country have experienced wolf
problems with livestock).
As far back as the 1920s and ’30s,
University of Wisconsin scientist, ecologist, forester and
environmentalist Aldo Leopold established visionary wildlife management
theories that rightfully viewed wildlife issues within the greater
ecological system of nature.
In 1949, he proposed that a natural
predator such as the wolf has a major residual impact on plants; river
and stream bank erosion; fish and fowl; water quality; and on other
animals. In other words, the wolf is a keystone species.
Leopold’s trophic cascade concept
articulated emphatically that killing a predator wolf carries serious
implications for the rest of the ecosystem. Later, that concept was
endorsed by former Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt.
The natural benefits of wolves to our complex landscapes is still not fully understood. What is known is that:
• The presence of wolves helps plants
and tree growth by affecting the browsing behavior of deer, especially
along stream and river banks.
• Wolves keep habitat healthy for birds and fish, many of which are now threatened with extinction.
• Groundbreaking work by Oregon State
University professors William Ripple and Robert Beschta in Yellowstone
National Park has shown Leopold’s principles to be true; the
reintroduction of the wolf improved the Yellowstone River wildlife and
ecosystems.
• Their work has relevance in Minnesota.
Although the ecosystems are dissimilar, the wolf still plays a major
role in both places and is Minnesota’s ally to slow species extinction.
It is unfortunate that the DNR does not
treat the wolf as a valuable asset for the large-scale needs of so many
other species. The DNR proposed to remove the wolf as a species of
special concern the same year the wolf was removed from the federal
endangered species list.
Yet no baseline population survey was
done before the wolf was proposed to come off the state’s list or before
the hunt. And it’s unclear: Who exactly supports the hunt? Even before
the first wolf hunting and trapping season in 2012, the DNR’s own online
survey indicated that a hunt was opposed by 79 percent of respondents.
If we look at the DNR’s published
numbers, our wolf population is already 25 percent less than it was at
last count in 2008. It had been stable without a hunt from 1998 through
2008.
Today, we have the lowest number of
wolves reported since 1988. The wolf’s removal from the list of species
of special concern has made it solely a game species and not in the
category of a nongame wildlife species to be protected.
With so many other species whose
existence depends on the presence of the wolf, it behooves the DNR to
follow its own Wolf Management Plan. That plan’s stated goals are to
ensure the long-term survival of the wolf in Minnesota and to resolve
conflicts between wolves and humans.
Our state’s wildlife management
resources need to be directed toward these goals. A wolf hunt — purely
for recreation — does not accomplishment these objectives.
Even without a hunt, wolves are killed
that are perceived to be a threat. Nor is there a plan to support
nonlethal prevention methods that work for reducing wolf-livestock
conflicts. The rare and first Minnesota wolf-human attack aside, the
wolves that will be killed in another hunting season are random and not
necessarily causing problems.
Last year, of the 413 wolves killed, 240
were juveniles. These young wolves had survived the high mortality pup
stage and were growing to the reproductive age
How does another wolf hunt this year
ensure the future of Minnesota’s wolves and the wildlife whose existence
depends on the vital role of the wolf on our landscapes?
------------
Maureen Hackett is the founder of Howling For Wolves,
a nonprofit organization educating the public and policymakers about
the Minnesota gray wolf. She is also a physician with a specialty in
psychiatry.
No comments:
Post a Comment