Grey Wolf

Ť BACK TO SUBJECTS/ISSUES
Sharon Beck, Wolf Task Force
OCA

Nearly 30 years ago, when the Endangered Species Act was passed by Congress, the wolf was one of the first species put on the list. It was listed not because it was biologically in danger of extinction but because all its subspecies did not roam freely in its entire historic habitat. I join others much more knowledgeable than I about wildlife biology in venturing the opinion that it should never have been listed and further that it should be removed from the list and managed as the predator it is before we have a wildlife meltdown of gigantic proportions.

So intent were the radical environmentalists in the Clinton administration, to have wolves in the west, to play God, that they built an entire introduction program on a foundation of lies. After bringing Canus Lupus to Yellowstone Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior, was in such a rush to dump captured Canadian wolves into Idaho before the State could protest that he turned them loose short of the targeted wilderness area because of deep snow and within a week they were killing cattle.

Wolf recovery is a constant on-going expense for federal and state governments as well as placing hardship on individuals who live near recovery areas. In Yellowstone, cost estimates on wolf recovery are from $200,000 to 1 million per wolf. Furthermore there is no known ecological benefit gained from wolves being in the region.

There are about 2000 wolves in Minnesota with the excess migrating to Wisconsin, 6,000 to 10,000 in Alaska and 40,000 to 50,000 in Canada and wherever they are they must be controlled or there will be, indeed there is, extreme conflict.

US Fish and Wildlife Service, in charge of the introduced "experimental population" of wolves into Idaho began by overstating the prey base by some 600%, understating wolf behavior and underestimating the tolerance of ranchers and recreationists for having their cattle and wildlife gobbled up by wolves. Wolf numbers are increasing 30-40% a year with a commensurate decline in big game herds. In just 5 years the Yellowstone elk herd is cut in half. With wolves increasing at that rate what will the next 5 years bring? Certainly the ranchers near the introduction areas, under siege now with up to 30% of their calves killed by wolves will not be able to survive.

Wolf proponents expound that more cattle and sheep die of disease, coyote or dog predation than they do from wolves. I don't know what I'm missing but that doesn't sound like a good argument to add wolves the mix to me.

They say that the conflict will decline over time. Sure it will! In Minnesota the sheep raisers hardly complain at all now because there aren't any. Pre-wolf there were 90,000 sheep in the state and now there are practically none. Cattle have declined too and calving usually has to be done inside barns in order to save the newborn calves.

ESA protection of the wolf should be seen for what it is. Successful introduction will assist in land lock-up as advocated by special interest groups. Certain groups favor large areas of land to be designated as wilderness, which eliminates virtually all multiple use of land. There is organized opposition to hunting and trapping.Wolf recovery is used to further these agendas.

States must protect their sovereignty. They must tell the Federal Government that our laws provide us the right to protect ourselves, our families and our property from harm and the threat of harm. I consider that to be not only our right it is our duty.

States must realize they had little to do with introducing the wolves so what obligation should they have to pay for their management? The wolf was consciously and purposely extirpated because it was well understood we could not have a viable livestock industry and allow unmanaged predation.

State wildlife managers must examine the results of reintroducing wolves and their proponent's purposes for doing so. The introduction process is totally out of control. It's time to ask if this experiment has far less to do with the preservation of a species than with social engineering. Is "rewilding" the west, getting people herded into the cities and off the land, reducing the human population, destroying the resource based economies, the ultimate goal?

We know that wolves will kill our wildlife herds, our livestock and our pets. We know there is risk for our children.

We must re-take command of our destiny.