What Good Are Wolves by Norm Bishop

An  excellent article by Norm Bishop.

Now, more than ever, it’s imperative we continue to shout down the ignorant , the uniformed and the hateful who seek to  demonize one of natures perfect predators, the wolf.  It’s our job to defend and  fight for them.

===

What Good Are Wolves?

A growing body of scientific research shows wolves are key to the ecosystems of the Northern Rockies. Here’s a condensed version compiled by a long-time wolf advocate.

By Norman A. Bishop, Guest Writer, 1-04-11

In 1869, General Phil Sheridan said, “The only good Indians I ever saw were dead.” Others said, “The only good wolf is a dead wolf.”

Barry Lopez wrote of an American Pogrom, not only of Native Americans and wolves, but of the bison on which both depended. Between 1850 and 1890, 75 million bison were killed, mostly for their hides; perhaps 1 million or 2 million wolves.

“Before about 1878, cattlemen were more worried about Indians killing their cattle than they were about wolves. As the land filled up with other ranchers, as water rights became an issue, and as the Indians were removed to reservations, however, the wolf became, as related in Barry Lopez’s book, “Of Wolves and Men,” ‘an object of pathological hatred.’” Lopez continues: “The motive for wiping out wolves (as opposed to controlling them) proceeded from misunderstanding, from illusions of what constituted sport, from strident attachment to private property, from ignorance and irrational hatred.

In 1884, Montana set a bounty on wolves; in the next three years, 10,261 wolves were bountied. “In 1887, the bounty was repealed by a legislature dominated by mining interests. … By 1893 … desperate stockmen were reporting losses that were mathematical impossibilities. The effect of this exaggeration was contagious. The Montana sheep industry, which up to this time had lost more animals to bears and mountain lions than to wolves, began to blame its every downward economic trend on the wolf. … Men in a speculative business like cattle ranching singled out one scapegoat for their financial losses.”

Not until wolves were functionally extinct from much of the West did anyone begin to ask “What good are wolves?” to study wolves, and to report their beneficial effects on their prey species and on the ecosystems where they lived.

Adolph Murie realized that wolves selected weaker Dall sheep, “which may be of great importance to the sheep as a species.” His brother, Olaus J. Murie, thought predators may have an important influence during severe winters in reducing elk herds too large for their winter range. Douglas H. Pimlott pointed out that wolves control their own densities.

Yellowstone National Park wolf project leader Douglas W. Smith says that restoration of wolves there has added exponentially to our knowledge of how natural ecosystems work. It has also reminded us that predation is one of the dominant forces in all of nature, present in ecosystems worldwide over millions of years.

Bob Crabtree and Jennifer Sheldon note that predation by wolves is important to the integrity of the Yellowstone ecosystem, but we should realize that, before their return to Yellowstone’s northern range, 17 mountain lions there killed 611 elk per year, 60 grizzly bears killed 750 elk calves annually, and 400 coyotes killed between 1,100 and 1,400 elk per year.

P.J. White et al wrote that climate and human harvest account for most of the recent decline of the northern Yellowstone elk herd, coupled with the effects of five predators: wolves, grizzly bears, black bears, cougars, and coyotes. These are parts of a system unique in North America by its completeness.

Joel Berger et al demonstrated “a cascade of ecological events that were triggered by the local extinction of grizzly bears … and wolves from the southern greater Yellowstone ecosystem.” In about 75 years, moose in Grand Teton National Park erupted to five times the population outside the park, changed willow structure and density, and eliminated neotropical birds: gray catbirds and MacGillivray’s warblers.

Dan Tyers informs us that wolves haven’t eliminated moose from Yellowstone. Instead, burning of tens of thousands of acres of moose habitat in 1988 (mature forests with their subalpine fir) hit the moose population hard, and it won’t recover until the forests mature again.

Mark Hebblewhite and Doug Smith documented that wolves change species abundance, community composition, and physical structure of the vegetation, preventing overuse of woody plants like willow, and reducing severity of browsing on willows that provide nesting for songbirds. In Banff, songbird diversity and abundance were double in areas of high wolf densities, compared to that of areas with fewer wolves. Fewer browsers lead to more willows, providing habitat for beaver, a keystone species, which in turn create aquatic habitat for other plants and animals.

By reducing coyotes, which were consuming 85 percent of the production of mice in Yellowstone’s Lamar Valley, restored wolves divert more food to raptors, foxes, and weasels. By concentrating on killing vulnerable calf elk and very old female elk, wolves reduce competition for forage by post-breeding females, and enhance the nutrition of breeding-age females.

Wolves promote biological diversity, affecting 20 vertebrate species, and feeding many scavengers (ravens, magpies, pine martens, wolverines, bald eagles, gray jays, golden eagles, three weasel species, mink, lynx, cougar, grizzly bear, chickadees, Clark’s nutcracker, masked shrew and great grey owl). In Yellowstone, grizzly bears prevailed at 85 percent of encounters over carcasses, and they usurp nearly every kill made by wolves in Pelican Valley from March to October.

Some 445 species of beetle scavengers benefit from the largess of wolf-killed prey. In Banff and Yellowstone, no other predator feeds as many other species as do wolves. Wolf-killed elk carcasses enhance local levels of soil nutrients, adding 20 percent to 500 percent greater nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium.

Dan Stahler and his colleagues saw an average of four ravens on carcasses in Lamar Valley pre-wolf. Post-wolf, that increased to an average of 28, with as many as 135 seen on one carcass. Eagles seen on carcasses increased from an average of one per four carcasses to four per carcass.

P.J. White and Bob Garrott observed that, by lowering elk numbers, wolves may contribute to higher bison numbers; decreasing coyote populations result in higher pronghorn numbers. They also said wolves may ameliorate ungulate-caused landscape simplification.

Daniel Fortin and others saw that wolves may cause elk to shift habitat, using less aspen, and favoring songbirds that nest in the aspen.

Christopher Wilmers and all tell us that hunting by humans does not benefit scavengers the way wolf kills do. Carrion from wolf kills is more dispersed spatially and temporally than that from hunter kills, resulting in three times the species diversity on wolf kills versus hunter kills. Wolves subsidize many scavengers by only partly consuming their prey; they increase the time over which carrion is available, and change the variability in scavenge from a late winter pulse (winterkill) to all winter. They decrease the variability in year-to-year and month to-month carrion availability.

Chris Wilmers and Wayne Getz write that wolves buffer the effects of climate change. In mild winters, fewer ungulates die of winterkill, causing loss of carrion for scavengers. Wolves mitigate late-winter reduction in carrion by killing ungulates all year.

Mid-sized predators can be destructive in the absence of large keystone predators.  In the absence of wolves, pronghorn have been threatened with elimination by coyotes. Wolves have reduced coyotes and promoted survival of pronghorn fawns. Pronghorn does actually choose the vicinity of wolf dens to give birth, because coyotes avoid those areas, according to Douglas W. Smith.

Mark Hebblewhite reviewed the effects of wolves on population dynamics of large-ungulate prey, other effects on mountain ecosystems, sensitivity of wolf-prey systems to top-down and bottom-up management, and how this may be constrained in national park settings. Then he discussed the implications of his research on ecosystem management and long-term ranges of variation in ungulate abundance. He cites literature that suggests that the long-term stable state under wolf recovery will be low migrant elk density in Western montane ecosystems, noting that wolves may be a keystone species, without which ungulate densities increase, vegetation communities become overbrowsed, moose and beaver decline, and biodiversity is reduced. But as elk decline, aspen and willow regeneration are enhanced. In this context, wolf predation should be viewed as a critical component of an ecosystem management approach across jurisdictions.

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) could wipe out our elk and deer. Tom Hobbs writes that increasing mortality rates in diseased populations can retard disease transmission and reduce disease prevalence. Reduced lifespan, in turn, can compress the time interval when animals are infectious, thereby reducing the number of infections produced per infected individual. Results from simulations suggest that predation by wolves has the potential to eliminate CWD from an infected elk population.

Wildlife veterinarian Mark R. Johnson writes that wolves scavenge carrion, such as aborted bison or elk calves. By eating them, they may reduce the spread of Brucellosis to other bison or elk.

Scott Creel and John Winnie, Jr. report that wolves also cause elk to congregate in smaller groups, potentially slowing the spread of diseases that thrive among dense populations of ungulates.

John Duffield and others report that restoration of wolves has cost about $30 million, but has produced a $35.5 million annual net benefit to greater Yellowstone area counties, based on increased visitation by wolf watchers. Some 325,000 park visitors saw wolves in 2005. In Lamar Valley alone, 174,252 visitors observed wolves from 2000 to 2009, where wolves were seen daily in summers for nine of those ten years.

Wolves cause us to examine our values and attitudes. Paul Errington wrote, “Of all the native biological constituents of a northern wilderness scene, I should say that the wolves present the greatest test of human wisdom and good intentions.”

Aldo Leopold, father of game management in America, said, “Harmony with land is like harmony with a friend; you cannot cherish his right hand and chop off his left. That is to say, you cannot love game and hate predators. … The land is one organism.”

Leopold also pointed out that the first rule of intelligent tinkering with natural ecosystems was to keep all the pieces. Eliminating predators is counter to that advice. Wolves remind us to consider what is ethically and esthetically right in dealing with natural systems.

As Leopold wrote in his essay “The Land Ethic,” “A land ethic … does affirm (animals’) right to continued existence … in a natural state.” He concluded, “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”

Norman Bishop lives in Bozeman, Montana, and is a member of the advisory board of Living With Wolves, a group which raises awareness about wolves and their importance to healthy ecosystems. He worked for 36 years for the National Park Service, which included leading and supporting wolf restoration interpretation in Yellowstone National Park from 1985 to 1997. He was a reviewer of the 1990 and 1992 reports to Congress, “Wolves for Yellowstone?” and contributed to the 1994 Environmental Impact Statement, “The Reintroduction of Gray Wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho.”

http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/what_good_are_wolves/C41/L41/

===

Large carnivores promote healthy ecosystems by keeping browsers on edge

http://oregonstate.edu/terra/2007/04/high-alert/

===

Photo: Courtesy OSU Terra The Power of Research

Video: YouTube: ripple wolves aspen

Posted in: gray wolf, biodiversity

Tags: gray wolf, apex predator, biodiversity

About these ads
Published in: on July 26, 2012 at 3:02 am  Comments (16)  
Tags: , ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2012/07/26/what-good-are-wolves-by-norm-bishop-3/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

16 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. i thank you men and women of intelligence,vision ,compassion,understanding,education,energy and courage for continuing to speak out .we, perhaps less audible but no less passionate folk ,are growing in numbers and in voice.we will be heard and i believe in time ,we will make a huge difference in turning the tide against this senseless slaughter of wolves . we must not give up.

    • I DITTO that .. Thank You SO much!! <3

  2. Excellent! Nothing else to say; this article says it all!

  3. Let it be known, that we are against wolf killers & will defend these wonderful animals forever, & will do whatever it takes to prevent more senseless killing. We are their voice, & they need our protection.
    We’re here for them & won’t be stopped.

  4. Excellent article! Too bad reason and education don’t get through to the irrational wolf haters.

    • Marcia, but the politicians and policy makers, especially Obama and Schweitzer and the other relatively smart and somewhat decent ones, should be able to go with the truth and resist the haters and dummies. That is the incredibly unjust and sickening thing, the truth is known by these people, but they allow wolves to be persecuted and killed due to dirty politics. This is why Obama and Salazar and others who know better are truly criminal, for signing off on another American made disaster that didn’t have to be.

  5. I personally like reading about the effects that wolves TRUELY have on ungulate populations and restoring the wilderness to a proper balance. however, until we get to the greedy ranchers, some hunters, and money grabbers in any government office that is supposed to be protecting our wildlife and wilderness – nothing will happen except more wolves will be killed. How can we convince the wolf killers that they are damaging an ecosystem that is already under assault???

    before I get slammed – i said ‘some hunters’ because I personally know a few and they are very careful to only take what they can eat. never saw anyone ‘eat’ a wolf!!!

    • Ellen Mass, I am not going to slam you,by no means.My mother used to tell me,it just takes a few to spoil it for the rest.The loud mouths who pump up their chests,scream out the loudest,and sprew out lies about wolves or another other undesired animal, or being afraid of everyone trying to take their guns away from them, or everyone taking food out of their family’s mouths. This is what sticks in people’s minds.Everyone is trying to be a good provider. You and I,along with the rest,are doing what we can.I try to help others whenever I can.I thank you for your post and,yes,I agree,that greedy ranchers,some hunters,government officals need to be dealt with.Got to go,grandson,getting into trouble.

      • I agree with both of you.

  6. Most excellent.

  7. I sincerely hope that many people read this most interesting of articles and either strengthen their views or change them.

  8. I think everyone should get involved in doing what they can to save and protect the wolves.They are a creation of God our creator and everything our creator made is of vast importance to us and to mother earth.Wolves are beautiful,they have feelings like all living creatures.They are inteligent and they will not harm you unless they sense you are a danger to them or they are hungry.If you show them love they will love you in return.

  9. To the idle out there: Take a few moments to re-post this most informative piece to congressmen, legistators, anti-wolf groups and other pro nature groups. keeping it to ourselves is suicide to the remaining wolves about to be disappeared. We KNOW these things, those who don’t, won’t, if we don’t share the knowledge.

  10. People killed Native Americans and wolves so they wouldn’t have to live with them. They killed the buffalo and only took skins, alllowing the meat to rot, so they could deprive the Indians of a primary, major food source. Until the hunters and trappers can come to terms, realistically and truthfully, as to why they kill wolves, let alone hunt when they have grocery stores to go to, they will continue in their psychotic, non-sensical behavior. I guarantee if a hunter were shot and killed by another person claiming to protect wolves that the shooter would be tried for murder, yet the wolf killing continues though it makes about as much sense!!!

  11. Very Interesting and cool!

  12. Passing this info on…Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests are a simple and powerful tool that can be used to release public records from various government agencies.. Especially useful for
    tracking monetary gains/use/and internal agendas.

    Remember: be patient but aggressive and don’t give up, no matter what the government throws at you.

    FOIA best practices/resources helpfully compiled by FOIA specialist Kevin Baron and Truthout.org journalist Jason Leopold.

    source
    dissenter.firedoglake.com/foia/

    How to file FOIA Requests:
    Step 1: Initial Request
    Determine the agency or agencies from which you want to file a request for documents.
» See our list of recommended agencies.
    FOIA requests are delivered in the form of a letter.
» See sample FOIA request letters.
    File both electronic and hard copies of requests, appeals and correspondence whenever possible
    Pay close attention to formatting (online samples are helpful). Be sure to:
    State that the request is being made under the Freedom of Information Act (or appropriate state FOI law)
    Identify the records, or at the very least the nature of the records, being sought
    Include your contact information
    Indicate that you are an individual and the request is for noncommercial purposes; individuals are subject to cost exemptions that commercial entities are not
    State how much you are willing to pay; tell them to notify you if the cost will exceed that amount
    Ask that all communications regarding the request come to you in writing. If possible do not talk about the request on the phone and never agree to anything on the phone; get all agreements in writing
    Be clear in what you are asking
    Note that you need not know the specific nature of what you are requesting (frequently you will not). However, the more specific you can be, the better (referencing specific documents, meetings, government actions, events, etc.). This will limit delays, counter-requests from the government and other stalling tactics
    Remember FOIA is a cycle; the standard statutory time response is 20 business days
    Government agencies have to supply an estimated date of completion for FOIA requests under Section 552(a)(7)(B) of FOIA. Ask for the mandatory response deadline from the agency you are filing a request with

    Step 2: Response: Non-response, clarification, or refusal
    Remember 20 business day response time
    If after initial request you receive no response file a non-response appeal:
    State that the statutory time limit has expired
    Note the date of original request
    State that this is a “non-response appeal”
    Threaten legal action if need be
    If you receive a response, respond accordingly
    If they say they need more time, there should be no charge
    If they ask for clarification, respond with clarification
    If you are refused prepare an appeal letter. Appeal instructions should be included in government’s response; if not, make sure to ask:
    Address any and all issues provided as to why you cannot have the information; respond with explanation of why you can. If they reference the nine FOIA exemptions see if they are accurate and address them if they are not
    Do not let them get away with anything, they will try to confuse with “precedents”
    Another tactic is to FOIA the FOIA process. If the agency is blocking your request, FOIA their preparatory documents to reveal how they were dealing with your initial request
    If you are directed to go to another agency, do so, but do not give up your request with the first agency

    Step 3: File Suit
    If your appeal is refused file suit
    The agency you have requested information from will inform you when you have exhausted all administrative actions
    At this point, file suit in the nearest federal court
    They will capitulate – your lawyers fees will be reimbursed
    You can also represent yourself pro se

    Agencies to FOIA about Wolves/Wildlife Abuses
    State Governments
    Fish/Game Commissioners/Directors
    Governor’s Office
    State Legislature
    Visit Sunshine Review to see
    City Council

    Other resources:
    First Amendment Center – How to file a FOIA request; includes basic steps and tips for filing a FOIA request
    Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press – FOIA Letter Generator; includes sample form letters for initial requests, appeals, etc.
    FOIA Advocates – Another FOIA information group. Also includes form letters and other helpful resources about the FOIA process
    FOIA.gov – U.S. Government’s official FOIA site. Contains statistics, how-tos, FAQs, etc


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,537 other followers

%d bloggers like this: