Wednesday, December 02, 2009

The New York Times Editorial Supports Wolf Conservation

I quote from the NYT editorial:
Once the season opened in Montana, some of the most-studied wolves in Yellowstone, including a female that scientists had been tracking for years, were killed almost immediately just outside the park, jeopardizing several scientific studies. The reaction from the state’s wolf program director? “We didn’t think wolves would be that vulnerable to firearms harvest.” By the time Montana’s season ended on Nov. 17, 72 wolves had been shot — 3 short of the state’s quota — out of a total population of some 500.

Nothing lays bare the true point of the wolf season more than Idaho’s recent decision to extend its hunt by three months, ending on March 31. The reason is that hunters have simply not killed enough wolves — only half of the state’s quota of 220 so far.

Environmental groups and other wolf advocates argued, before protections were lifted last spring, that populations across the Northern Rockies had not in fact reached sustainable levels. Having lost that argument, they are now insisting on stronger state management plans, and a moratorium on hunting until such plans can be formulated. This is a fair request. What matters is the survival of not just a few token wolves, but strong, genetically healthy wolf populations.
Comment: Of course the wolves are a keystone species, and their loss results in a major ecological shift of the area they inhabit. The animal populations controlled by the wolves control the spread of weedy species, and so it goes....

This is a prime example of the conflict between local economic interests -- a few farmers, some of whom may be grossly uninformed, and a few hunters in the West versus the vast majority of Americans who want our national parks and wilderness areas to be protected as they were before Columbus arrived.

I vote with the scientists, the conservationists, and those who feel that the National Parks were America's greatest idea! JAD

No comments: