Flip-flopping or an honest change of heart
A few months ago, I wrote of an ecological dilemma. The federal government had decided to remove Endangered Species Act protections from gray wolves in the Northern Rockies and I was besieged by environmental organizations to join the fight that would follow implementation of the delisting. At the time, based on what wildlife biologists said, I thought maybe the time had come to turn over wolf management to local control.
It appears I was wrong.
Since losing federal protection March 28, at least 37 wolves have been killed, more than 2 percent of their population and three times the number for that period last year. This prompted 12 environmental organizations to sue the federal government and force it to restore the wolves’ endangered species status.
Since their reintroduction to Yellowstone National Park a dozen years ago, wolves have made a remarkable comeback. Hunted to near extinction in the ’20s, wolves were needed, scientists agreed, as removal of the top predator was wreaking havoc on the ecosystem.
Obviously, there’s no fence marking all of the park boundaries, and wolf biologists say most of the park has been claimed by existing wolf packs. The young form new packs, and often have to establish territory outside protected areas. And when snow is as heavy inside the park as it was last winter, wolves follow elk, their main prey, to lower country in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming where they face ranchers with rifles. Even under federal protection, livestock producers were given permits to shoot wolves that killed or threatened their animals, and a fund was set up to pay ranchers for lost stock.
The three states enacted different management plans that were approved by the federal government before delisting. The rules vary from in-season hunting in Montana to shoot-on-sight anytime in Wyoming. A recent letter from Defenders of Wildlife, a party to the lawsuit, says without federal protection, states may use aerial gunning, trapping and even poisoning against the predators.
That got my attention. Among the poisons they could use is Compound 1080, a poison with no known antidote, listed by the EPA as “super toxic” and registered by the FBI as a possible terrorist weapon. It has been studied for use in biological warfare. One teaspoon can kill up to 100 people. A combination of sodium cyanide and sodium fluoroacetate, Compound 1080 has been used to target coyotes but has also killed swift foxes, wolves and other imperiled wildlife. It can be deployed in collars on sheep and goats, and kills not only the animal who preys on them but also the scavengers that feed on the remains. It can work its way up the food chain to kill endangered birds (condors), pets and people.
Sodium cyanide is used in M-44s, spring-loaded devices that are topped with bait lures to attract carnivores. When an animal tugs on the bait, a spring shoots a capsule of powder into the animal’s mouth. Death may come in two minutes or up to eight hours, causing seizures, convulsions and ultimately cardiac or respiratory failure. No animal deserves to die like that.
An attorney for Defenders of Wildlife, one of the 12 groups that filed suit in Montana, said that absent an injunction, hundreds of wolves could be killed under the states’ management plans.
A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spokeswoman said she believes the agency’s decision was based on science and will hold up in court. It may be true that the wolf population has recovered sufficiently and that the state plans are adequate to ensure its survival. If that view prevails in court, only time will tell.
Call me a flip-flopper if you will but I reserve the right to change my opinion based on new evidence. And I think what we’ve seen the past month is more than just ranchers wanting to dispatch one wolf or even two pack leaders to protect a herd or flock. We’ve seen vengeance, even hatred, against a whole species for predation by a few individuals.
And we know from history that can lead to extinction.
I’ve lost dogs to coyotes, but I don’t hate all coyotes nor do I condone using poison to kill them. I also lost a dog that played with the carcass of a poisoned squirrel. Giving people a license to kill generally leads to unintended consequences.
Some things simply can’t be resolved in court, but it takes time for the legal system to work and that may be just enough for cooler heads to prevail.
So I’ll support Defenders, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Humane Society and the others to buy more time for further scrutiny of the state management plans, including methods of control that appear to be needlessly inhumane.
After all, flip-flopping often is just a change of heart.