A symbol of the wild recovers amid controversy
By: Matt Norman, Senior Staff Writer
One can imagine the conflicting emotions that ancient man must have had towards the wolf; one of the most striking and noble of all animals, but also representing all that is wild, not to mention frightening, in nature. Despite this dichotomy, man was able to live in balance with wolves until the eighteenth century, when the expansion of modern civilization led to the wolfs decline in many areas around the world. Now, with wolves resurgent in many places where they had long been absent, the conflict is arising once more, this time in the form of a political controversy. It is a conflict based on primal emotions, but thanks largely to pioneering researchers at Michigan Tech, it is one that scientific understanding is being brought to bear on.
The current controversy centers around the impact of increasing wolf populations on both big game and livestock. Hunters and farmers have in recent years led a rising chorus blaming wolves for declining game harvests and dead cattle. While the debate is most heated in the West, it has also been the cause of an increasingly evident public divide in the Upper Peninsula. In all places where the issue is being argued, however, Michigan Tech researchers are being called upon to shed light on the matter.
It was no surprise then when a USA Today article last week, looking into whether wolves have been responsible for a drop in elk populations in Yellowstone National Park, looked to MTU forestry professor John Vucetich for insight. Vucetich, who began researching the wolves of Isle Royale twelve years ago as an MTU undergrad, used ecological models to analyze the relative impact of wolves on elk.
His findings were clear, indicating that it was almost entirely a combination of severe ongoing drought in the region and increased hunting that had led to the sharp decline in elk. The models findings make a lot of sense, says Vucetich, when considering that the last six years have been the worst extended drought in the southwest since the Dust Bowl and that an increase in elk hunting permits issued by Montana has led to the harvest rate nearly doubling over that time.
The findings are unlikely to satisfy those who persist in seeing the wolf, which was reintroduced to Yellowstone during the 1980s, as the root of the elks problems. MTU research has had more success in tempering the demonization of the wolf in the Upper Peninsula however.
Wolves have made a remarkable recovery in the U.P. over the last decade. In 1992, there were only around 20 wolves in the entire peninsula. Currently there are thought to be 400. The growth has been facilitated by the wolfs federal protected status, first as endangered and more recently as threatened, titles meaning that anyone caught killing a wolf will be subject to hefty fines. This protection has also bred enmity towards the wolf, however, especially among hunters who blame the wolf for declining deer harvests throughout the U.P.
A culture of vilification of the wolf has sprung up in recent years according to Michigan State sociologist Rik Scarce. If you walk into the right bar at the right time, someone will be talking about killing wolves, says Scarce. This statement is corroborated by letters to the editor expressing intense anger at the presence of wolves, have become a norm for many U.P. papers over recent years. In one typical example, John Gagnon of Kingsord asserts that, rather than being fined, those shooting wolves should be paid a bounty for doing a public service.
The research of Vucetich and others at MTU has provided strong evidence that such attitudes are unwarranted however, especially among hunters. As Vucetich points out, while wolves definitely kill deer and lower the deer population, it is doubtful that they do so at levels that would cause any noticeable change in deer harvest for hunters. DNR research finds that at current population levels wolves are likely responsible for 5 percent of all deer kills in the U.P. This is in comparison to vehicular collisions, which are responsible for about 7 percent of deer deaths and hunting, which accounts for 47 percent.
Moreover, as Vucetich points out, as the top predator the wolves in fact play an important ecological role in regulating deer population, one that human hunters alone cant fulfill. This is well demonstrated by the situation downstate, where wolves are still by and large absent. There deer populations are far over DNR targets, leading, among other things to the spread of diseases such as tuberculosis and chronic wasting disease among deer herds.
The spread of theses sicknesses to livestock necessitated the killing of 5,000 head of cattle in 2004, a number several orders of magnitude greater than the number of cattle killed by wolves.
This modern understanding of wolves and their ecological role has been formed largely by the research done at MTU. One big reason this has been the case is the schools location. Isle Royale, where an isolated population of wolves has continually existed, even when the animals were virtually extinct throughout the upper midwest, has long provided an ideal laboratory for observing and learning about both wolves and their relationship with the rest of the ecosystem. The predator-prey relationship between wolves and moose on Isle Royale has been studied without interruption for the last 58 years, making it the longest studied of any predator-prey interaction.
Leading the research efforts here at MTU has been Rolf Peterson of Forestry, who began studying wolves on Isle Royale 34 years ago. At that time, Peterson was a student of Derwood Anderson, the originator of the Isle Royale wolf study. After Andersons retirement, Peterson took over the study and relocated it to its most logical destination, Michigan Tech.
Since then, Peterson and others at MTU have found Isle Royale to be a treasure trove of knowledge on predator prey relationships, and on wolves in particular. The expertise developed in the process has led to MTU researchers being in high demand, especially during the latest round of controversy surrounding wolves.
The researchers have so far managed to remain scientific in their approach despite the contentious atmosphere. According to the math dept.s Tom Drummer, who has worked on wolf modeling since 1997, while love of nature drives the research it is rigorous science that allows it to serve nature.
Vucetich echoes this, saying For people who love wolves, they are symbolic of all that is great about nature. For those who dislike wolves, they symbolize all that is most difficult in nature. There needs to be a dialogue between the two views.