By John Barnes
A federal judge’s order to reinstate wolves as an endangered species in the Great Lakes area was cheered by Michigan wolf supporters and decried by a farmer who has had significant cattle losses.
“Basically what this decision shows is that entrusting the state with the management of wolves is a failed experiment,” said Jill Fritz, state director for The Humane Society of the United States and director for Keep Michigan Wolves Protected.
“It’s an indictment of how the states chose to manage that resource.”
However, an Upper Peninsula farmer who lost more cattle this year than any other rancher was upset he can no longer deal with attacking wolves.
A Department of Natural Resources wildlife biologist left a message with Ontonagon County cattle manager Duane Kolpack on Friday to tell him it is now illegal to shoot a wolf in the act of attacking livestock, Kolpack said.
“I got shaking mad and I jumped up and down somewhat. I was the only one around, so there were no witnesses,” Kolpack said Saturday.
State figures show Kolpack has lost more cattle than any other rancher in the Upper Peninsula this year. Kolpack estimates he may have lost as many as 16 cattle, mostly calves. At least seven are confirmed. It is often difficult to know if wolves were responsible for others, because little evidence sometimes remains or can be found in wooded areas.
“For us having the ability to shoot them, we’ve been able to take it from 15 to 20 wolves in the area down to four or five,” Kolpack said.
While state reimbursements are available for livestock losses, critics charge they do not cover the eventual value of the cattle. Kolpack has no idea if the 10 calves he can no longer find will be covered at even minimal expense.
More needs to be done to help ranchers like Kolpack, but the federal judge’s ruling “affirms the arbitrary capriciousness in Michigan,” said Nancy Warren, Great Lakes regional director of the National Wolf Watcher Coalition.
Warren says more wolves will simply enter a certain problem territory if other predators are killed. She wonders if non-profits should step forward with financial insurance assistance.
Michigan voters in November rejected two ballot questions that would essentially have allowed the state Natural Resources Commission to decide the hunting of wolves. But a legislative maneuver made those votes null. Friday’s federal order trumps that, but is likely to be challenged on appeal.
“The gray wolf, like the bald eagle and the grizzly bear, has become a symbol for endangered species,” wrote U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in a 111-page order to protect wolves. “But, perhaps more than other such species, the gray wolf is a lightning rod for controversy.”
But she also cited a number of legal efforts, at least four, to settle the issue.
“The D.C.Circuit has noted that, at times, a court ‘must lean forward from the bench to let an agency know, in no uncertain terms, that enough is enough,'” Howell wrote. “This case is one of those times.”
In 2013, 22 wolves were killed in Michigan’s inaugural hunt, about half of the 43 animals the DNR sought in three specific Upper Peninsula zones. Eleven were males, 11 females. The median age was 2.6 years; two were more than seven years old.
There was no wolf hunt in Michigan in 2014, due to the elective efforts. A hunt in 2015 remains questionable.
There are just more than 600 wolves in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, up from just six in the 1970s.
Hunting advocates argue the population warrants stronger management to reduce conflicts with livestock and comfort levels around humans.
Opponents argue that hunting could halt recovery of a species only a few years removed from endangered status and say reported conflicts are overblown but can be managed without a hunt.