Home

Gray Wolf Biology

Wolf Eradication

Wolf Reintroduction

More Information

Wolves of Yellowstone:
Science, Stewardship, and Civic Engagement

Adam Turner—Biology and Political Science

May 30, 2006—Travel Day

My day started too early since I had to leave Bowling Green at 3:00 AM to catch my 6:00 AM flight out of Nashville. After ten hours of flying and layovers, Cabrina, Michelle, and Chris met me at the Bozeman airport where we loaded up our rental tank (a Nissan Armada) and took off just in time to arrive at the Yellowstone Association’s North Entrance Education Center (NEEC) for our first class at 7:00 PM. Introductions were made between all the students and our instructor. There were six other students, two from Colorado, two from Arkansas, and two from Oklahoma. Our instructor’s name was Jim Garry who turned out to be the grandfatherly type of gentleman who never ran out of things to say and his volunteer helper, read ‘bus driver,’ was Bill. After the introductions and making a quick breakdown of how the class was going to be loosely structured we got down to business and started discussing some of the initial conflict that presented itself when the idea of wolf introduction was introduced.

It is evident that conditions weren’t the same when natural populations of wolves roamed the Yellowstone ecosystem and the mid-90’s when the wolves were actually reintroduced. There are now tons more people living in, ranching, and developing the western landscape, and they don’t necessarily want large predators, such as wolves, or even bears and mountain lions preying on their pets, livestock, or even them. However, the stages that bring about such development tend to attract these types of animals. When land is initially cleared it may be used for something such as a hayfield which attracts large grazing animals like elk, deer, and bison, and when this land starts being subdivided and developed, the animals sort of stick around and this crowd is the large predator’s prey base. People tend to want to live in the same habitat that these grazers want to live in, right around the river. People need roads too. None of this is good news for wildlife, especially the predators, because not only do the roadways pose a potential threat, but nobody wants them around their homes either. Development and humans also present a barrier in the gene flow of the wolf population locations between Idaho, Yellowstone, and Glacier. There exist all these islands of wolf populations and those of British Columbia and Alaska; the ideal would be to have gene flow between the islands so none of the populations become fixed and genetically identical, much like the cheetah’s present state. The question is, how big of a population do you need to produce this genetic variability so you don’t end up with one inbred population?

Since the wolf was eradicated from the western states in earlier centuries, it was a very misunderstood species. Like Jim said, what a lot of people know about wolves comes from three sources: Little Red Riding Hood, The Three Pigs, and Peter and the Wolf. It took a lot of “unlearning” to begin understanding wolves and their behavior. For instance it was generally thought that only the alpha male and alpha female of a pack mated, but observations after reintroduction indicated that this is merely a circumstance of available food sources. When the wolves were first reintroduced into booming populations of elk there were instances of several females in a pack having pups. Biologists are also only recently studying what wolves’ food palate consists of during the summer months when conditions and availability of prey shift considerably.

All of the new data and old beliefs become power. Studies into the biology of the wolves can indicate that for Yellowstone’s ecosystem to return to a natural state and maintain itself the grey wolf is a necessity. On the other side old habits die hard and the people whose grandparents wiped out the wolves don’t think their grandparents were wrong (who does?) and are vigilant about not accepting the wolf whether it is for the sake of their livestock, which is their livelihood, or development. This power is political, because whoever wields it can interpret it their own way and present it to a constituency of people who will base a decision on what they are given and how it is given, who will in turn vote for the candidate who just so happens to see things they do.

Conflicts between people and nature exist everywhere, especially today when the actions that people take can be accessed and evaluated to determine what types of effects are had on those around them and their environment. Closer to home lock and dam #6 (LD 6) in Mammoth Cave is a relevant example. The Mammoth Cave ecosystem is not entirely natural; there are dams right in the river flowing through it. LD 6 makes it possible for the Green River ferry to run, which is of great benefit for commuters who daily must cross the Green River somehow. Without the ferry those wishing to pass would have to drive all the way around the park’s boundary to a bridge which is a very long way; probably about an extra 45 minutes compared to crossing the ferry. The river ecosystem however is affected by the dam, especially in the form of mussel populations in the river. There is a significant difference in mussel populations between the Green River ferry upstream and downstream which is to a greater extent the area affected by LD 6. Several alternatives have been suggested from a low bridge to altering the slopes of ferry ramps to make it possible for the ferry to run if LD 6 were to go, or when it goes rather since the Corps of Engineers is not going to maintain it.

Read about the other students experience on the same day:

Cabrina Hamilton, Biology

Michelle Hart, Education

Christopher Whitfield, Political Science and Economics

Read Adam’s next journal entry