You are here

Guest Column: Pondering The Proposal To Remove ESA Protection From Gray Wolves

Share

How should the gray wolf be viewed by humans? US Fish and Wildlife Service photo by Gary Kramer.

Editor's note: Earlier this summer the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to remove Endangered Species Act protection from the gray wolf. In this guest column, ecologist Barbara Moritsch, author of The Soul of Yosemite: Finding, Defending, and Saving the Valley's Sacred Wild Nature, questions that decision.

This morning as I washed the breakfast dishes, I pondered the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposal to remove the gray wolf from the endangered species list. I considered arguments I had read that contested this proposal: wolves had not yet fully recovered in the lower 48 states; after spending so many millions of dollars to re-introduce wolves, it is stupid to de-list them prematurely and allow people to hunt them; wolves play an important role in natural ecosystems, and are proving to be an asset to ecosystem processes; and wolves have a right to life, just as humans and all other species have such a right.

I agree with all of these points, and I am strongly opposed to the proposal to de-list wolves. But as I considered how I wanted to frame my comments to the agency, something kept nagging at me. My heart told me that the wolf controversy, of which this recent proposal is only one element, goes much deeper than ecological principles and species recovery. The wolf controversy, particularly the strident and very ugly anti-wolf campaign, is a pure reflection of a very dark side of human nature—a side that does not bode well for the future of any living thing on the planet.

To wolf advocates, wolves symbolize wildness, freedom, and big, open country. To wolf haters, the animal may symbolize everything that is wrong, evil, or vicious in their lives—a scapegoat. To trophy hunters, the killing of a wolf may symbolize strength and manhood. Note my use of the word “may” on these latter two—I am speculating because I neither hate nor hunt wolves.

It suddenly struck me with great force that the wolf symbolizes something much greater, something much more important than these fairly superficial human emotions. The wolf symbolizes, as perhaps no other species does, the inability of many humans to co-exist with anything that competes with or threatens them in any way—even if that competition or threat is largely imaginary. The wolf symbolizes the mistaken opinion that, when push comes to shove and either a human gets to hunt the elk or the wolf gets to hunt the elk, the human has the greater God-given right to that elk.

This opinion holds true for cows and sheep, as well as elk. The attitude of too many humans toward wolves epitomizes selfish human nature, at the expense of all other species, as well as their habitats.

Anyone who is paying attention knows that the human tendency to take whatever he or she wants from the Earth with little consideration for the long-term consequences is quickly catching up with us, and the consequences of our inattention may be dire. The truth is, unless we change our ways rapidly or there is a massive die off of humans, we will experience shortages of clean water and food, probably in the not-too-distant future.

Given how poorly we are coping with wolves, I can’t help but wonder how we will react when we are faced with these shortages, and there is not enough to go around, when instead of wolves, we are “competing” with other humans. A lot of people think things will get ugly, and they are stockpiling weapons and ammunition, so they can fight for “their share.” Do you really want to live in a world like that? I don’t.

It’s time to change our collective ways. It’s time to view the Earth and all of its inhabitants as important and precious. It’s time to learn to share, instead of compete. Learning how to make peace with and co-exist with wolves and other species is the first step in this shift.

Some Native Americans believe the wolf symbolizes the teacher. I believe we have much to learn from our brother the wolf, and these are lessons we need to learn quickly. Transmute the anger, transcend the fear, and embrace all other life with compassion and reverence—this is how we will survive and thrive as conditions on Earth change

Comments

So dahkota - a wolf is attacking your child. Does or does not your child have "the greater God given right" to live or do you let the wolf kill him?

ec, neither my child nor the wolf has a greater God given right. All life is sacred. All life is equally valuable. I may be stronger or more able to kill something but that does not give me greater rights to anything. It just makes me more capable. You err in believing that physical supremacy grants "rights" that physical weakness does not. You err in believing that greater intelligence grants "rights" that lesser intelligence does not. If I want to follow your slippery slope, men have greater God given rights than women. Adults have greater God given rights than children.

It is not a matter of "do let the wolf kill him." A life and death battle has nothing to do with rights. If I am killing a wolf's pup, she will equally try to kill me to stop me. God given rights have nothing to do with it. You really need to find a better example to defend your argument.

Ted does have a valid point: in our society, we do not grant animals rights. We are starting to, kind of, with respect to pets and livestock. Of course, that seems to be more akin to property rights rather than any right to life. However, just because our judeo-christian society deems animals as lesser beings (man has dominion over all animals) does not make it so, nor does it make it morally right. Other societies (and religious beliefs) hold opposing opinions on animal rights.


Traveler, thank you for a thought provoking post by Barbara Moritsch. The discussions that have followed are quite interesting. Both Ted Cayton and dahkote have contributed excellent comments along with many others including EC, at least in my own opinion. I must admit I subscribe to dahkote's viewpoint on this issue. As Barbara has pointed out, there are some serious problems, as we humans and our actions continue to expand into the habitats of all other living creatures from amphibians to wolves what with our use of pesticides, destruction of forests, etc. Know this is a very complex discussion, I have no answers, but I do want to thank the Traveler and Ms. Moritsch for generating the discussion.


rmackie - Thank you for acknowledging that I have legitimate arguments and am not just a "troll", an accusation typically thrown out by someone that is losing the argument or has nothing to contribute.

I too share your concern about things such as pesticides and the destruction of forests to the extent they have real impacts. In fact, in my opinion, it is our superiority as humans that gives us the ability and responsibility to make these moral judgements. It is the absolutism of statements/implications such as Barbara's that we shouldn't intrude in any habitat the bothers me. Its all about balance. We can have legitimate disagreements as to where those balance points are but to declare absolutes makes no sense at all.


This is where we differ, as I disagree with you completely, and that is okay.

I think Barbara is right about the conversation. There seem to be two competing readings of divinity, which are somewhat incommensurable. I'd say that ec's position comes out of a Christian tradition influenced by a Calvinist interpretation of Scripture. Whereas Barabara's (I would only suggest) comes out of an earlier reading of Christianity--one of an immanent God; that is, a god that isn't outside Creation, but is its assembly and boundary, in which hierarchies are collapsed into an immanent divine presence. It's a reading that makes the later Passion closer to compassion and where some read an overlapping of Christianity and Buddhism. It's a also a reading of creation that, since we are talking about the parks, seems to underwrite Muir's reading of the natural world.


So dahkota - I guess you let your child die because if you really believe that humans are not above animials, you have no moral right to intervene,

BTW - I am not the one that brought "God" into the discussion - that was Barbara in the orgininal article. So Ted - go read the article again - it does discuss (what Barbara believes is the false position) "the human has the greater God-given right to that elk

{edit} My appologies Ted, you did acknowledge that in the end.


Justin -I don't have clue what you just said or meant.


I see no contradiction. When looking at humans vs pit bulls - there is no "scale" Either they are superior or they are not. When it comes to what land should be available - all or none are not acceptable answers - it lies somewhere in between. Same with wilderness, trail use, .....


Perhaps if all of the god stuff was avoided we could all agree that humanity should stop polluting the oceans, the air, and the water we drink for the benefit of current and future generations of humans. That should mean preserving the diversity of life including predators and prey, and plants etc. because that benefits the quality of human life. The same goes for natural beauty like parks. My problem, but the subject of god given rights makes me sick to my stomach.


The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.