Trump environmental move impacts Nation’s wildlife

RAPID CITY— Lakota lore holds that Tokahe, the first man, followed a wolf up out of Wind Cave to the surface of the earth. This indicates how deeply the wolf is immersed in Lakota culture and beliefs. The wolf was a common presence in traditional Lakota life, as was his canine relative the dog, and science considers the dog to be the domesticated descendant of wolf ancestors. According to the South Dakota Game, Fish & Parks (SDGFP): “Over the past few years, South Dakota has had a handful of gray wolves killed on both sides of the Missouri River; however, South Dakota does not have a resident gray wolf population.”

This is because the last reported wolf populations were wiped out in the 1930’s. Despite there being no resident wolf population, as of January 4, 2021, the SDGFP states that gray wolves “are no longer protected by the endangered species act.” This means even though resident wolf populations have been reduced to zero in-state, “trappers, sportsmen, landowners and livestock producers now have the ability to harvest gray wolves across the state.”

SDGFP does not explain how a “handful of gray wolves” were killed over the past few years if they were protected by the Endangered Species Act. But the lifting of that act allowed another state, Wisconsin, to conduct a scheduled weeklong wolf hunt this past week which killed 20 percent of the state wolf population, according to Time Magazine. The article also reported that 216 wolves were killed, “nearly double the number of wolves the state allotted for a weeklong season.” This was done in three days, forcing the abrupt cancellation of the hunt.

Just like the United States Supreme Court once wrote that the greatest enemy any tribe had was “the state in which it resides,” it appears the wolf, when not protected by Congressional Act, shares the same enemy.

“This is a deeply sad and shameful week for Wisconsin, “Megan Nicholson said, director of the Wisconsin chapter of the Humane Society of the United States. “Now, more than ever, gray wolves need federal protections restored to protect them from short-sighted and lethal state management.”

Despite the overkill from this hunt, Wisconsin still plans a wolf hunt for November, and according to their Wildlife Management Director, Eric Lobner, the state wolf population is very “robust.”

Lifting the endangered species protection from wolves was one of the last acts of the outgoing Trump Administration. State wildlife management always struggles to staff their operations between the environmentally conscious and the hunter friendly, as both tend to acquire the same management credentials. Wisconsin was traditionally a liberal state but there has been a demographic shift over the past half century and Republican Governor Scott Walker implemented wolf hunts as far back as 2010. These hunts always exceeded quota, but by only a dozen kills.

There have been reported wolf attacks in recent years. A 2013 article in the Arizona Daily Republic lists five between 2010 and 2012. Environmental activist claims that there are no reported attacks are thus, erroneous. However, given the population of wolves, the territory they inhabit, and the human presence in those territories, the impact of wolf attacks on humans is statistically minimal.

But the death of any one person has a deep impact on isolated rural communities, even if they are indigenous and traditional. In 2011 wolves are reported to have killed Candice Berner, a 32-year-old special education teacher, jogging two miles outside Chignik Lake, a small village 474 miles northwest of Anchorage, Alaska. The death devastated the inhabitants of Chignik Lake, as Berner was well liked. The school had a wolf mascot, but considered dropping it, and they removed a stuffed wolf from the school lobby. Even tribal people, when processing grief, need to hold some party accountable. The two wolves considered responsible for the attack were hunted down and killed. Chignik Lake is one of the most remote villages in North America, peopled by a tribe that has occupied this land for thousands of years, but even here, wolves and humans occasionally fail to make room for each other.

It generally takes federal funding and federal management to arrive at deeper and more effective methods of wolf management, such as was the case in Wyoming a quarter century back. South Dakota would not consider gray wolf reintroduction, but Wyoming did because the introduction was in Yellowstone National Park. Resident wolf populations had been wiped out there 70 years ago, but in 1995-96 the green light was given to reintroduce wolf populations. What followed, was not expected by most environmentalists. They always considered the wolf an apex predator, but few thought them a keystone species. A keystone species, according to New York’s Wolf Conservation Center, “is a plant or animal that plays a disproportionately large role in the ecosystem.” Removing the wolf increased prey populations, and the activity of these increased populations negatively impacted plant populations. This negative impact resulted in altered water courses, eliminating many species and reducing healthy habitats.

“Wolves are a critical keystone species in a healthy ecosystem,” New York’s Wolf Conservation Center said. “After wolf reintroduction, scientists documented the return of willows and other vegetation. And where the willows returned, the researchers noted more diverse wildlife. Beaver dams and dried up wetlands returned…wildlife thrived again where it had been suppressed for decades.”

It was not an easy connection for scientists to make, to understand that as a keystone species the wolf was responsible for a healthy songbird population. It seemed there could be no connection. Only by reintroducing the wolf populations to Yellowstone and then observing them in their undisturbed traditional role, were they able to determine the depth of impact wolves had as the key keystone species. All of this required federal funding and federal protections. States tend not to possess the mechanisms, funding or desire to protect wildlife or deepen scientific understanding of the environment.

No study has been conducted to determine the impact of the complete removal of the wolf population from South Dakota. Given the bison and bear populations were also removed it is safe to assume not much of the original ecosystem survives intact.

It remains to be seen what steps the Biden Administration will take on wildlife and environmental regulation and protection. Nomination of New Mexico Congresswoman and Pueblo tribal member, Deb Haaland, for Secretary of the Interior, is a strong indication the Biden Administration intends a different approach from President Trump. Whether Biden policy impacts wolf populations in general, or the scheduled November Wisconsin wolf hunt in particular, depends on how effective Biden proves to be in dealing with the 117^th Congress.

(Contact James Giago Davies at skindiesel@msn.com).

 

The post Trump environmental move impacts Nation’s wildlife first appeared on Native Sun News Today.

Visit Original Source