Wolves are no
strangers to the Adirondacks. This may come as a surprise to many of you due to
their non-existence in the Park for the last 100 years, but wolves need to make
a comeback. Humans do not hunt many species the wolves normally hold in check;
those they do are not hunted as efficiently as they are by wolves. Animals like
beavers and deer are wreaking havoc on the Park. Beavers have changed the flow
of rivers throughout the Park and pose a problem to the navigable waters. I speak
from experience; this past summer I had to portage my canoe loaded with
supplies over numerous beaver dams on the Marion River. Not to say beavers are
inherently bad for an ecosystem, but if the population is too large they can
cause problems such as erosion and water blockage.
Now the reintroduction of wolves can put people on edge; after all you are reintroducing a predator equal to man on the food chain. However, the reintroduction of wolves has already occurred in Yellowstone National Park. Since their reintroduction in 1995, Yellowstone has become much healthier. Wolves eat deer; which had no major natural predators for 70 years, and had cut the vegetation of the park down to a fraction of what it should have been. Wolves began to eat the deer, but also they began to change their behavior, forcing them to stay away from riverbanks, where the deer could easily be trapped. This in turn allowed for the quick regrowth of the plants around the rivers. As the video posted in the link below says, some trees quintupled in size. Because the plants were allowed to grow, their roots reinforced the riverbanks, which had become soft and prone to cave ins. The lack of erosion forced the rivers to flow straighter, and created a healthier flow rate of water for other organisms that rely on the rivers. Now Yellow Stone has larger game than the Adirondacks for the most part. Consequently the wolf population should not get out of control if reintroduced, because they would not have as much to feed on. Based on the model of Yellow Stone, the rivers and waterways of the Adirondacks will be healthier after just a decade with wolves back in the park.
How Wolves Help
Now the reintroduction of wolves can put people on edge; after all you are reintroducing a predator equal to man on the food chain. However, the reintroduction of wolves has already occurred in Yellowstone National Park. Since their reintroduction in 1995, Yellowstone has become much healthier. Wolves eat deer; which had no major natural predators for 70 years, and had cut the vegetation of the park down to a fraction of what it should have been. Wolves began to eat the deer, but also they began to change their behavior, forcing them to stay away from riverbanks, where the deer could easily be trapped. This in turn allowed for the quick regrowth of the plants around the rivers. As the video posted in the link below says, some trees quintupled in size. Because the plants were allowed to grow, their roots reinforced the riverbanks, which had become soft and prone to cave ins. The lack of erosion forced the rivers to flow straighter, and created a healthier flow rate of water for other organisms that rely on the rivers. Now Yellow Stone has larger game than the Adirondacks for the most part. Consequently the wolf population should not get out of control if reintroduced, because they would not have as much to feed on. Based on the model of Yellow Stone, the rivers and waterways of the Adirondacks will be healthier after just a decade with wolves back in the park.
http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/how-wolves-can-save-ecosystem
The re-introduction of wolves into the Adirondack Park is a complicated social and ecological proposal. While you make a strong argument for wolf re-introduction, many counter-arguments still exist and are supported by residents of the Adirondack Park and of New York State.
ReplyDeleteWolves eat deer, which is generally received as a positive benefit to the ecosystem. However, many Adirondack locals are already noting the diminishing deer populations due to coyotes. If wolves are reintroduced, the deer population will decline even more sharply. This could cause irrevocable problems for both the deer population and the hunters who make a living from hunting deer. Also, wolves hunt and eat farmer’s livestock. Is it fair to the already impoverished farmers living in the ADK region to re-introduce wolves that can damage their livestock population?
On a separate note, coyotes are a relatively new predatory species in the Adirondacks that now occupy the ecological niche the wolves left behind when populations were eradicated. Is it fair to reintroduce the wolves in an environment now occupied by coyotes? Could wolf introduction harm coyote populations? And now with the coywolf (a hybrid between wolves and coyotes), three species will be competing for the same environmental niche.
These are a few counter-arguments to wolf re-introduction that I found interesting. Personally, I support the wolf re-introduction in the Adirondack Park but I think it’s always interesting to examine the opposing faction’s arguments.
Article citing Adirondack residents discussing declining deer population: (http://www.adirondackoutdoorsmagazine.com/stories/news-story/coyotes-in-the-adirondacks)
Information about coyotes
(http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/9359.html)
Article about the coywolf
(http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/11/111107-hybrids-coyotes-wolf-virginia-dna-animals-science)
It seems that all we need to solve the problems of the world are wolves and hemp. While you both introduce interesting points here, I think we can look to McKibben as he illustrates that "Management" of anything as complicated as a woods requires more humility than comes easily to our species, at least in its American incarnation." It might be best- in the cases of wolves, coyotes and beavers- to take a step back and ask what business we have in their affairs. While it was without a doubt a system of bitter and barbaric hubris which decimated the populations in question and resulted in our dilemma-similar human intervention might not be the answer. However, it must also be said that to restore does not mean to rewind. Given the permeation of humans throughout the region-and their density in the neighboring counties-returning to ecosystem equilibrium (if it ever existed) seems impossible. While I cannot claim to have the solution offhand, I do not think that we will find it in a single species or legislation. While destruction can be simple and specific restoration oftentimes must be multifaceted and subtle.
ReplyDelete