My Name is Canis Rufus and I'm a Recovering Red Wolf - "Hello Canis"

After 30 years as a wildlife officer, I came to believe that there were few things that stirred people up more than wildlife/human interactions.  One person’s “beautiful example of creation” is another’s “pest.”  One enjoys seeing raccoons on their back porch while another stuffs their children under the bed out fear of rabid ‘coon attacks.  When a yearling male bear wanders through a Piedmont town, news crews are scrambled and local schools go on lockdown.  In Asheville, the residents there follow the urban bear study on Facebook.

As is the case with most controversial topics, an individual’s position is often influenced by their proximity to the source of contention.  For example, I think it is cool that the gray wolf population is spreading throughout the western states.  However, I live 2500 miles away and don’t have the concerns some ranchers have for the predation of cattle.  It’s easy for me to support a critter that’s not in my backyard.  The truth is I don’t want wolves in my woods.

Not a Coyote
www.fws.org

Those same conflicting perceptions are in play in eastern North Carolina.  In 1987, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) began an experimental reintroduction of red wolves.   Prior to that date, red wolves, extinct in the wild, only existed in captivity.  These captive animals had suspect genetics and were likely interbred with coyotes.  The original plan called for the release of 35-50 animals on 144,000 acres of National Wildlife Refuge.  The current population is in the neighborhood of 100 wolves that range over 1.7 million acres, much of it privately owned.

The geographical expansion of the population has created a multitude of issues for the USFWS.  Compounding the management of red wolves is the exponential rise in the coyote population in this region.  And local farmers feel they have been misled over the past 25+ years.

The USFWS requested the Wildlife Management Institute conduct an independent review of the red wolf recovery program.  The 2014 study identified numerous problems with the program as it is currently structured.  Based in part on the findings of this report, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has requested the program cease.

So now the “fun” begins.

Emotions run high on each side of the issue.  A recent Raleigh News and Observer editorial blasted the NCWRC for shirking its duties by “abandoning the red wolf.”  Local residents have taken advantage of various forums accusing the NCWRC of abandoning its obligations to landowners, farmers and hunters (due to the court ordered moratorium on coyote hunting).

At the core of the controversy, is the modern definition of conservation.  In the North American Wildlife Conservation Model one of the major management principles is that decisions will be based on “sound science.”  Traditionally, this is considered to be biological science.

Dr. David Cobb, chief of the NCWRC’s Division of Wildlife Management, asserts that “sound science” is more than biology.  In what he describes as the “Arc of Conservation,” social, political, and economic science also come into play in modern wildlife conservation.  To many purists, the inclusion of these others sciences is akin to blasphemy.

As we see with many other current events, polarized “conservation” groups often square off in philosophical battles that leave those entrusted with management of public trust resources caught squarely in the middle.  In this case, these groups, politicians, landowners, and a host of other wolf haters or lovers have placed the NCWRC in a spot where it is nearly impossible to win.