Isle royale wolf\moose study

[BuzzH]

Semi old school thread though it's a bit of a stretch... to consider this a predator/prey research that all our text book examples are built on these studies.

An attempt to use wolf studies for common wide open spaces on a 53 mile sized area? Bull chit. It's Dr. Jeckel Island study of inbreeding.
Wolf packs (plural emphasis) are not stuffed within a 53 mile area to share insight how wolf packs operate elsewhere.

Inbreeding Causes Isle Royale Wolf Population Crash | American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

Each of the two remaining wolves from a population that has been followed for 60 years is more susceptible to inheriting two harmful copies of a particular gene, the researchers found.

www.aaas.org

Genomics of Isle Royale wolves reveal impacts of inbreeding

A new paper explores the genetic signatures of a pair of wolves isolated on Isle Royale, a remote national park in Lake Superior. The pair are father-daughter and share the same mother. Such close inbreeding leads to genetic anomalies, which likely are the main driver behind the wolf population...

phys.org

Isle Royale Wolves Fall Prey to Inbreeding Problems

Isle Royale Wolves Fall Prey to Inbreeding Problems. By Jennifer Donovan | Published 8:53 a.m., March 26, 2013

www.mtu.edu

Extra ribs, crooked backs show inbreeding that caused Isle Royale’s old wolf packs to crash

A new report examines the genetics of the last two island-born wolves on Isle Royale, as well as the remains of other pack mates.

www.mlive.com

And the reality?

Replacing wolves on Isle Royale is bad policy and worse science

Overview: Isle Royale is an island in Lake Superior that is designated as a Wilderness Area and managed by the National Park Service. In the 20th century, wolves and moose migrated to the island an…

www.azandisresearch.com

Permit humans to be part of the process for moose population control. We're not aliens of this planet... we are an integral component to our conservation efforts. Feed hungry, produce research revenue and boot the eco extremists to the curb.

Selective outrage...

What about all the game farms, that allow "hunters" to shoot pen raised whitetail, pen raised mule deer, bighorn sheep now...and on and on and on.

Those are "closed Dr. Jeckel" systems as well...same outrage for those?

Even worse, genetically altering deer, elk, etc. so some 10 watt, that couldn't hunt their way out of wet paper sack, can blast them.

Oh, but that's different because its not a wolf.

While we're busy kicking the eco-extremists to the curb, I'd like to kick a bunch of "hunters" to the curb as well.

Finally, not every prey species on planet earth needs to end up as a human turd...

 

[OntarioHunter]

Permit humans to be part of the process for moose population control. We're not aliens of this planet... we are an integral component to our conservation efforts. Feed hungry, produce research revenue and boot the eco extremists to the curb.

I am retired US National Park Service. And you are definitely singing to my choir. The 1916 Organic Act which gave the NPS its mandate states it will preserve the natural and historic wonders for the enjoyment of future generations (I'm pretty sure that's a direct quote). Also it was directed to protect the wildlife. The NPS, particularly under conservative administrations, has come to focus its policies mostly on the "enjoyment" factor over "preservation" (though admittedly it will always be a challenge to balance the two). This is largely due to a modern emphasis (again usually conservative) that the parks are somehow supposed to help pay their way with admission fees and concession leases (something that was SPECIFICALLY not mandated in the Act). As an example: the bear viewing dog and pony show at Brooks River in Katmai National Park is both historically and naturally a complete farce. A created tourist trap. For four thousand years there were essentially no bears at the falls. It was a large native community for millenia that took advantage of the fishing. The NPS simply did not let the natives return after the volcanic eruption that created the park. When a fishing outfitter was established in the 1950s, there were still no bears there, and the rare wild ones that showed up were easily encouraged to leave. Then the bears started showing up at the dump site down the lake and the lodge began boating tourists down to watch them. That started the habituation process. Then, after two kids were eaten at Glacier by a grizzly on the way to a dump, Reagan abruptly outlawed dumps at all parks (which almost exterminated the Yellowstone grizzlies overnight). The Brooks Camp dump grizzlies were of course desperate and were attracted to the smell of rotting fish at the river. The concession and the NPS saw an opportunity to make money and allowed the grizzlies to become habituated for tourist viewing. Now there's more than eighty bears hanging out, often right in the camp. Everything is being put on stilts so visitors can travel to and from the viewing platform ... to watch some bears that are TOTALLY unwild. There is nothing about this fake attraction that is natural or historic or wild. The sick part is that unlike Yellowstone which EVOLVED into a similar zoo-like situation DUE to visitation, at Katmai the situation was CREATED to DRAW visitation. I had to attend Mike Tollefson's retirement party when I was at Yosemite. I felt like spitting on him when he bragged for fifteen minutes about how he built that "attraction" into what it is today. Similarly, at a management training course I was compelled to read former director George Hartzog's autobiography. He devotes one whole chapter to boasting how he circumvented the Organic Act and tricked the government into building the St Louis Arch for the NPS (he omits mentioning that a significant historic waterfront which actually had a role in being the Gateway to the West was destroyed in the process). What a phony. At the end of the course I had the "priveledge" of shaking the hand of a retired supt who proudly bragged, "This is the hand that shook the hands of Aldo Leopold and George Hartzog!" When I sat down I turned to the gal next to me and told her I needed a shower! She chuckled.

The problem with Ilse Royale is they have an artificial situation much like Katmai. At IR moose were introduced after the caribou were exterminated when prospectors either cut or, more often, burned all the island's old growth forest. When mining and commercial fishing dried up, the moose population went nuts and wolves crossed the ice to feed on carrion they could smell from the mainland. It would take hundreds of years to restore the island to its original caribou habitat. So the status quo wolf/moose balance has been accepted as better than nothing. Visitors are not going to come view trees blowing in the wind. At Ilse Royale park managers unfortunately more or less inherited an unnatural situation. At Katmai they clearly manufactured one.

As a predator/prey study area Isle Royale does have benefit for all of us outside the park system's fake environments. We can study what can happen in isolated environments when things get out of whack, and even make some generalizations about what can be done to balance the resources in places where natural human predation is allowed. That kind of knowledge is our friend.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

The problem with Ilse Royale is they have an artificial situation much like Katmai. At IR moose were introduced after the caribou were exterminated when prospectors either cut or, more often, burned all the island's old growth forest. When mining and commercial fishing dried up, the moose population went nuts and wolves crossed the ice to feed on carrion they could smell from the mainland. It would take hundreds of years to restore the island to its original caribou habitat. So the status quo wolf/moose balance has been accepted as better than nothing. Visitors are not going to come view trees blowing in the wind. At Ilse Royale park managers unfortunately more or less inherited an unnatural situation. At Katmai they clearly manufactured one.

I have not seen documented evidence of this. I have seen evidence that moose occupation of IR took place over time as moose moved naturally to the island, and the shift away from old growth was the catalyst to cause their boom in population in the early 1900s. Also, caribou and moose existed on the island simultaneously, and it was a slower shift in primacy, versus an abrupt one.

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/56270/MP025.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
See pages 13-14

 

[OntarioHunter]

The locals have long maintained that some moose were brought to the island in the hold of a mail steamer and supplied/paid for by a Michigan hunt club. Such nonsense was not uncommon at the turn of last century. A hunting club planted the mountain goats that became a plague in Olympic National Park. Whether enough moose were planted to make a viable population would certainly be debatable. And we are certain the wolves arrived later by ice, so why not the moose? An interesting question arises as to why the moose have not developed similar inbreeding issues as the wolves? I suspect it has to do with different breeding patterns. If elk had arrived instead of moose, I suspect they would not have survived long due to genetic deterioration. Elk are a harem species whereas moose breed more or less individually. Similar to elk, wolf is a pack species. Both have large family units with one male (or for wolves, female) dominating all the breeding. Moose have a greater opportunity for preserving genetic variation.

In any event, the NPS inherited an unnatural situation that was/is practically irreversible. It's a no win management situation as far as strictly adhering to the Organic Act mandate goes. We suspect that it's not the first time the island has faced this conundrum. In the past it's not unlikely that a large fire(s) took out the old growth and made it uninhabitable for caribou. Moose moved over via the ice and thrived to the point of starving themselves and wolves followed. Wolves thrived until all the moose were gone and then either died off or relocated back to the mainland. With moose and wolves gone, the old growth forest returned and with it caribou. What went wrong this time? First, the historic cycle probably took a long time to come full circle. So long that it would have to be prehistoric so we're only guessing. Second, there are no longer enough wolves on the MN mainland to pressure some into crossing the ice and restocking the island's gene pool. That would seem to be an obvious consequence given all the MN lake shore development. The potential route for genetic restocking island wolves has essentially been blockaded.

So the conundrum for NPS was allow nature to take its course and have the island return to its "natural" state or intervene and save the wolves. The natural path would not be pretty, we know that. The moose would all have starve and/or die from inbreeding. Ugh! Then we wait a couple hundred years for the slow evolving old growth boreal forest to return. Then what? Caribou aren't going to magically reappear. Even if the endangered woodland species manages to survive that long, it would have to be artificially reintroduced. Then, if the natural cycle is to be maintained, the island would need to be allowed to burn off again to start all over. Maintaining the theoretical natural cycle would be very long, very painful for the species involved, ruinous for tourism, and the ultimate goal would in all probably never be achieved. The cycle would always have to be artificially maintained by a species noted for its objective instability. In this case reality sucks and we just have to deal with it as best we can. So new wolves are introduced to maintain an artificial balance in an artificial environment.

 

[Sytes]

What about...

What about-isms... Typical strawman argument.
Following your strawman stretch - Let's start a caged 53 mile island government sanctioned study of human inbreeding... Ya, agree - Strawman as well.

Isle Royale - A designated Wilderness Act protected (1974) subjected to forced reintroduction of wolves because they killed themselves off naturally - Yet in our Wilderness Protected landscape, we create a misuse of forced re-introduction of wolves for the government sanctioned, human based manipulation in opposition to the natural digression of wolves for the specific purpose of the study of "predator v prey" and study the progression of human created inbreeding research...

 

[OntarioHunter]

I have not seen documented evidence of this. I have seen evidence that moose occupation of IR took place over time as moose moved naturally to the island, and the shift away from old growth was the catalyst to cause their boom in population in the early 1900s. Also, caribou and moose existed on the island simultaneously, and it was a slower shift in primacy, versus an abrupt one.

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/56270/MP025.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
See pages 13-14

Ilse Royale was the site of one of the nation's earliest mining booms. Native (naturally pure) copper had been mined by aboriginals there since pre-Columbian times. Early miners prospected for area minerals by either exploiting the natives knowledge or burning everything off to expose the Shield. I know this well. Nineteenth century mining in NW Ontario was the subject of my MA research. The removal of the island's (and NW Onario's) old growth was not gradual. It was unnaturally accelerated by both mining and logging, but more rapidly and thoroughly by the former. As I'm sure you know, burning the forest was more likely to produce second growth favorable to moose than horse logging for select white pine.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

Ilse Royale was the site of one of the nation's earliest mining booms. Native (naturally pure) copper had been mined by aboriginals there since pre-Columbian times. Early miners prospected for area minerals by either exploiting the natives knowledge or burning everything off to expose the Shield. I know this well. Nineteenth century mining in NW Ontario was the subject of my MA research. The removal of the island's (and NW Onario's) old growth was not gradual. It was unnaturally accelerated by both mining and logging, but more rapidly and thoroughly by the former. As I'm sure you know, burning the forest was more likely to produce second growth favorable to moose than horse logging for select white pine.

I agree. What I was referring to is the fact that caribou and moose did overlap, caribou weren't gone and then moose showed up; it happened over time. Moose were reported on the island in the late 1800s and caribou existed there until ~1910.

 

[OntarioHunter]

I agree. What I was referring to is the fact that caribou and moose did overlap, caribou weren't gone and then moose showed up; it happened over time. Moose were reported on the island in the late 1800s and caribou existed there until ~1910.

My take on the source you supplied was that four or five were spotted on the ice once in the 1880s and that some researcher observed a piece of brush possibly browsed by a moose shortly after the turn of the century (though possibly a caribou antler rub?). Keep in mind there were still residents on the island at that time involved in commercial fishing and small scale mining or prospecting. The researchers do not record any sightings reported by these residents. It would seem odd that they wouldn't ask for this information. The documentary evidence seems to indicate if there were any moose on Isle Royale, it was only a couple from time to time. Then by 1934 there's estimated to be a thousand moose on the island. If there was an overlap with caribou, it must have been relatively brief. If the rest of NW Ontario is any indication, it must be presumed all or nearly all of the island's old growth caribou sustaining forest was gone by then. And by the 1880s with very few or no moose on the island for sustenance, the influx of miners and fisherman probably made even faster work of finishing off the remaining caribou. According to historic accounts I've read, there was very little to sustain island settlers by the turn of the century. Fishing was about it. On the other hand, I do know from interpreting Jesuit mission diaries that the annual caribou hunt on Ilse Royal was a very big deal for mainland natives at the middle of 19th century. Hunting over there was obviously much more productive.

 

[COEngineer]

Selective outrage...

What about all the game farms, that allow "hunters" to shoot pen raised whitetail, pen raised mule deer, bighorn sheep now...and on and on and on.

Those are "closed Dr. Jeckel" systems as well...same outrage for those?

Even worse, genetically altering deer, elk, etc. so some 10 watt, that couldn't hunt their way out of wet paper sack, can blast them.

Oh, but that's different because its not a wolf.

While we're busy kicking the eco-extremists to the curb, I'd like to kick a bunch of "hunters" to the curb as well.

Finally, not every prey species on planet earth needs to end up as a human turd..

First, I wouldn't say I'm outraged about wolves on IR. Disappointed and skeptical would be better adjectives for me.

Second, yes, I am outraged about captive breeding of deer, elk, and sheep (hadn't heard of that 'til now), but that's not the topic at hand.

Buzz, I think you assume too much about people that make comments for/against a subject. We can each have an opinion without being "outraged." And your insults ("10 watt" - also new to me) do not help your arguments.

 

[BuzzH]

What about-isms... Typical strawman argument.
Following your strawman stretch - Let's start a caged 53 mile island government sanctioned study of human inbreeding... Ya, agree - Strawman as well.

Isle Royale - A designated Wilderness Act protected (1974) subjected to forced reintroduction of wolves because they killed themselves off naturally - Yet in our Wilderness Protected landscape, we create a misuse of forced re-introduction of wolves for the government sanctioned, human based manipulation in opposition to the natural digression of wolves for the specific purpose of the study of "predator v prey" and study the progression of human created inbreeding research...

So what, like I said not every animal on planet earth needs to be utilized by a person and end up a floater in the sewage plant. In particular on places like Isle Royale, Yellowstone Park, Glacier Park, etc.

Having witnessed more than my fair share of human behavior in my life, I'm fine cheering for the animals once in a while. They need places where they aren't hunted for 6 months.

Its troubling to me that people have the idea that big-game needs to be hunted in every last place they exist. I reckon 99% of the landscape isn't enough?

So, are you also against "forced reintroduction" of elk in AZ, NM, KY, MN, WI, etc. How about the "forced reintroduction" of Bighorn sheep in the Breaks, Anaconda, Rock Creek, Petty Creek, Bonner, Plains, Thompson Falls, etc.?

The goats in the Crazies, AB, etc.?

Again, if you're going to cry about "forced reintroductions"...be consistent about it.

 

[Sytes]

So what, like I said not every animal on planet earth needs to be utilized by a person and end up a floater in the sewage plant. In particular on places like Isle Royale, Yellowstone Park, Glacier Park, etc.

Having witnessed more than my fair share of human behavior in my life, I'm fine cheering for the animals once in a while. They need places where they aren't hunted for 6 months.

Its troubling to me that people have the idea that big-game needs to be hunted in every last place they exist. I reckon 99% of the landscape isn't enough?

So, are you also against "forced reintroduction" of elk in AZ, NM, KY, MN, WI, etc. How about the "forced reintroduction" of Bighorn sheep in the Breaks, Anaconda, Rock Creek, Petty Creek, Bonner, Plains, Thompson Falls, etc.?

The goats in the Crazies, AB, etc.?

Again, if you're going to cry about "forced reintroductions"...be consistent about it.

Buzz,
If your going to piss and moan about every subject outside the topic... have at it. You are far too often an assumption type gent on the net.
You play strawman b.s. frequently by implying ideas of what others might believe - thus presenting the idea your subject must be ALL one way or the other. Black and white in your argument on the net yet negotiate behind the scenes.

When wolves die off naturally on a 53 mile Island yet the studies of wolf inbreeding deformaties in a Wilderness Protected area is necessary worldwide... thus Isle Royale Island sees fit for human forced re introduction of wolves... yes. I've a problem with it.

If bighorn were forced onto an island for continued study of inbreeding deformities after they naturally died off from that cause... yes. I'd have a problem with that.

If mountain goats were forced onto an island for continued study of inbreeding deformities after they naturally died off from that cause... yes. I'd have a problem with that.

If <insert wildlife> were forced onto an island for continued study of inbreeding deformities after they naturally died off from that cause... yes. I'd have a problem with that.

If you're going to cry about moose population management via lawful hunting for a fantastic meat to food banks for those in need...

 

[OntarioHunter]

Buzz,
If your going to piss and moan about every subject outside the topic... have at it. You are far too often an assumption type gent on the net.
You play strawman b.s. frequently by implying ideas of what others might believe - thus presenting the idea your subject must be ALL one way or the other. Black and white in your argument on the net yet negotiate behind the scenes.

When wolves die off naturally on a 53 mile Island yet the studies of wolf inbreeding deformaties in a Wilderness Protected area is necessary worldwide... thus Isle Royale Island sees fit for human forced re introduction of wolves... yes. I've a problem with it.

If bighorn were forced onto an island for continued study of inbreeding deformities after they naturally died off from that cause... yes. I'd have a problem with that.

If mountain goats were forced onto an island for continued study of inbreeding deformities after they naturally died off from that cause... yes. I'd have a problem with that.

If <insert wildlife> were forced onto an island for continued study of inbreeding deformities after they naturally died off from that cause... yes. I'd have a problem with that.

If you're going to cry about moose population management via lawful hunting for a fantastic meat to food banks for those in need...

I think the question is was the inbreeding problem "natural" or a result of the artificial lakeshore development on the Minnesota mainland blockading a "natural" genetic restocking of the island? Lake Superior has frozen over completely a few times since I moved here in 1989. I'm sure the fifteen mile stretch between MN and Isle Royal has frozen over many more times. It's not hard to imagine wolves would have naturally moved across, especially if the mainland moose population started to decline. But the boom in exotic whitetail deer on the shoreline that followed the development has pretty much also ensured wolves wouldn't leave. Why would they?

The island's moose and wolves were probably always transient populations. But the factors producing the cycle were fire and ice ... and time. The natural cycle of moose and wolf transiency was always linked to the mainland remaining "natural." If the national park had incorporated large tracts of adjacent mainland, I think we might be looking at a much different scenario on the island today. The Park Service is endevouring to sustain an artificial situation that resembles one component of the natural cycle. There is simply no hope of maintaining the complete natural cycle of death and rebirth of the island's ecosystem. We have changed the surrounding world too much. So Isle Royale becomes a museum piece and scientific laboratory. It's the best we can do.

 

[Sytes]

The Park Service is endevouring to sustain an artificial situation that resembles one component of the natural cycle. There is simply no hope of maintaining the complete natural cycle of death and rebirth of the island's ecosystem. We have changed the surrounding world too much. So Isle Royale becomes a museum piece and scientific laboratory.

Exactly.

"The paper, which will publish in Science Advances next week, dives into the inbreeding depression within the Isle Royale wolf population caused by homozygosity. That is, when genes carry identical strains of genetic code they are more likely to cause recessive, or uncommon, traits. Inbreeding can lead to deleterious recessive mutations causing spinal deformities and other health problems, which makes an already tough life of being a wolf on a remote island even harder."

Genomics of Isle Royale wolves reveal impacts of inbreeding

A new paper explores the genetic signatures of a pair of wolves isolated on Isle Royale, a remote national park in Lake Superior. The pair are father-daughter and share the same mother. Such close inbreeding leads to genetic anomalies, which likely are the main driver behind the wolf population...

phys.org

So when Buzz goes on about this animal in Yellowstone or that animal in Petty Creek (MT)… his strawman attempts (as you describe do not reflect Isle Royale) become more a joke on himself than attempting to discuss the UNIQUE setting on a 53 mile island that incorporates a given replication of an already natural and (wolf or not) painful self eradication. The more embarrassing portion by this joke of a Hyde Island - it's an intentional study - this time from the human intentional re introduction of the digression of wolves.

Wolves have attempted to leave the island inhabited with hordes of fresh moose at the taking... Yet humans continue to bring them back.

"ISLE ROYALE, MI – Two years ago this winter, after an arctic blast had frozen the surface of Lake Superior between Isle Royale and the Canadian mainland, a 4-year-old female wolf walked to the edge of Michigan’s most remote island after sunset. She took a few steps onto the ice … and kept going. About 15 miles later, the 70-pound wolf who sported a distinctive black fur mantle across the back of her tan coat, stepped onto the Canadian mainland, her GPS tracking collar showed."

Wolf that left Michigan’s Isle Royale has had amazing 2-year journey, GPS data shows

The female wolf left via an ice bridge that formed during a Polar Vortex event in 2019.

www.mlive.com

If it's for population control of Moose - Humans are equally part of this world's equation. NPS has done this in the past. From elk hunts in Roosevelt National Park to Bison of Yellowstone. Food banks for the human families that could certainly use vs wolves for the purpose of inbreeding studies. All this human manipulation not only in the National Park - yet one designated Wilderness Act. I join the many who oppose our federal use of this.

 

[OntarioHunter]

Exactly.

Genomics of Isle Royale wolves reveal impacts of inbreeding

A new paper explores the genetic signatures of a pair of wolves isolated on Isle Royale, a remote national park in Lake Superior. The pair are father-daughter and share the same mother. Such close inbreeding leads to genetic anomalies, which likely are the main driver behind the wolf population...

phys.org

So when Buzz goes on about this animal in Yellowstone or that animal in Petty Creek (MT)… his strawman attempts (as you describe do not reflect Isle Royale) become more a joke on himself than attempting to discuss the UNIQUE setting on a 53 mile island that incorporates a given replication of an already natural and (wolf or not) painful self eradication. The more embarrassing portion by this joke of a Hyde Island - it's an intentional study - this time from the human intentional re introduction of the digression of wolves.

Wolves have attempted to leave the island inhabited with hordes of fresh moose at the taking... Yet humans continue to bring them back.

Wolf that left Michigan’s Isle Royale has had amazing 2-year journey, GPS data shows

The female wolf left via an ice bridge that formed during a Polar Vortex event in 2019.

www.mlive.com

If it's for population control of Moose - Humans are equally part of this world's equation. NPS has done this in the past. From elk hunts in Roosevelt National Park to Bison of Yellowstone. Food banks for the human families that could certainly use vs wolves for the purpose of inbreeding studies. All this human manipulation not only in the National Park - yet one designated Wilderness Act. I join the many who oppose our federal use of this.

Well, I tried.

 

[Sytes]

Well, I tried.

We all have opinions. Appreciate yours whether we agree or disagree.

 

[Horse]

I am all for hunters and their role in wildlife management, but what is wrong with having a few of these scenarios play out under controlled conditions to investigate the predator/prey dynamics. This is the foundation for our understanding of how moose and wolves behave together and furthers our understanding of how they interact. National parks are a petri dish for studying the outside world.

This has been discussed before. We already have years of data from the 1st experiment. The wolves inbred and basically died off. Moose have since prospered with the wolves gone. I dont see anything changing this scenario again with same wolf moose varibles.

 

[Sytes]

Isle Royale: Save Wolves or Let Them ‘Die For Science?’

The National Park Service released four gray wolves on Isle Royale in northwestern Lake Superior in October 2018 to start rebuilding the island’s severely inbred packs. Three months later, a female from the foursome fled across Superior’s ice toward its home turf on the mainland 15 miles away...

www.themeateater.com

"Other scientists and wilderness advocates believe the NPS should let nature dictate the wolf’s fate. They note Isle Royale is a federally designated wilderness area, which requires it remain free of human intervention. In writing the 1964 Wilderness Act’s text, preservationist Howard Zahniser legally defined wilderness as places “where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.”

"Even so, Heberlein said he wasn’t surprised in June 2018 when the NPS issued its “Record of Decision” to restore the island’s wolves. When contacted for this article, Heberlein said: “The round-heeled NPS went backward capitulating to nonscientific sentiments from wolf researchers, just as I said they would six years ago.”

A follow up article. Same author:

Isle Royale: Are the $2 Million Wolf Reintroductions Working?

Riddle me this: How can a male wolf be both father and half-brother to a female wolf? Answer: By breeding their shared mother. Just such an Oedipal pairing about a decade ago begat what became the lone surviving “native-born” wolf duo on Isle Royale National Park in northwestern Lake Superior...

www.themeateater.com

Of hunting and food bank donations (Same author):

How Hunters Use Venison to Feed the Hungry

Much as the quickest way to a lover’s heart is through their stomach, the surest way to help nonhunters accept hunting is through meat from deer, elk, and other wild game. Whether it’s Steven Rinella serving venison to a roomful of nonhunting New Yorkers, or a Swedish hunter substituting a moose...

www.themeateater.com

“Every survey ever done on hunting shows 70 to 80% approval ratings when the animal is used for food. That’s a powerful position for hunting to work from.”

If time permits for a three article read, he presents all sides in an equitable manner, imo.