Good sleuthing :-) Thanks for your post. I appreciate your perspective.
"But this article is accurate, managing wolves is much more difficult than managing cats or coyotes. And does take a heavy hand, just to keep them under control. Which as this article explains is critical to keeping balance. It described the "bouncing ball" effect. This is the natural cycle, which is very much more cruel than modern game management. The natural cycle also includes starvation and disease, which is not mentioned here. This causes great fluctuation in animal populations- explosions followed by die-offs. The natural cycle is cruel and just plain gross. And has been effectively ended in the last century where managed hunting has been practiced."
What you say makes sense. Delphinium has claimed that there is no "bouncing ball effect" but that wolves will simply kill everything in site until there is nothing left :-) I agree with you that management could improve things from the harsh "bouncing ball effect". And that is a good thing. I think most of us (Delphinium excluded) believe that we can co-exist with wolves if they are kept to territory and managed well. This article provides different information than dmsTahoe and Delphinium have given and I think adds greater perspective to the picture. Some of the anti-wolf propaganda is nearly hysterical (not all of it), imo:
Management, This is where the rub comes in. Environuts take control away form the management professionals using legal and political means. Example: prop 117 in CA to protect cougars. The population has nearly tripled and wildlife has greatly suffered. But the management professionals can do nothing.
Years ago, I worked as a civil engineer in Southern CA. Because of environmental "considerations" Flood control districts were prevented from clearing brush and debris out of natural channels. You see, that was habitat destruction. Then every so often, you would get a storm that would blow a channel clean, (this was accompanied with flooding and property damage.) Since the habitat was destroyed naturally, the flood control districts would immediately come in and line the channels with concrete. This would, of course, prevent future habitat problems.
It was Stupid. and expensive, and destroyed the natural aquifers, damaged beaches and did all sorts of environmental destruction. BUT, it was expedient. We as engineers hated it, and in many cases there were cheaper and better solutions. We just couldn't use them.
Now back to wolves: Ask I stated earlier, management of wolves requires an extremely heavy hand. This is why we exterminated them in the first place. Leaving other, "easier to manage" predators, to take their place. Wolves are like the hordes that came off the steppes and terrorized Europe and Asia for thousands of years. They come in, clear out an area (leaving a wildlife desert), and move on. And just when an area recovers, here they come again.
Just to keep control of these creatures, you have to stomp on them. Never letting them get so populous that they impact their food supply. Cause if they do, they break up into small groups and move on, in all directions. Then you have a nightmare. From the damage that these wolves have already created, we have too many. We are already teetering on that nightmare line, and they were just reintroduced! OUCH!
On Thursday 18. April 1996 Ms. Patricia Wyman, 24 years old, was attacked and killed by five adult North American grey wolves (Canis lupus ssp.) at the HALIBURTON FOREST and WILDLIFE RESERVE, Ltd. near Haliburton, Ontario.
These wolves had lived in captivity all their lives, and were not socialized to humans.
Prior to the attack the wolves had always kept their distance when caretakers and others entered the wooded 15-acre enclosure.
The wolves were part of a new WOLF CENTER exhibit that was established as an educational facility to foster a better appreciation of the role of wolves in the wild.