Perspectives On The Values Of Wolves

The Ownership View

I agree with the Ownership View because it is the least destructive and therefore the least risky. While the Stewardship View could possibly have good results, it is taking far too much of a chance. There are several things that could go wrong with it. Also, the Frontier View would be detrimental to our earth in other ways than the obvious. The killing of a species has unforeseeable effects on the entire ecosystem the animal lives in, as well as often on humans.

Leaving the wolves to their own devices is the best plan because if we were to move them from Alberta, it is possible that they could become under populated there and cause problems for the ecosystems in Alberta. Also, the wolves might experience different conditions in Yellowstone compared to that of Alberta, and not be able to adjust. If the wolves were to die off because they were unable to adapt, it would just be causing a greater problem because not only is there an under population of wolves in Yellowstone, there would be one in Alberta as well.

If we were to move the wolves to Yellowstone and they successfully adapted, it could cause other problems. Wolves are predators to many small animals. If there was suddenly an abundance of predators in the park, the population of the prey would decrease dramatically. This could cause several different problems, depending on the role the prey plays in the ecosystem.

Also, if the wolves were suddenly introduced to the area, they might not decide to stay there. They could wander, trying to find their way back home. In the event that they do, they could end up in areas such as residential areas or areas of agriculture. If they were to end up in a subdivision, this would cause safety issues for the area's inhabitants. If they were to find their way into an agricultural area, the ranchers could potentially lose their cattle and sheep.

...