Wait at least 10 years before introducing any new wolves to Isle Royale.
That is the recommendation Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Tribe recently sent to Phyllis Green, superintendent of Isle Royale National Park.
With only two wolves remaining on the island, the Park Service has touted a plan to introduce 20 to 30 wolves in part to try to keep the moose numbers in check. Currently it is estimated there are 1,400 moose on Isle Royale. The letter to Green is in reference to a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on a reintroduction of wolves plan for Isle Royale put forth by the National Park Service this past winter.
Here is the letter sent to Green in its entirety.
The Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa is a federally recognized Indian tribe and is one of the member Bands of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe. Grand Portage retains hunting, fishing, and other usufructuary rights that extend throughout the entire northeast portion of the state of Minnesota under the 1854 Treaty of LaPointe (the “Ceded Territory”). In the Ceded Territories, all the Bands that were signatory to that Treaty have a legal and moral interest in protecting natural resources for sustainable use.
The Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa recommends against reintroducing wolves now and reconsidering further after the effects of their loss are measured and sufficient time has elapsed to allow for natural recolonization of wolves from the mainland. We feel that the current DEIS does not fully outline all the potential options and we recommend an additional option. We support the development and adoption of Option E: Do not stock wolves now and reconsider after at least a decade post-extinction of wolves and if other metrics of ecosystem change have been met. This option includes the development of a scientific advisory committee to 1) define scientifically valid measures of ecosystem change following the natural extinction of wolves from the Island and 2) to produce a management plan that defines whether and when wolves should be re-introduced after sufficient time has elapsed to allow for natural recolonization from the mainland.
Grand Portage Ojibwe historically used Isle Royale for hunting and fishing as part of their traditional use area and are the closest federally recognized tribe to its shores. The reservation land base is less than 14 miles from the island and was historically accessed by canoe by Ojibwe peoples. Furthermore, Grand Portage Indians did not cede Isle Royale in the 1842 Treaty and in fact were not invited to the treaty signing. Only in 1844, through the Isle Royale Compact, and under duress, did the band cede the lands of Isle Royale to the U.S. government. The muddy history of the Isle Royale land cession leaves rand Portage with a unique position regarding the island and its management. A traditional cultural property(TCP) nomination has been developed that highlights traditional use of Minong (Isle Royale) by regional Ojibwe, specifically the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. A TCP demonstrates an on-going relationship that has a (1) historic connection and that (2) continues today. The Grand Portage Band’s use of Minong is lasting, and the report identifies the unique position of Grand Portage to Isle Royale and how families and Band members have maintained connections to the island for generations. The Band supports the Park and its visitors via marinas, concessions boat traffic from a tribal dock, participation in a Tribal Self Government Act agreement, and other economic ties that help nurture a contemporary relationship. Fishing, a dominant activity throughout Island history, is woven into much of the narrative; however, many other subsistence activities are also captured in the discussion through historic documentation as well as more recent interviews with members of the Grand Portage tribal community. The nominated property is defined as follows: the terrestrial lands and inland waters of Minong or Isle Royale National Park, which also includes a quarter-mile “ring” outward from the lands and peripheral islands of Minong. This ring recognizes traditional fishing grounds of Grand Portage people in times before and after the 1842 Treaty and 1844 Compact.
The Grand Portage Band observes a cultural value that allows for natural cycles of predators and prey and the cultural philosophy of management only when necessary. Thus, we urge non-interventionist policy for management of wildlife on Isle Royale National Park and feel that upholding the Park principle of maintaining unmanaged wilderness is most appropriate, as indicated in Option D of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Predator stocking to artificially maintain the recent moose/wolf dynamic seems contrary to National Park Service and Grand Portage Band of Chippewa philosophy and policy. Furthermore, the Band has concern that current public perception of wolves on Isle Royale has been shaped by how the studies were conducted and publicized, rather than the merit of letting the ecological and evolutionary process evolve naturally.
Wolves have only been on island since 1949, but the Grand Portage tribal culture and the history of natural introductions and extinctions on the island are much older. Grand Portage Indians harvested fish and caribou from the Island. It is curious that the more recent dynamic of wolves and moose are discussed to be perpetuated, but the question arises of how that choice is made. One could easily ask why are not woodland caribou or other species that have ebbed and flowed to and from the island being considered for reintroduction.
The ongoing study that commenced around 1952 began with an intent to consider the effects of naturally introduced predators and prey. The study is not yet complete, and extinction of one of the species, and the consequences of that extinction are worthwhile scientific findings. To circumvent the natural culmination of that study is premature and shortsighted.
The Grand Portage Band feels that there is sufficient opportunity for natural repopulation by wolves from the mainland and they can provide a local genetic composition. We support this statement with the fact that two Grand Portage wolves, one of which was collared with GPS telemetry collar, crossed an ice bridge during winter 2015, stayed on the Island for a few days and departed back across the ice bridge. Thus, we know that ice bridges continue to form, and that mainland wolves continue to foray onto the island. While ice bridges may be less common than historically, they still occur, and the opportunity for natural repopulation would likely be impeded by a reintroduction event.
We question whether the artificial perpetuation of this scientific study is beneficial. Does this benefit a small group of scientists or meet the long-term management philosophy of the National Park Service? Scientists should study natural change first, then determine appropriate pathway forward. Knowledge of what we will learn from absence of predators on the Island is invaluable. Additionally, it may be prudent, given recent moose population declines on the mainland, for Isle Royale to become a natural refuge for moose. There are many viable options that can be considered if moose populations grow to the point that human intervention is required.
We outline the options identified in the DEIS and our position on those options below in order of our preference.
Finally, we reiterate Grand Portage claims of historic use and ownership of Isle Royale and the oppressive way the Island was conveyed to the U.S. federal government in 1844. We hope that National Park Service management will observe our cultural considerations for the Island as well as our position on ecological and scientific concerns regarding wolf reintroduction. Furthermore, we offer our scientific expertise and agency assistance in this issue and other natural resources management issues. Our final recommendation is to allow the Isle Royale National Park to come to a natural ecological equilibrium in the event of natural extinction of wolves and evaluate further after rigorous scientific analysis of effects. We look forward to discussing this further with you.
Norman W. Deschampe, Chairman, Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, signed the letter to Green.
PREFERRED OPTIONS:
1: Option E: NO IMMEDIATE ACTION, WITH
ALLOWANCE FOR FUTURE ACTION AFTER
THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET:
1) 10 YEARS POST NATURAL WOLF EXTINCTION;
2) MEASUREABLE METRICS OF
ECOSYTEM CHANGE HAVE BEEN MET;
3) A SCIENTIFICALLY DESIGNED MANAGEMENT
PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED BY A SCIENCE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
We feel that this option is most appropriate because it provides the option to reconsider in the future after rigorous evaluation. If the value to the park is monitoring how an island evolves over time, then wolves should not be reintroduced. By delaying reintroduction of predators, the Park can allow the existing scientific study to come to successful resolution by studying the moose population and their effects on habitat. Scientists can determine how other biota respond to the absence of a large predator, including population dynamics, health, parasites, and disease. A scientific advisory panel should be developed to identify the metrics of a) ecosystem change that should be measured, b) population demographics of moose and other biota as they respond to the absence of a large predator, and c) ecosystem thresholds at which wolf reintroduction should be considered as a viable option. Furthermore, the advisory panel should develop a wildlife management plan that articulates strategy for management of Isle Royale’s wilderness ecosystem.
A primary benefit of this option is the opportunity for natural repopulation by wolves with local genetic composition and natural social structure. Another benefit of this approach is that results of the studies can inform scientists in other areas that are facing moose population declines. Isle Royale can and should be a leader in the science of natural ecosystem change. Reintroduction of wolves should only be considered once noticeable vegetation loss has occurred and if the potential catastrophic ecosystem consequences of loss of desired vegetative communities occur. Option E appears ideal, as it would give the opportunity for wolf repopulation to occur naturally. If the Park subsequently considers moose populations to be higher than desired for aesthetic or ecological reasons, we suggest that excess moose can be culled through subsistence hunting by Grand Portage tribal members or they can be considered for rehabilitation in other areas of the continental U.S. where population declines may be high.
2: Option D: NO IMMEDIATE ACTION, WITH
ALLOWANCE FOR FUTURE ACTION:
We feel that this option is also reasonable because it provides the option to reconsider in the future.
3: Option A: NO ACTION.
We feel that this option is also reasonable. The benefits are like those described above, but it limits the opportunity for a change in viewpoint later.
UNDESIRABLE OPTIONS
The Grand Portage Band of Chippewa feels that the two options outlining reintroduction of wolves are not appropriate culturally, ecologically, or scientifically. The Grand Portage Band recommends against:
3: Option B: IMMEDIATE LIMITED INTRODUCTION.
The band feels that the initial stocking of 26 wolves could contribute or proliferate non-local genetics into the region. There is considerable risk of escapement of reintroduced wolves over ice bridges that could affect populations of local strains of wolves. Please see our earlier statements regarding Grand Portage collared wolves traversing an Isle Royale ice bridge as recently as 2015. In addition to Grand Portage wolves moving to the Island, wolves also emigrate from the Island when ice bridges form. In 2014 an Isle Royale wolf, named Isabella by park scientists, traveled across an ice bridge from Isle Royale, landing on the Grand Portage Indian reservation (see story of Isabella, Winter 2014). There are significant additional risks of parasite, disease and viral transmission from non-local strains that may affect biota in the park or on the adjacent mainland. There are many multi-host parasites and diseases passed among mammals, and the risk of new introductions to the park is high with a deliberate stocking event. While this risk would be part of the pre-release evaluation it is not clear if animals would be released before all results (disease screening, in particular) would be available for consideration.
4: Option C: IMMEDIATE INTRODUCTION WITH
POTENTIAL SUPPLEMENTAL INTRODUCTIONS.
This is the least desired option. All the risks expressed above are greatly exacerbated by repeat introductions of wolves.
Leave a Reply