Mikey's Debut, and The Hunt is On

My name is Mikey Goralnik, and I am thrilled and honored to be Leave No Trace's intern this fall. I grew up in St. Louis, just graduated from college in Boston, and I honestly could not be happier to live among mountains and work among folks as interesting and dedicated as those I've met so far this week.

I'd like to use my first post to talk about a recent and highly controversial issue that has been well-covered in the national media, one that both asks us to define what we mean by "stewardship" and cuts right at the core of what we are doing at Leave No Trace.



On September 1st, the continental US's first legal wolf hunt since the 1970's began at dawn in Idaho, a state that will allow 220 gray wolves to be hunted this season. Two weeks later, wolf hunting began in Montana, where authorities expect Montanans to kill 75 wolves. All told, from a population of approximately 1600, nearly 300 Canis lupi will probably be (legally) killed between now and New Year's Eve.

What do you think about this kind of land management? Are Idaho and Montana promoting responsible enjoyment and active stewardship of the outdoors?

There are those--including the New York Times editorial writers--who fiercely criticize the Idaho/Montana wolf hunt, labeling it "indecent" and little more than the expression of hunters' collective "love of killing things." The wolf has only been considered "non-endangered" by the federal government since January of this year (it is still considered endangered in Wyoming), and many of this country's most thoughtful and well-respected conservationist organizations assert that North Rocky wolf populations are nowhere near stable enough for state governments to be encouraging people to hunt them. Allowing open hostility to a threatened animal--especially one that fulfills such demonstrably unique roles in the health of its ecosystem--certainly seems like a good way to damage the wild places that enrich our world and lives.

However, sportspeople like hunters have a rich tradition as some of the wilderness' most capable stewards. It was, for example, renowned hunter Theodore Roosevelt who oversaw the consolidation and blossoming of the US Forest Service. While it makes sense to decry as irresponsible stewardship an act as hostile as gray wolf hunting in Idaho and Montana, it seems equally logical to entrust the outdoors to the people that enjoy, depend on, and are inspired by it. Some may tend to think of this community as a collection of cyclists, climbers, and hikers, but it doesn't seem fair to preclude hunters--and gray wolf hunters--from this group. As recreators, hunters depend on the vitality and abundance of the outdoors, and purely from a self-interest perspective, it would be foolish for them to behave in ways that threaten the wild.

Preservationism or conservationism? Is good environmental stewardship defending and maintaining the wild places on our planet, or is it finding ways for both ourselves and our great-great-grandchildren to fully know and experience them? Finally, are the outdoors imbued with their own intrinsic value, or is the meaning that we derive from them what makes our surroundings so special? I have no idea, but I think it is crucial for us to grapple with these questions not just to determine the fate of gray wolves in the American Rockies but also to know where we stand going forward in the environmental movement.