Bitterroot Politics

Humanities Montana and the UM Center for Ethics held the first in a series of 10 forum discussions at the Bitter Root Brew Pub on Monday with a discussion on wolf reintroduction. Forum organizer Zack Rogala reported that everyone drank beer, no one brought a gun and the conversation was encouraging. Here’s his report:

With approximately a dozen participants, we focused on three questions. First, what should proper management of the wolf populations in the Bitterroot ecosystem entail? Points were brought up that the more localized the management the better. This allows for real time field observations to be implemented into management strategies much quicker and avoids much red tape. On the opposing side, with too localized of management, policies can become myopic, where local managers lose sight of populations between jurisdictions…i.e. inter-county or inter-state.
The second question considered whether the wolf should be managed under the Endangered Species Act. The no’s felt that under the ESA wolf populations would continue on their assumed exponential population growth, therein creating a much bigger problem for the ecosystem as a whole. While it was acknowledged that managing under the ESA puts a stop to Wyoming’s ‘can be shot on sight’ policies, a more nuanced approach needs to be taken, much along the lines of the avenues the Ravalli County Commissioners, and Montana FWP and State Representatives are taking. The yes’s felt that at times estimates of sustainable carrying capacity for wolves have been grossly underestimated or conducted in a negligent manner. These instances create a desire for wolves to be managed under the ESA to prevent the decimation of a wolf population who may, or may not, be at or exceeding appropriate carrying capacity.
The third question dealt with dwindling ungulate populations. Specifically, what impact past FWP policies played in limiting elk populations as seen throughout the region during the past five years? With over the counter permits, what impact did these hunts have in relation to predation rates by wolves? Which caused more harm?
And finally, the logical fallacy of the week was that of overgeneralization. This fallacy deals with statements that make sweeping generalizations that exaggerate and oversimplify reality, ignoring important details. Generalizations are often useful in persuasion if they are worded carefully and if they are accompanied by clarifications and evidence. By way of example…
“Wolves are bad…”
Or…
“Wolves are good…”
That’s it for today. Thanks to all those who attended. Enjoy the afternoon and see you next Monday.

Next week’s discussion will be October 4th, from 5-6 upstairs at the Bitter Root Brewery.
The topic will be, ‘The Future of Logging in the Bitterroot.’

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 29th, 2010 at 11:30 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.