Saving Nation’s Seed Supply

  • Multinational corporations started taking control of seeds around thirty years ago. Now, ten corporations own over half the world’s commodity seed supply. (Photo by Scott Bauer, courtesy of the USDA Agricultural Research Service)

Some small gardening businesses
are noticing more customers want organic
and heirloom seeds. Experts think that
trend might be important for the world.
Kinna Ohman reports they believe
those seeds might be the hope of future
food supplies:

Transcript

Some small gardening businesses
are noticing more customers want organic
and heirloom seeds. Experts think that
trend might be important for the world.
Kinna Ohman reports they believe
those seeds might be the hope of future
food supplies:

John Meshna points to a half empty rack of vegetable and flower seed packets in his
store.

“We’ve emptied this thing at least a half a dozen times this year. I thought maybe
we’d have a rush in the spring and that’d be the end of it. And it looks like it’s
going to be going through the winter.”

Meshna owns and runs DirtWorks – a green garden supply business in New Haven,
Vermont. He’s been selling organic and heirloom garden seeds for more than twenty
years. Heirloom seeds come from vegetables that have almost disappeared. And Meshna
thinks people want those types of seeds more and more because they’re worried about our
food supply.

“People call us just to make sure sometimes before they order, now, ‘these are really
organic seeds, right?’ Yeah, it says it right on the label. It’s gonna make you very
happy when you get that package.”

And it’s making certain experts happy too.

Hope Shand is the research director of Etcetera Group. It’s an organization that’s
concerned about corporate control of the food supply. Shand says when more home
gardeners and small farmers grow plants from organic and heirloom seeds, that helps
keep variety in the world’s food supply.

“This is an incredibly important service. People, gardeners, small farmers, urban
gardeners, are conserving, and saving seed diversity. No one else is really doing that
job.”

Hope Shand says multinational corporations started taking control of seeds around thirty
years ago. Now, Shand says, ten corporations own over half the world’s commodity seed
supply. And she thinks that’s risky.

“The seed is the first link in the food chain. Whoever controls the seed literally
controls the world’s food supply. We can’t afford to have the level of vulnerability
and dependence that that entails when we have a handful of multinational seed
companies controlling the world seed supply.”

(sound of watering)

“I’m growing greens without heat.”

At a small organic nursery in Hinesberg, Vermont, Julie Rubaud is one of those who
wants to get these seeds and plants to more people. For her, it’s not just preserving a
strain of a vegetable, it’s trying to match up those plants with the right gardener.

Rubaud grows close to eight hundred varieties of organic and heirloom plants for her
customers. She says that helps her connect people with the right plants for their gardens
and tastebuds.

“I always start out asking, ‘how much room do you have?’ And then I ask them
how they like to eat tomatoes. It’s nice to be able to cater everyone’s garden plan to
their individual needs because we have so many varieties.”

And if next year’s anything like last year, Rubaud will have at least forty varieties of
organic tomato plants ready for new gardens by next spring.

She wonders – with the economy the way it’s been – if one plant might do exceptionally
well.

“There’s Radiator Charlie’s Mortgage Lifter Tomatoes. Have you heard of that
one?” (laughs)

Radiator Charlie’s tomato has been around since the 1940s. You probably won’t find it
at the big-box discount-store gardening department. It’s one of those colorful, hardy,
productive plants that many people think will help bring back variety to our food supply.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Part Two: Canada’s Take on Trash

  • Gerry Moore’s the CEO of Island Waste Management – the company that runs the waste program on Prince Edward Island. He’s pointing at an aerial shot of the compost facility. (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

The recycling and composting rate
in the United States runs just around thirty
percent. That means seventy percent of our
waste still goes to landfills. Government
officials and others in charge of recycling
programs say we’re doing pretty well with
what we have available. But there’s a
community that’s challenging that assumption.
Kinna Ohman reports:

Transcript

The recycling and composting rate
in the United States runs just around thirty
percent. That means seventy percent of our
waste still goes to landfills. Government
officials and others in charge of recycling
programs say we’re doing pretty well with
what we have available. But there’s a
community that’s challenging that assumption.
Kinna Ohman reports:

Prince Edward Island’s one of those places where people who grow up here, stay here.
And it’s no wonder. The island’s off Canada’s eastern coast. It’s covered with rolling
green farmland, dark forests, and copper-red beaches. It’s Canada’s smallest province –
about the size of Delaware.

Prince Edward Island has a population of only 160,000. There seems to be enough room
for everyone.

But not for every thing.

Around ten years ago, the residents of Prince Edward Island saw their landfills filling up.
That meant digging more. They wanted to do something about it – and fast.

So they started an aggressive recycling and composting program.

Gerry Moore’s the CEO of Island Waste Management – the company that runs the
program. Moore says to make it happen quickly,

“We had to make this mandatory. It wasn’t something that we could go out and ask
people, ‘well, listen, this is the right thing to environmentally.’ We made it
mandatory.”

Moore says they had to be tough. If people didn’t separate their compost and recycling
from their waste, the company refused to pick it up. That was a difficult time for
politicians.

“And, to be quite honest with you, in the initial stages, it was fairly painful. But, if
we didn’t do what we did, when we did it, the landfill we have now would be totally
full and we’d have to have another one. We’re recycling everything we totally
possibly can.”

(sounds of a compost facility)

And they are. People and businesses on Prince Edward Island recycle and compost 65%
of their waste. That’s more than double the average in the U.S.

A lot of the former waste now goes to the island’s composting facility. The facility takes
care of miscellaneous garbage that can’t be recycled – things such as certain types of
paper and food scraps.

(sound of door closing)

Gordon Smith shows me the compost curing warehouse. We’re now sealed in with
steaming mounds of dark compost that almost reach the ceiling. It’s muggy and hot.
About 130 degrees.

“So this is our finished compost you’re looking at right here. This large pile. And
that large pile over there as well.”

Smith’s the facilities supervisor for ADI – the company running the composting plant.
The facility handles 30,000 tons every year.

And with all that, you’d think Prince Edward Islanders would say ‘job done.’ Right? But
they’re trying to reduce landfill waste even more.

They want businesses to start using packaging that can be composted or recycled. Many
local businesses have switched.

But there’s a problem. Big multinational chain stores bring goods to Prince Edward
Island in packaging that cannot be recycled or composted. It all ends up in the island’s
landfill.

Gerry Moore knows his province is too small to really influence these companies. So
that’s where he hopes other communities will help out and join in.

“There will be initial pain with that in the front end. And a lot of politicians and
public figures don’t want to go through that pain. But, you know, we only have one
earth. And whether you’re from New York, or Prince Edward Island, or all over
the globe, anything we can remanufacture and reuse is only going to extend the life
of the planet.”

And Prince Edward Island officials think if they can do it, other places can too – if they
have the political will.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Honey, I Shrunk the Cow

  • Today’s cattle are much bigger than they were back in the 1920s. They’ve been bred to big and beefy. But, it turns out, you can actually produce more meat with the smaller cattle. (Photo by Keith Weller, courtesy of the USDA)

Because of feed and energy prices,
some cattle farmers are scaling back.
They’re not reducing the size of their
herd. They’re reducing the size of their
cows. Kinna Ohman reports:

Transcript

Because of feed and energy prices,
some cattle farmers are scaling back.
They’re not reducing the size of their
herd. They’re reducing the size of their
cows. Kinna Ohman reports:

Today’s cattle are much bigger than they were back in the 1920s. They’ve been bred to
big and beefy. But, it turns out, you can actually produce more meat with the smaller
cattle.

Richard Gradwohl has been breeding miniature cattle for more than forty years. He
says with today’s larger beef cattle on five acres, you can produce 2400 pounds of
meat. He can raise as much as 7000 pounds of beef on that same five acres.

“It’s surprising to me how many large cattle breeders call me almost every day
because they’re interested in reducing the size of their animals to achieve more
feed efficiency.”

Gradwohl thinks the emphasis on breeding large cattle might be reversing.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Farmers Take Cues From Their Cows

  • The Getz’s think their cows can help make decisions on their farm. (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

Family farming is in trouble. The country has lost thousands

of small family-owned farms over the last twenty years. Some researchers

say that’s because the agricultural industry and government policy favor

corporate farms. That makes it difficult for smaller farms to survive.

So some small farmers are trying a different way of farming. Kinna Ohman reports that it can all start with a little ingenuity:

Transcript

Family farming is in trouble. The country has lost thousands

of small family-owned farms over the last twenty years. Some researchers

say that’s because the agricultural industry and government policy favor

corporate farms. That makes it difficult for smaller farms to survive.

So some small farmers are trying a different way of farming. Kinna Ohman reports that it can all start with a little ingenuity:

(sounds of farm)

Steve and Karen Getz run a dairy farm in central Vermont.

They’re the type of people who think outside of the box. Not only do they let their cows
out on pasture (and that’s rare among dairy farmers) they also let their cows be part of the
decision making on the farm. They think their cows have some pretty good ideas.

It all started on a hot summer day a couple of years ago. The Getz’s noticed after the
morning milking, their cows didn’t want to go out to pasture. Instead, the cows stood at
the gate that led into a large indoor shelter they call a ‘pack’.

The Getz’s built this ‘pack’ for the winter – so their cows could get out of the harsh
winds. They didn’t know why their cows would want to use it in the summer, but Steve
Getz says they gave it a try.

“And what we did was to open the gate to see what would happen. And what we
found was they’d come in and sleep in the pack in the blazing hot heat. And it
started to cool down in the afternoon. They went back out and grazed all night
long.”

Steve Getz says there’s been no loss of milk production. And all this makes a lot of
sense. But he says they never read about this in any book or farm magazine.

So Steve and Karen Getz thought they’d see if their cows had any more good ideas.

And the cows did.

Karen Getz says they were told their cows needed to give birth in an area separated from
the herd. So they built a fence around a corner area of their indoor shelter. But soon they
saw their cows didn’t like this – they wanted to be with the herd. So Karen Getz says
they let that happen too.

“She can go off into a corner somewhere and calve and have enough space. And
then she feels comfortable because she can get up and eat with the herd, she can be
nursing the calf. But she’s not separated. That’s less stress for the cow. You know,
we let them choose.”

It’s this kind of creativity that could help small farming come back to rural communities.

That’s what Martha Pickard thinks. She’s a grazing specialist.

She says many farmers only know the industrial model used by large farms. So when
they see families like the Getz’s grazing their cows, saving lots of money on feed, and
letting the cows make decisions on their own, it gives them other options.

“It’s such a huge deal to change your style of management. It’s like you getting up
in the morning and having a different job. So it takes a certain personality type,
someone who’s willing to think outside of the box, someone who’s willing to have
their neighbors stop by and say, ‘why are you doing it that way?’ It’s tough because
they’re usually on their own.”

Martha Pickard wants those small farmers to realize they’re not alone. And to know
there are others who are also rejecting the industrial way of farming.

Darrell Emmick, who’s with the Natural Resources Conservation Service, says he’s seen
progress.

Even though there’s been a net loss of small dairy farms in his region,
Emmick’s also watched farms with alternative grass based systems survive. He says
that’s hopeful.

“Twenty-five years ago, we’d pretty much gotten away from this. But today,
farmers putting cows on pasture. Finally, we have that on the radar screen. And if
I have a success story to share, that’d be it.”

Those small family farmers have realized the conventional wisdom pushed by the
agricultural industry might hurt more than help them. And people like Pickard and
Emmick want to help those farmers to learn from each other. They hope it means more
farms will survive being taken-over by corporate farming.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

A New Approach to Dairy Farming

  • At Hawthorne Valley Farm, calves are raised with their mothers - unlike other dairy farms (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

Some cutting edge farmers are stepping
away from concentrating on only production of
meat and milk on their farms. They’re starting
to focus on ways to give their animals healthy,
long lives. And they’re finding more benefits
than they ever imagined. Kinna Ohman reports:

Transcript

Some cutting edge farmers are stepping
away from concentrating on only production of
meat and milk on their farms. They’re starting
to focus on ways to give their animals healthy,
long lives. And they’re finding more benefits
than they ever imagined. Kinna Ohman reports:

The idea of dairy cows grazing out in a pasture is rare – even though advertisers use this
scene all the time to sell us cheese and milk.

The reality is, most dairy cows spend their lives inside big sheds. They’re pushed to produce a lot of milk. And
they often die a premature death.

(cows mooing)

So there’s something relaxing about a farm like Hawthorne Valley. Maybe it’s just
knowing places like these still exist.

The farm’s surrounded by the rolling hills of New York’s Hudson Valley. There’s a big
red barn. Cows graze out in green pastures. And this year? You’ll even see some little
calves hanging out with their mothers.

Steffen Schneider’s grinning because of those little calves. He’s the dairy farm manager
at Hawthorne Valley. He’s standing at a pasture fence. And he can’t take his eyes off the scene
in front of him.

“It’s a great sight to see a little herd of calves galloping like little kids right through
the herd and the mother looking, being very proud of their ones. This mother right
here we’re looking at Patricia, she has her eye exactly on her own baby there,
Pepper, he’s one of those guys lying right there. Yeah, it’s wonderful.”

Schneider started letting his cows bring up their calves around a year ago. But that’s
really rare in the dairy industry.

At most farms, they take calves away from their mothers within a day of being born.
That’s because farmers want to keep their cows in milk production. They don’t want to waste that
milk on the calves. That push for high milk production does take a toll on dairy cows.

Kent Anderson’s a veterinarian who works on these types of farms. He says he
understand the business needs of farmers. But he says its difficult seeing cows pushed so
hard.

“But one thing that distresses me a bit is that a normal bovine should have five, ten,
twelve, productive years. But as agriculture changes, the average dairy cow makes it
two and a half lactations, which means, she’s not even 5 years old, and she’s gone.”

Many farmers think that’s the best way to run their dairy farms.

But Steffen Schneider says he wants to balance business with the natural needs of his
animals. And letting his cows raise their calves is just one more step. He says the cows
are less stressed. And they’re seeing some great changes in the calves.

“Within a few weeks, it was amazing to watch how healthy those calves were, how
quickly they grew. They were like different animals than we were used to seeing in
our pens. And so much more awake in their senses, so much stronger limbs. Just
much more vibrant animals.”

Schneider wonders how these improvements will help the calves as they become adults.
And even how it could help the quality of their milk. But more than anything else, he just
seems amazed it took him twenty five years to take this step.

“It’s really crazy that through just greed we don’t just expose those calves to their
mothers. And think we need every single last drop of milk – forgetting the only
reason the milk even comes in is because the cow gives birth. I’m really very happy
I finally, we finally, did it.”

Only a small group of dairy farmers are letting their cows bring up their young. But they hope to show other farmers and consumers there is a way to combine business with a more natural life for their animals.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Big Plans for Big Livestock Farm

  • Bion's proposed project would consist of 84,000 beef cattle (Photo by Bill Tarpenning, courtesy of the USDA)

Corporations are taking a new approach to farming. They’re combining ethanol production with feeding animals. The corporations need land, water, and a willing community. They turn to economically depressed rural communities and promise jobs. But some researchers think these rural communities could end up with more problems than benefits. Kinna Ohman reports:

Transcript

Corporations are taking a new approach to farming. They’re combining ethanol production with feeding animals. The corporations need land, water, and a willing community. They turn to economically depressed rural communities and promise jobs.But some researchers think these rural communities could end up with more problems than benefits. Kinna Ohman reports:

Bion Environmental Technologies is just like a lot of big businesses trying to capitalize on the ethanol trend.

Over the past year, people from Bion have been working with local officials in St. Lawrence County, a rural area of northern New York. Bion plans to build their first project there. It’ll be a huge indoor feedlot for eighty four thousand beef cattle and a large corn ethanol plant.

They have everything accounted for – they’ll ship cattle and corn in from the Midwest. They’ll use distiller’s grain from the ethanol plant to help feed the cattle. And they’ll even use manure from the cattle to power the ethanol plant.

Jeff Kappell is a manager with Bion. He says this kind of scale and integration is the future of agriculture. And he thinks it’ll be great for the community,

“Establishing a brand and establishing the ability, the knowledge in a consumer marketplace that there is value associated with activity in St. Lawrence County is a tide that can rise all boats. So we see this as symbiotic.”

But not everyone agrees. They wonder how much water the project will need. And they wonder about pollution from all those cattle.

Shane Rogers knows a lot about pollution from factory farms. He’s a professor of environmental engineering at Clarkson University in St. Lawrence County. He tests for certain pollutants in the water and soil around factory farms. Rogers often finds antibiotic resistant E-Coli and other pathogens. He says that type of discharge can happen every day – even at the best run facilities.

”And these are from operations with good practices. Or what we would call good practice because they’re following nutrient management plans. Because they’re treating their manures the way they’re supposed to be before applying them to land. Because they’re collecting and doing things the way they’re supposed to be. But they still can contribute pathogens to the environment and those pathogens still affect us.”

Rogers says factory farms don’t need to remove these pollutants. But people at Bion say their system will remove a lot of them.

James Morris is one of their engineers. He says they’re motivated to keep environmental impacts low,

“A facility of this sort wants to have the minimum possible environmental liability. Because that lowers the risk and raises the probability of profits. And we’re in the business to make money.

But researchers are still unconvinced. And some think there are better ways to provide meat and dairy products for the country.

Doug Gurian-Sherman’s with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He’s the lead author of a new report critical of large factory farms. He says small and medium sized farms can provide what people need without the risks to those in rural communities.

“When you spread these animals out, and you have smaller operations you have benefits to rural communities in terms of not as many problems with the pathogens, or the odors or the nutrient problems. What we’re talking about are sophisticated, smart alternatives that work with nature rather than against it.”

But Bion insists their large integrated project will work. And they expect to receive millions in taxpayer subsidies to help make it work. It’s unclear what the costs will be to the community. In the meantime, the trend continues. Bion plans to build at least five more of these projects throughout the country.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Bigger Not Always Better

  • The Hill's cows getting a sip of water while waiting for milking (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

In many areas of the country, small farms
are now the exception, not the norm. Farming,
especially with livestock, can mean thousands and
thousands of animals, and often distant, corporate
ownership. Even the smallest farms are pressured
to get bigger. So when a family decides to make
their farm smaller, they’re rebels. Kinna Ohman
reports:

Transcript

In many areas of the country, small farms
are now the exception, not the norm. Farming,
especially with livestock, can mean thousands and
thousands of animals, and often distant, corporate
ownership. Even the smallest farms are pressured
to get bigger. So when a family decides to make
their farm smaller, they’re rebels. Kinna Ohman
reports:

It’s five o’clock in the evening on the Hill’s dairy farm. Ray Hill just finished cleaning
out the milking equipment and is moving into the barn.

(sound of milking equipment and door)

Cows look around curiously, and afternoon light streams through the windows. Hill
moves comfortably among these cows, calling each of them by name, and cleans their
udders for milking.

(Ray describing the process)

Ray Hill and his wife Stephanie are full time farmers. They milk ten cows, twice a day.
They sell raw milk and yogurt directly from their farm. But getting to this point hasn’t
been easy. To survive, they’ve had to step away from the conventional approach to dairy
farming.

When the Hills got into farming eight years ago, they listened to the advice of farm
experts. They had more than forty cows, a tractor, and were selling their farm’s milk to the
regional processors.

But within a couple of years, they were deep in debt. Hill says the experts told him to get
more cows. He says he couldn’t see how that would help.

“Financially it just didn’t work. There wasn’t money to hire help. I had a couple of
kids and my wife and we were all running ragged and it just wasn’t fun. And there
were many days where I threatened to sell every cow in the barn.”

It’s common for farm experts and even bankers to push family farmers like the Hills to
‘get big or get out.’ Darrell Emmick’s with the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
He says he’s seen regions lose more than fifty percent of their dairy farms when using
this conventional standard.

“Getting bigger or get out really didn’t help a lot of the farmers. They got bigger
and they still went out of business.”

For a farm to get bigger, farmers confine hundreds or even thousands of dairy cows inside
large barns. That means farmers spend a lot of money and time bringing food to their
animals and hauling manure away.

Darrell Emmick says that model of agriculture started
in the 1940s when fuel was pretty cheap. But these days, it makes good economic sense
for farmers to go back to letting their milk cows out of the big barns to eat grass.

“Nothing can harvest a ton of feed any cheaper than the cow or the sheep or the
horse can by itself. Bringing food to animals is something I think we’re going to see a lot
less of, especially here and now with fuel prices going over four dollars a gallon.”

The Hill’s have made that switch on their farm. Ray Hill says his cows are healthier. He
believes their milk is better quality, too. And he’s excited about providing healthy
food for his community. Ray Hill says he wants their farm to be a place where people
come to buy quality food, and definately let him know if they have concerns.

“I want to have control over how I take care of my animals. I want to have control
over how I process or don’t process my milk. I want to have control over the price,
the quality. If there’s a quality issue, it’s up to me to take care of it, not say ‘let me
call so and so.’ I don’t think you can find anyone who’d that would tell you I’d
rather talk to a corporate person than the person who produced my food.”

But bucking against the system is not easy. There are days when no one comes to their
farm to buy their milk or yogurt. The Hills know they’re taking a risk. But they feel, at
least they’re not at the mercy of the industry, the banks and the whims of the market.

And for now, that’s worth it.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Holistic Medicine for Pets

  • Many holistic veterinarians think both dogs and cats can benefit from being fed fresh food. (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

Veterinarians who use a holistic approach to healing make up only about one percent of
all veterinarians in the country. But their numbers are growing. And so is their
popularity among pet owners. The mainstream veterinary community wants to see more
science behind the methods used by holistic veterinarians. Kinna Ohman
reports:

Transcript

Veterinarians who use a holistic approach to healing make up only about one percent of
all veterinarians in the country. But their numbers are growing. And so is their
popularity among pet owners. The mainstream veterinary community wants to see more
science behind the methods used by holistic veterinarians. Kinna Ohman
reports:


The snow’s starting to fall as I arrive at a small, yellow farmhouse. I hurry my dogs up to
the front door and step inside.


(Sound of dogs)


This is the veterinary clinic of Dr. Konrad Kruesi. He’s a holistic veterinarian with a
different approach to animal healthcare. One thing Dr. Kruesi does is to take a lot of time
teaching clients how to help heal their animals. He says it’s hard work but most clients
embrace the idea:


“Nine out of ten of them do a wonderful job. They do make food, they learn
massage, they learn to stretch their animal, they’ll buy air filters for the allergic
individual. They see that healing is a progression.”


Pet owners who switch to holistic veterinarians such as Kruesi swear by this approach,
and Neil and Joannie Alcorn are perfect examples. They found Dr. Kruesi after the local
veterinarians said they’d run out of options to help their dog Poppy. Poppy developed
complications after picking up a rare parasite, and the veterinarians tried everything from
exploratory surgery to steroids. Neil Alcorn says after ten months of this, they told him
to prepare for his dog’s death:


“The vets were now basically saying you should get prepared for the fact Poppy’s
not going to last much longer. And they didn’t have anything else to offer.”


But the Alcorns decided to keep trying. They researched holistic veterinarians and came
across the name of Konrad Kruesi. Right away, Dr. Kruesi says he taught the Alcorns
how to prepare fresh, homemade food for their dog. They started with a simple puree of
natural foods and offered it to Poppy. Within a few days, their dog was showing more
interest in food for the first time in months. Dr. Kruesi then added natural supplements to
help build up Poppy’s strength. Neil Alcorn says the good results continued:


“It was so remarkable. Within between two to three months, she had been weaned
off of every single medication, including the steroids, and was beginning to function
again as a living being.”


Veterinarians such as Kruesi say this kind of care shows how a natural and holistic
approach should be part of standard veterinary treatment, but there’s no policy within the
mainstream veterinary community to link clients such as the Alcorns with holistic
veterinarians.


Dr. Craig Smith is with the American Veterinary Medical Association. He says most vets
are cautious about fully supporting holistic veterinary medicine until they see more
science:


“Unfortunately, for too many of the complementary and alternative veterinary
medical therapies, including some of the nutritional recommendations, we don’t
have the science. I’m not saying it doesn’t work, it obviously does work for some
animals. The question is how can you, as a practicing veterinarian, develop your
level of confidence to say this is going to work for your dog.”


So the larger community of veterinarians is reluctant to endorse holistic medicine as part
of standard animal care, but this doesn’t stop pet owners such as the Alcorn from
continuing to use the holistic methods for their animals. They’re much more involved in
their animals’ healthcare, from preparing meals to being part of decision making at the
local veterinary office. Neil Alcorn says they don’t need to go further than Poppy for
proof it works. She’s still going strong six years after the local veterinarians gave up on
her:


“She was sixteen years old this last September. This weekend I took her hiking for
several two to three mile hikes. And she still plays with us. She’s gray, she’s
showing her age but then so are we all. And we have every hope of sending birthday
congratulations to Dr. Kruesi on Poppy’s seventeenth birthday next September.
(laughs) Even to us, it’s a bit of an amazing story.”


For the Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Wolf Hunting Hurts Wolf Packs

  • The gray wolf is slated to be removed from the Endangered Species List. Many are worried this will have a negative impact on wolf packs. (Photo courtesy of Wisconsin Fish and Wildlife Service)

This year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to officially remove the northern
Rockies gray wolf from the federal Endangered Species List. The agency will hand over
management of the wolves to states in the region. The states will allow hunters and
ranchers to kill wolves during specific seasons, or even year-round. But scientists and
conservationists are concerned about the hunting plans. Kinna Ohman reports some
conservationists think hunting could disrupt the way a wolf pack works, and even lead
members to seek out easier prey such as livestock:

Transcript

This year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to officially remove the northern
Rockies gray wolf from the federal Endangered Species List. The agency will hand over
management of the wolves to states in the region. The states will allow hunters and
ranchers to kill wolves during specific seasons, or even year-round. But scientists and
conservationists are concerned about the hunting plans. Kinna Ohman reports some
conservationists think hunting could disrupt the way a wolf pack works, and even lead
members to seek out easier prey such as livestock:


Biologists in Yellowstone National Park have had an unprecedented opportunity to study
wolves over the last twelve years. They’ve looked at everything from what wolves prefer
to eat, to why wolves kill big prey such as bison. But one topic they haven’t studied
much is how a typical wolf pack works.


Doug Smith is a biologist with Yellowstone’s wolf recovery program. He says they now
understand healthy wolf packs need lots of older, skilled members in order to hunt natural
prey:


“They’re very good at it. They have a lot of teamwork. They switch back and forth
about whose doing what job.”


In fact, studies have shown it takes 3-4 skilled adults to kill an elk. It takes more wolves
to kill a bison. Packs in Yellowstone are naturally filled with large numbers of adults.
But in places where wolves are hunted by humans, skilled adults are in short supply.


Smith says a lack of skilled wolves in a pack could mean they’d be more likely to go after
easier prey including livestock:


“If they don’t have that experienced age structure in the pack, they make do, and so
you will have probably inexperienced killers out there and inexperienced killers are gonna
look for easier prey. The elders of the pack, if there are only 2 or 3 of you,
are much more likely going to go after a sheep or cow than if there’s 7 or 8 of you.”


These concerns could become real when the gray wolf is taken off the Endangered
Species list in the northern Rockies. The states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming will
take over management. Suzanne Stone with the Defenders of Wildlife in Idaho says
hundreds of wolves could be killed as part of state management plans:


“They’re talking about killing now about 500 to 600 wolves after delisting. You
don’t manage any population of wildlife like that. The delisting plan, as it’s written
right now, is just a recipe for failure.”


Stone says the gray wolves were protected to build healthy populations, and how a wolf
pack works should be part of that consideration.


But the government is focused on how sport hunting effects just wolf numbers. Ed Bangs
is the wolf recovery coordinator with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He says that
hunting won’t threaten the wolves:


“One thing that does happen everywhere in the world that wolves and people
overlap is that people kill wolves. And the answer is yes, that does have an effect on
wolf pack structure. And it certainly never endangered wolf populations.”


So it’s hard for conservationists to convince officials that the sport hunting of wolves
could change how wolf packs work and even lead to more livestock conflicts. Biologist
Doug Smith says that’s because the decision to delist the wolves is based purely on
numbers:


“Delisting is entirely numbers. Some conservation biologists have made the
argument that delisting should not occur until the endangered species is integrated
back within the ecosystem and functioning as a member as that ecosystem. That is
not how delisting occurs now for the Fish and Wildlife Service. It’s ‘do we have
enough?'”


Many conservationists and activists will soon be arguing that killing 500 to 600 wolves
leave too few. They’ll likely file lawsuits, stressing that the importance of healthy wolf
packs should be considered before hunting is allowed.


Ed Bangs with the Fish and Wildlife Service says he’s confident the agency has followed
the law. He says they’ll meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act by
delisting the wolves and handing management over to the states:


“My deal with the Fish and Wildlife Service is: What is the purpose of the act as it’s
currently written by Congress, have we met those conditions for wolves, and the
answer is clearly yes and therefore we’re supposed to delist them. If people want the
act to say something different, they need to talk to their elected officials, not the Fish
and Wildlife Service.”


But the wolf’s defenders will argue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as well as the
states need to understand how the wolf packs work before declaring open season on the
wolf.


For the Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links

Wolves Make Mark on Yellowstone

  • The wolves in Kinna Ohman's report as seen through a spotting scope. Wolves have helped strengthen several species of plants and animals in Yellowstone National Park. (Photo by Marlene Foard)

Scientists are surprised by the changes one animal can make in America’s first national park.
Since the wolf returned to Yellowstone, the predator’s had wide-ranging and unexpected effects
on the ecosystem of the park. As Kinna Ohman reports, top predators such as wolves might be
more necessary than previously realized:

Transcript

Scientists are surprised by the changes one animal can make in America’s first national park.
Since the wolf returned to Yellowstone, the predator’s had wide-ranging and unexpected effects
on the ecosystem of the park. As Kinna Ohman reports, top predators such as wolves might be
more necessary than previously realized:


Yellowstone National Park holds many wonders, but few things capture a visitor’s imagination
like the wolf:


“Whoa, I can see their eyes.”


Marlene Foard lets me peek through her scope and see members of the Slough Creek wolf pack
tearing into a recent kill. As we watch, we hear another group of wolves howling in the distance:


“Did you hear ’em? Yeah, did you hear that? Oh my God…”


(Sound of wolves howling)


Visitors are not the only ones fascinated by the wolves. Lately, scientists have been caught up in
the excitement too. Not just by the wolves, but how the wolves are changing Yellowstone.


(Sound of creek)


It’s a cold yet sunny day in the park. I’ve met up with Doug Smith, the project leader of
the park’s wolf recovery program. But we’re not going to look for wolves today. We’re about to
see how wolves are changing the landscape:


(Sound of footsteps)


“This is Blacktail Deer Creek that we’re walking up on. And it’s surrounded by willows.
And these willows about ten years ago were not growing as luxuriantly as they are right
now.”


This new willow growth happened after the wolves’ reintroduction to Yellowstone, and many
scientists are making a connection. Willow can be a food for elk especially in the winter, but
since the wolves have returned, elk would rather be on hillsides and open areas where they can
see wolves coming. And once they leave the river valleys behind, plants like the willow are
recovering.


The willow’s recovery is important because it helps other wildlife. Beaver eat willow and use it
for building dams. And ponds created by beavers are great habitat for endangered birds, like the
warbler. Doug Smith says the fact this could be caused by wolves caught everyone by surprise:


“Nobody thought of this. I was around at the beginning. There were many studies done
looking at what the impacts of wolves would be. And I can’t remember reading about this
at all.”


And it goes beyond the willow. Bill Ripple is a professor of Ecology at Oregon State University.
He came to Yellowstone in 1997 to study why aspen trees were declining. Ripple wasn’t thinking
wolves, but one day, when studying tree ring data, he saw the aspens’ problems began just when
the last wolves were killed off in Yellowstone. He was equally surprised:


“I didn’t see anything in the record. It wasn’t on my radar to see how wolves may be
affecting aspen trees. That was not even considered at all. And all of a sudden, it appears
that this one animal can have this profound effect on the entire ecosystem.”


And this got Ripple thinking about the top predators a little differently. He says these effects
might even extend to other animals:


“I think that this effect of predators would probably go well beyond just cougars or wolves.
You know everything from black bears to grizzly bears to lynx to wolverines. They may all
play important roles that we don’t even know about at this point.”


Not everyone thinks predators are needed for ecosystems to thrive. There are hunters who
consider wolves unnecessary and even competition for animals such as deer and elk, but Doug
Smith says it’s important to realize the contribution of wolves goes beyond what hunters can do.
Willow and aspen re-growth depends on wolves changing elk behavior. And this has to happen
year round:


“Human hunters, well known this fact, and I’m a hunter and I know this, prey behavior
changes during the hunting season, and before and after they go back to doing what they
want. Having a carnivore on the landscape changes prey behavior year round. A totally
different presence than human hunting.”


But there’s a caveat. Smith says there has to be a certain number of wolves on the landscape for
these changes to occur. And the number might be more than humans are willing to tolerate:


“You know, just having wolves on the landscape does not do it. And that’s a very, very
important point because some people are using wolves to argue that we’re going to get this
ecosystem restoration, this ecosystem recovery. But they need to be at a certain minimum
density. And that might be in some places at densities that are too high for humans to
socially tolerate.”


So, ultimately, ecological recovery could depend on humans, not the wolves. Human tolerance
needs to be high enough to allow top predators like the wolf to return to ecosystems, otherwise,
full recovery might never happen.


For the Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links