We recently encountered a story that got us thinking. In a Colorado neighborhood that resembles a rural community, a Lucid Narratives scout had a chance encounter with a local. Now to start, this local has quite a bit of credibility – among other things and in addition to his day job, he mentors youth, is a volunteer Westernaires coach, and hunts for his food. So we got him talking about various things and one thing led to another led to the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone National Park.

So, over the course of about 15 minutes, we learned that it may be possible that the wolves reintroduced in Yellowstone are in the 40-175 pound animals (all facts from the Live Science website), and those that are on the big end of the range are powerful enough to hunt solo, rather than in a pack. These big wolves don’t have natural predators as, according to the locals, even grizzlies will leave them alone. Further, they hunt for fun, not just for food. And, not surprising, they cover large territory, which potentially helps explain why cattle and other ranchers in Wyoming and Montana are having trouble with wolves – they’ve simply multiplied and spread out. They apparently replaced red wolves, which are much smaller (50-80 pounds), and in 2016 were deemed to be extinct.

Now all this may or may not be correct, but it got us thinking. Could it be that the wolves that disappeared were smaller (like the red wolf) and the ones that were restored were the bigger variety? Could this be another example of a species introduced to fill a gap in a cycle of nature, that caused new and perhaps more complex problems than it solved? Does anyone think to consult Native Americans in this type of situation?