I'm very much an advocate for the restoration of wilderness now, and am naturally gladdened that the wolves are once again protected so that their populations can not just be shown to be viable in what's left of "the wild" but so that they can continue as the adaptable ranging population they are as they always have been.

I do think, however, that it is important for the environmentally sensitive (and maybe specifically the environmentally over-sensitive) to fully appreciate that there will be times when individual animals and even populations become problematic and that might necessitate occasional takings (the sanitized word for killings) will occur, sanctioned and otherwise, and that provided it represents a growing population, as it has meant for the wolf and a growing number of other once imperilled species, it need not be seen as needless crippling assault on a valued contributing species and an erosion of the wild landscape. Indeed, if practical and reasonable common ground is reached between the resource managers and resource users, it might be possible to see overall wilderness expand and even approach the restoration of the pleistocene inventory and something approaching the pleistocene ecosystem which the North American continent lost most unfortunately so prematurely, possibly due to overhunting though the likelihood of natural catalcysmic ecosystem destruction due to cosmic bollide impact approx 12.9KYA is becomming more and more accepted as the primary cause.

Like nearly all cases of seemingly unresovable squabbling over limited and desired resources, the arguments can nearly all be resolved if a long enough time frame is considered and working solutions which might not be acceptible in short term scenarios are considered. So; a few wolves are shot.It is a loss but were it to be sanctioned so that a large scale re-introduction of the the cheetah, the pronghorn antelopes' evolutionary counterpart, can once again patrol the high western deserts and plains, we would begin to see the true potential that the landscape possesses though long denied and a new vitality for the pronghorn as well. A few grizzlies are taken but if it's a sensible taking then ecological restoration advocates can rightfully claim sensible reason for the restoration of the mammoths' presence in the west where its keystone contributions have been long missed and the role in which it formerly funtioned would be superbly filled by its still extant cousin species, the asian elephant; itself not endangered officially but what large animal requiring large range isn't imperilled by our supposed emminent domaine.

Chinese curses aside, we are indeed living in interesting times and our current understanding of the biological and human historical story is changing before our eyes. The old concepts of wilderness, of human progress, of our own history, is being re-shaped and ideology, whether it adheres to the most dazzling of technological futures or the most basic aspects of instinctive biology, can be a barrier or a guidepost. I hope the path is long and the destination is shared by everyone.

I greatly appreciate GK's wisdom and perspective though on the connection between conservatism and bad behavior, I think it is a case of sliding definitions. I've knows a lot of really wonderful people on both ends of the political spectrum and a few too many of the other kind. There is plenty of room for scoundrels of all type under the big tents of both conservatism and liberalism though those arent the only two ways to place oneself in relationship to any issue. I am against gay marriage for instance but only because I think marriage is a religious function and that gays should be demanding that the government stop recognizing marriage and start recognizing that humans want individual arrangements and it's nobody's business what my genitals look like. So?

It's not just the need to examine a third path automatically, but we'd do better as a nation seeking some kind of dialogue with those who have differing perspectives if we stopped characterizing "them" as somehow inherently different from "us" and as the responsible ones for our society's ills. Really, I'm sure there are liberals in favor of torture if the victim is Karl Rove or some other percieved threat to the pat notions of how the world works that we're so fond of constructing and defending.