From time immemorial, that’s generally been the consensus.
Nevertheless, thoughts on the subject range from this:
‘We reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes. I realized then, and have known ever since, that there was something new to me in those eyes-something known only to her and to the mountain. I was young then, and full of trigger-itch; I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters’ paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view.’
“They’re killing machines, they have no place in the food chain they’re, whatever quotas they set they’re not great enough,” said Montana resident Wayne Leischner.
And everything between.
It’s an intensely complex issue today, where traditional agricultural practices like big-sky-country ranching exist robustly, but are fading nonetheless; and where game management ranges from true subsistence hunting in remote areas of Alaska, to pure trophy cage hunting in pockets of the Midwest. But the question always seems to come down to a moral one: ought ‘we’ as humans eradicate or sharply “control” wolves in the wild? Is there any room for them, anywhere? And further, with the last corners of the world being settled and developed, will there be room for them in some of the few places where they are yet unmolested?
My question is, did God err in creating wolves (or, if you will, any other creature)?
Read me at 20/10 Blog