man vs nature

Donald Trump is proposing to delist grey wolves from the Endangered Species Act.

This wild animal's federal protection is under threat, and not for the first (or last) time.

I'm following this story because grey wolves are totemic to my business and its values, and because I am genuinely intrigued by the battle of man vs nature, wild vs tame and domesticity vs instinct. The particular line at which this battle plays out is where American farmers' livestock meets apex predator; and Trump's rationale is that farmers should be allowed to kill wolves to protect their livestock.

Right now, there is a 90 day investigation underway to assess whether the wolf population has recovered enough in the last few decades to be unaffected by the proposed delisting.

Environmental groups are pushing back, stating that livestock loss due to wolves is negligible and even decreasing. So seemingly the data doesn't support the fear. Something else is at play here, and it's a conflict that has been going on for a very, very long time.

Long before this order, wolves were hunted to near-extinction across America. Bounty offerings and poisoning programs nearly wiped them off the map by the 1940s. Their addition to the endangered species list in 1967 slowly started bringing them back from the brink of extinction; and they have been threatened to be removed multiple times, including now again. 

I acknowledge that on the lands where this showdown happens between animal and man, it is deeply inconvenient, scary and risky for the families, and of course the cattle.  But if you're still here reading - let me ask you: If it were you living with one foot in the modern world, and one foot bordering wild territories, what would you be advocating for? Your freedoms, or theirs? Is it binary?  One or the other? Can you advocate for both? Do you even want to?

And the reason these questions are so interesting to me, is because whether we acknowledge it or not, the connection between land and our bodies is ancient and strong. And fighting for the preservation of wildness at a borderline, is not altogether different from fighting for the wildness of our spirits. 

So when it comes to your own wild instinct… your “fangs and your fur", your own craving for wide open spaces and sunsets and silence and naked intimacy… Have you found a way for that to coexist alongside your cultural adaptations and societal should's and shouldn’ts?  Or do you kill, cage or exile your wildness completely?

Are you a trump-like tyrant to the unruly parts of yourself that thirst for proverbial blood? Or are you engaged in the far more complex, tender and soulful work of weaving a relationship between parts with opposing desires?  There is energy in this tension, life-affirming energy.

There is charge, life-force and eros in what is wild and untamed. If we don't give it a space to feed and nourish our lives, we are at risk of becoming brittle and sterile; and at worst - fearful of the very forces that animate a rich and fulfilling life. I don't think it's supposed to be clean, neat, or easy - what happens at this border of wild vs tame. I think we are supposed to see that the battle that plays out in front of our eyes is the same one asking for attention in the inner territories of our being.