Download (PDF 143 KB): https://research.fs.usda.gov/download/treesearch/21928.pdf
Abstract
This paper examines the arguments employed in the debate over reintroduction of wolves into Idaho, Montana, and the Yellowstone National Park Ecosystem; and in Arizona and New Mexico. The study reviews common rhetorical themes used by advocates and opponents of wolf reintroduction and identifies a significant rhetorical shift in the debate. Advocates opposed to wolf reintroduction have turned to scientific appeals in their efforts to shift public opinion; on the other hand, proponents of reintroduction increasingly use aesthetic arguments and personal narratives in their public discourse.
Parent Publication
Keywords
wilderness,
endangered species,
Canis lupus,
wolf reintroduction,
politics,
conflict,
attitudes,
public opinion,
policy,
Yellowstone National Park,
Idaho,
Montana,
Arizona,
New Mexico
Citation
Hardy-Short, Dayle C.; Short, C. Brant. 2000. Science, economics, and rhetoric: environmental advocacy and the wolf reintroduction debate, 1987-1999. In: McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N.; Borrie, William T.; O’Loughlin, Jennifer, comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of change conference—Volume 2: Wilderness within the context of larger systems; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL-2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 65-72
