amina- wildlife conservationist
Endangered Wolf Center, St. Louis, MO. 2025
Why wolves? What got you into this work?
The Yellowstone story was one we all knew about as kids–the way the landscape recovered around them when they were rereleased into the park–the way the park healed itself. I always loved animals as a kid. I loved Jane Goodall. I zeroed in on wolves eventually because of their controversial nature. Not because I wanted to fight people but because I related to them. I grew up at a lot of intersections both racial and political–with both sides of the family on different sides of the spectrum. They were so different from each other they started to look like each other; a political horseshoe if you will.
When I was growing up I was raised in the Unitarian Universalist church (I’m no longer religious I don’t identify as UU anymore) but it did get me thinking about activism as it is a very social-justice minded organization. It can be performative, as the UU is very white, but it did help me realize that many of the challenges in our world intersect. My major in undergrad was Afrikaans studies–specifically race relations and African diaspora. We talked about difficult things like police brutality. I’m from a police family as well, as my uncle is an officer of color, which is a dicey position to be in. The structure of these systems can be very corrupt. I did my final project on that, and began to realize that in all my studies and everything I’d been steeped in there was no black and white but always a rough gray. There was always an intersection– always a way to tease out a more complicated picture than our feelings tell us there is. I realized my biggest passion was animals but that my second was people. I wanted to talk to people about animals.
With wolves, people often have an emotional gut reaction. “No, I hate this animal. It’s going to kill all my cattle.” My job is to find where those gray areas are for them and for us as conservationists too. Neither side has the full picture. I’m just one person. I can't sing Kumbaya to anyone. We all only have our own capacity, either personally as employees or as an organization. I can try to find the intersections, however, between people or organizations that may not see eye to eye.
How do you make peace when you don’t see the progress you hope to see? How do you keep going and avoid burnout in conservation?
Lots of ranting! I feel my feelings and I get angry and then I cry. After that I pick myself up and find another angle. Then you do that emotional rollercoaster again. Prior to wolf conservation I worked at a dog rescue, which is another field where many get burnt out. It’s always about the small wins. You may not be able to end dog fighting culture, or change the way some people will treat their animals, but you can hope for incremental change and focus on that one dog’s safety. Do they have worms? We can fix that. Do they have anxiety? We can help with that.
I’m not a savior, I'm just a person. We’re all just people and none of us have much individual power. Together we have a little more.
Can you speak to the negative perceptions of wolves, particularly in Western folklore?
I’m not native, so I don’t have a cultural claim to wolves. I’ve noticed how tightly the people of the West cling to whatever they feel their culture is– whether it be a new culture (100-200) years old, or an old one. This can create a deep protectiveness against anything new. People fear that change will create loss. This mentality causes people to dig in their heels against conservation efforts. My minor was in environmental science policy. In the U.S. much of our environmental perspectives are based on colonial ideas. Many resources were destroyed systematically during colonialism. For example, Colonel Dodge once said that “Every buffalo dead is an Indian gone.” The removal of resources and animals was a way to remove people and culture. The extermination of the American bison had a massive impact on wolves. There were also direct bounties placed on wolves as a way to break down cultures where wolves were central.
I’m in no way saying that any contemporary rancher goes after a wolf thinking, “I hate natives or their culture” but their great grandfather may have settled on stolen land or inherited it from the government. The unconscious bias that is created in that moment gets passed down. That modern day rancher may not be actively racist, but systemic and generational racism may still play a role in how they feel about wolves or public land usage.
Here in America, we occupy land that isn’t ours and so much of our culture is based on the colonialism we come from. It’s difficult for people to divorce their sense of identity from a settler/colonialist mindset. It’s everything they’ve known, and to move out of an ownership mindset creates grieving. You can’t force someone into that. I think of the phrase, “hurt people hurt people.” When a society is started in survival mode, a whole culture can be born out of survival mode.
What has been the most helpful in changing perceptions of these animals and the land they occupy?
Personal relationships. For example, being half white and half brown, I know that if someone isn’t conditioned to see your humanity their emotional response will cause them to reject what you have to say. If you approach someone with your ideas first, you are dependent on whatever those instinctive reactions are. If you become their friend first they are more open because they are invested in you beyond the issue itself. Many farmers and ranchers I’ve done tours with work that way. A lot of people have biases they are unaware of.
Sitting down and having a beer or putting in a day of work on their ranch can do more than anything else. Caring about what someone else cares about makes them more likely to care about you. That’s when you can propose a change. That’s the moment to tell them not to shoot the wolf next time it comes on their land.
Science doesn’t mean shit to most people. I can list facts and figures about wolves, and it won’t matter. I clearly have my own political views, but it works both ways. I have to listen. The wolf may have taken two cows out of two thousand but for them that’s a real loss. Empathy has to move both ways or I’m manipulating them. Whether their perspective is scientific or emotional, it still matters.
Over and over it’s become clear. In Idaho, Yellowstone, North Carolina, and New Mexico –where we’ve done major wolf re-releases in recent years– maintaining personal relationships with the public and ranchers has been critical. If we rest on our laurels or stop investing in those connections the hatred of wolves will come back with a vengeance.
In Idaho in the 1990s, they re-released wolves in Yellowstone. The Nez Perce managed the effort, which initially flourished. Unfortunately the government decided to stop funding the tribe's efforts and turned responsibility over to the state itself. Now, you can hunt wolves in Idaho 365 days a year. The hatred of wolves is worse than 20 years ago because the wolves are no longer a community effort.
Tell me about the Preserve and its goals.
The Endangered Wolf Center focuses on two main species: the American Red Wolf and the Mexican Gray Wolf (the smallest subspecies of gray wolf from what is now Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico). At the center we keep wolves in habitats with their packs. Preserving their family structures is critical so that pairs can continue parenting after their release and pups can learn proper behavior. Pairs are based on the most genetically diverse match as these are very small populations. When we started off there were 14 red wolves and 7 Mexicans left.
We do two modes of release working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and any local state agencies and native nations. Native nations are often more willing to greenlight re-releases. The first type is an “adult release” which is either a breeding pair or an entire pack. They are put in a pre-release pen where they are observed for normal hunting behaviors. Carcasses are provided at first then scaled back. If it’s determined that they are self-sufficient the gate is opened and the wolves move out on their own. It’s called “soft release” as the wolves are permitted to return as needed for food. Only naturally occurring prey like deer, and occasional kibble are provided but never livestock.
The second type of release is called pup fostering. If pups at the center are born within the week of a wild litter, we partner with White Hawk who fly our puppies out and place them among the wild litter. When the mother returns she will often adopt the pups into the rest. Wolves are great at cross fostering and cross adopting.
What is your favorite part of your work?
Animal care! It’s a nice break from all the controversy to do diet prep and learn about the nutritional needs of both species. I also love captures. Wolves are amazing. They are animals, not great or terrible like some believe. They are neutral– so wonderful at times and not so wonderful at times. The point is not to demonize what we don’t understand.
What have wolves taught you?
Controversial take, but it’s made me a better dog owner. Alpha theory is false. Domestic dog hierarchies are more akin to sibling rivalry. Wolves hierarchies are based on parent-child relationships.
What do you most want people to know about your work?
It matters so much that our communities understand the concept of non-lethal control. You can protect your livestock without harming the wolf. You can tie flags around fences to repel them or get a livestock guardian animal. Range riding is also important as human presence is one of the most powerful natural deterrents to wolves. These are more traditional methods that work well for small operations. For large ranches, these techniques become too difficult to fairly encourage.
We have a partnership with an organization called Working Circle who develops cattle behavior. Western methods of cattle farming and ranching are often hard on the environment although regenerative methods are becoming more popular. Traditional methods are more practical and less focused on animal behavior. Cattle, similar to most herd animals, stick together if they perceive a threat. Ranching uses these same instincts to drive cattle based on their fear response. As a result, cattle are more likely to scatter in the face of a real threat making it easier for them to be picked off by a predator. Wolves go after the sick and the weak and are only successful 10-20% of the time. In a big herd the loss of a few weak animals may even be considered a benefit. For a smaller ranch where every animal counts, it’s a more difficult sacrifice to make.
Working Circle re-trains cattle in low-stress herding. It’s more about leading and building positive associations so that the herds stand their ground instead of scattering. It’s proved pretty effective, as wolves tend to move on from herds that stick together.
Wolves take less than a percent of livestock but the general impact of wolves on herds doesn’t reflect the individual experience of specific ranches. Wolves may leave most ranches alone and take many animals from only one if they are able to hunt easier there. Only one farmer may be fighting the battle, but it creates fear for all of them.
It’s important to remove carcasses and treat sick animals so as to not attract wolves. If livestock or dogs get stuck, wolves are more likely to attack there. Working Circle provides a lot of these services. People have to know their options and care about their options.
Can you touch on what you’ve called the “politics of conservation?”
People, animals, and resources often get caught in the political divide. Non-native conservation is likely to have colonial perspectives. This is true even in our organization. Yellowstone has had a huge success story with wolves, despite the fact that indigenous communities were removed from the land. Most often when indigenous communities are allowed to lead conservation and ecological efforts results improve drastically. Barriers to degrees and formal education are often based on privilege. As a result, so many people with knowledge and ability to lead these efforts don’t have the qualifications or resources. Traditional knowledge is often appropriated by conservationists or not recognized at all. Luckily more and more conservationists are realizing that a degree doesn’t mean we know the best way to handle these efforts.
Why wolves? What got you into this work?
The Yellowstone story was one we all knew about as kids–the way the landscape recovered around them when they were rereleased into the park–the way the park healed itself. I always loved animals as a kid. I loved Jane Goodall. I zeroed in on wolves eventually because of their controversial nature. Not because I wanted to fight people but because I related to them. I grew up at a lot of intersections both racial and political–with both sides of the family on different sides of the spectrum. They were so different from each other they started to look like each other; a political horseshoe if you will.
When I was growing up I was raised in the Unitarian Universalist church (I’m no longer religious I don’t identify as UU anymore) but it did get me thinking about activism as it is a very social-justice minded organization. It can be performative, as the UU is very white, but it did help me realize that many of the challenges in our world intersect. My major in undergrad was Afrikaans studies–specifically race relations and African diaspora. We talked about difficult things like police brutality. I’m from a police family as well, as my uncle is an officer of color, which is a dicey position to be in. The structure of these systems can be very corrupt. I did my final project on that, and began to realize that in all my studies and everything I’d been steeped in there was no black and white but always a rough gray. There was always an intersection– always a way to tease out a more complicated picture than our feelings tell us there is. I realized my biggest passion was animals but that my second was people. I wanted to talk to people about animals.
With wolves, people often have an emotional gut reaction. “No, I hate this animal. It’s going to kill all my cattle.” My job is to find where those gray areas are for them and for us as conservationists too. Neither side has the full picture. I’m just one person. I can't sing Kumbaya to anyone. We all only have our own capacity, either personally as employees or as an organization. I can try to find the intersections, however, between people or organizations that may not see eye to eye.
How do you make peace when you don’t see the progress you hope to see? How do you keep going and avoid burnout in conservation?
Lots of ranting! I feel my feelings and I get angry and then I cry. After that I pick myself up and find another angle. Then you do that emotional rollercoaster again. Prior to wolf conservation I worked at a dog rescue, which is another field where many get burnt out. It’s always about the small wins. You may not be able to end dog fighting culture, or change the way some people will treat their animals, but you can hope for incremental change and focus on that one dog’s safety. Do they have worms? We can fix that. Do they have anxiety? We can help with that.
I’m not a savior, I'm just a person. We’re all just people and none of us have much individual power. Together we have a little more.
Can you speak to the negative perceptions of wolves, particularly in Western folklore?
I’m not native, so I don’t have a cultural claim to wolves. I’ve noticed how tightly the people of the West cling to whatever they feel their culture is– whether it be a new culture (100-200) years old, or an old one. This can create a deep protectiveness against anything new. People fear that change will create loss. This mentality causes people to dig in their heels against conservation efforts. My minor was in environmental science policy. In the U.S. much of our environmental perspectives are based on colonial ideas. Many resources were destroyed systematically during colonialism. For example, Colonel Dodge once said that “Every buffalo dead is an Indian gone.” The removal of resources and animals was a way to remove people and culture. The extermination of the American bison had a massive impact on wolves. There were also direct bounties placed on wolves as a way to break down cultures where wolves were central.
I’m in no way saying that any contemporary rancher goes after a wolf thinking, “I hate natives or their culture” but their great grandfather may have settled on stolen land or inherited it from the government. The unconscious bias that is created in that moment gets passed down. That modern day rancher may not be actively racist, but systemic and generational racism may still play a role in how they feel about wolves or public land usage.
Here in America, we occupy land that isn’t ours and so much of our culture is based on the colonialism we come from. It’s difficult for people to divorce their sense of identity from a settler/colonialist mindset. It’s everything they’ve known, and to move out of an ownership mindset creates grieving. You can’t force someone into that. I think of the phrase, “hurt people hurt people.” When a society is started in survival mode, a whole culture can be born out of survival mode.
What has been the most helpful in changing perceptions of these animals and the land they occupy?
Personal relationships. For example, being half white and half brown, I know that if someone isn’t conditioned to see your humanity their emotional response will cause them to reject what you have to say. If you approach someone with your ideas first, you are dependent on whatever those instinctive reactions are. If you become their friend first they are more open because they are invested in you beyond the issue itself. Many farmers and ranchers I’ve done tours with work that way. A lot of people have biases they are unaware of.
Sitting down and having a beer or putting in a day of work on their ranch can do more than anything else. Caring about what someone else cares about makes them more likely to care about you. That’s when you can propose a change. That’s the moment to tell them not to shoot the wolf next time it comes on their land.
Science doesn’t mean shit to most people. I can list facts and figures about wolves, and it won’t matter. I clearly have my own political views, but it works both ways. I have to listen. The wolf may have taken two cows out of two thousand but for them that’s a real loss. Empathy has to move both ways or I’m manipulating them. Whether their perspective is scientific or emotional, it still matters.
Over and over it’s become clear. In Idaho, Yellowstone, North Carolina, and New Mexico –where we’ve done major wolf re-releases in recent years– maintaining personal relationships with the public and ranchers has been critical. If we rest on our laurels or stop investing in those connections the hatred of wolves will come back with a vengeance.
In Idaho in the 1990s, they re-released wolves in Yellowstone. The Nez Perce managed the effort, which initially flourished. Unfortunately the government decided to stop funding the tribe's efforts and turned responsibility over to the state itself. Now, you can hunt wolves in Idaho 365 days a year. The hatred of wolves is worse than 20 years ago because the wolves are no longer a community effort.
Tell me about the Preserve and its goals.
The Endangered Wolf Center focuses on two main species: the American Red Wolf and the Mexican Gray Wolf (the smallest subspecies of gray wolf from what is now Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico). At the center we keep wolves in habitats with their packs. Preserving their family structures is critical so that pairs can continue parenting after their release and pups can learn proper behavior. Pairs are based on the most genetically diverse match as these are very small populations. When we started off there were 14 red wolves and 7 Mexicans left.
We do two modes of release working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and any local state agencies and native nations. Native nations are often more willing to greenlight re-releases. The first type is an “adult release” which is either a breeding pair or an entire pack. They are put in a pre-release pen where they are observed for normal hunting behaviors. Carcasses are provided at first then scaled back. If it’s determined that they are self-sufficient the gate is opened and the wolves move out on their own. It’s called “soft release” as the wolves are permitted to return as needed for food. Only naturally occurring prey like deer, and occasional kibble are provided but never livestock.
The second type of release is called pup fostering. If pups at the center are born within the week of a wild litter, we partner with White Hawk who fly our puppies out and place them among the wild litter. When the mother returns she will often adopt the pups into the rest. Wolves are great at cross fostering and cross adopting.
What is your favorite part of your work?
Animal care! It’s a nice break from all the controversy to do diet prep and learn about the nutritional needs of both species. I also love captures. Wolves are amazing. They are animals, not great or terrible like some believe. They are neutral– so wonderful at times and not so wonderful at times. The point is not to demonize what we don’t understand.
What have wolves taught you?
Controversial take, but it’s made me a better dog owner. Alpha theory is false. Domestic dog hierarchies are more akin to sibling rivalry. Wolves hierarchies are based on parent-child relationships.
What do you most want people to know about your work?
It matters so much that our communities understand the concept of non-lethal control. You can protect your livestock without harming the wolf. You can tie flags around fences to repel them or get a livestock guardian animal. Range riding is also important as human presence is one of the most powerful natural deterrents to wolves. These are more traditional methods that work well for small operations. For large ranches, these techniques become too difficult to fairly encourage.
We have a partnership with an organization called Working Circle who develops cattle behavior. Western methods of cattle farming and ranching are often hard on the environment although regenerative methods are becoming more popular. Traditional methods are more practical and less focused on animal behavior. Cattle, similar to most herd animals, stick together if they perceive a threat. Ranching uses these same instincts to drive cattle based on their fear response. As a result, cattle are more likely to scatter in the face of a real threat making it easier for them to be picked off by a predator. Wolves go after the sick and the weak and are only successful 10-20% of the time. In a big herd the loss of a few weak animals may even be considered a benefit. For a smaller ranch where every animal counts, it’s a more difficult sacrifice to make.
Working Circle re-trains cattle in low-stress herding. It’s more about leading and building positive associations so that the herds stand their ground instead of scattering. It’s proved pretty effective, as wolves tend to move on from herds that stick together.
Wolves take less than a percent of livestock but the general impact of wolves on herds doesn’t reflect the individual experience of specific ranches. Wolves may leave most ranches alone and take many animals from only one if they are able to hunt easier there. Only one farmer may be fighting the battle, but it creates fear for all of them.
It’s important to remove carcasses and treat sick animals so as to not attract wolves. If livestock or dogs get stuck, wolves are more likely to attack there. Working Circle provides a lot of these services. People have to know their options and care about their options.
Can you touch on what you’ve called the “politics of conservation?”
People, animals, and resources often get caught in the political divide. Non-native conservation is likely to have colonial perspectives. This is true even in our organization. Yellowstone has had a huge success story with wolves, despite the fact that indigenous communities were removed from the land. Most often when indigenous communities are allowed to lead conservation and ecological efforts results improve drastically. Barriers to degrees and formal education are often based on privilege. As a result, so many people with knowledge and ability to lead these efforts don’t have the qualifications or resources. Traditional knowledge is often appropriated by conservationists or not recognized at all. Luckily more and more conservationists are realizing that a degree doesn’t mean we know the best way to handle these efforts.