Łukasz Smyrski conducts research at the intersection of anthropology and history. His studies are focused on the spatial dimension of human-animal relationships analized in the context of modernist concepts that address the interplays between animals, society, and the nation-state.

Under what conditions do wild animals cease to be “in their place”? How do human actions towards these animals are influenced when they inhabit spaces not designated for their presence?

The research is situated within the posthumanist anthropology:

In this perspective, to leave non-humans outside the scope of anthropological interest is impossible, and concentrating discussions on humans alone raises ethical concerns” (Halemba 2022).

The mentioned author considers as particularly challenging the need to transform the ethnographic description into one:

where the agency is distributed among dynamic networks encompassing both humans and non-humans “ (Halemba 2022).

The above statement has served as a source of inspiration for narrating the story of the bison named “Pulpit” from the second half of the 1960s,  originating from the state bison breeding program in the Stuposiany forest district within the Bieszczady Mountains.

Pulpit stood out among other representatives of its species due to a distinct lifestyle. He enjoyed solitary, long journeys. Unlike the other bison that stayed within the confines of their enclosure and avoided venturing beyond the forest, Pulpit embarked on independent journeys, covering extensive territories in Podkarpacie and Małopolska. Pulpit’s roaming was clearly in conflict with the concepts of nature conservation and wildlife management established based on human parameters. The bison was not part of the implemented protective and breeding project, but rather its antithesis. Instead of abiding within the designated space, adhering to a predetermined feeding regimen, and undergoing veterinary supervision, Pulpit posed numerous challenges for the foresters. Through his undisciplined behavior, defying expectations outlined in statutes and breeding regulations, he forged a different set of rules for interacting with humans. He could not be confined within the rigid boundaries of the reserve – his caretakers, instead of overseeing it in a fixed location, had to constantly trail behind him as he moved.

Pulpit broke away from the state-driven constructivism and the top-down model of natural resource management. He wasn’t an animal that found himself at home in the depths of the forest; he preferred a lifestyle close to humans – he was closer to being a cow than a bison. He didn’t fit into the myth of the wild Bieszczady nature. From the perspective of forestry services in Poland, the wandering bison, moving alone through fields and meadows, was treated as an anomaly in the designed world of nature, where humans clearly planned where animals should be and how they should behave. However, if we weaken the anthropocentric perspective and place the Pulpit within a network of symmetrical relations among different forms of life, it turns out that specific forms of inter-species relationships cannot be imposed on the animal. Their wildness is created in a given time and place.

The story of this animal illustrates how complex the interactions between humans and non-humans can be, how relations and networks of mutual dependencies are formed, and how external classifications impose schematic and petrifying optics, depriving animals of the ability to shape and participate in networks of social relationships.