COMMENTS (57)

October 29, 2010 by Australian reporter Kirsty Bennett

VIDEOLINK – FOUND ON ORIGINAL ARTICLE http://www.abc.net.au/btn/story/s3045575.htm#  (not able to embed video)

From feature films to fairy tales wolves haven’t got the best reputation.

And they’re not too popular with farmers in some parts of the US either.

For years the wolves were hunted and killed but now they’re protected.

Kirsty checked out why that’s got some farmers pretty angry.

KIRSTY BENNETT, REPORTER: Wolves get a pretty bad rap. They’re either a scary superhero like Wolverine or appear as an evil werewolf character in the movies. In Australia, this is the closest we get to seeing wolves. But over in the US and Canada, these animals have roamed in the wild for a long time.

This is one place wolves can call home. It’s the Wild West in America – a state called Idaho. Thousands of Gray Wolves used to hang around here but by the 1930s most of them were killed by hunters. Almost 70 years later, packs of wolves from Canada were brought back to the area to rebuild the population. Now, around sixteen hundred wolves live here and in two of the neighbouring states. They can’t be hunted either because they’re a protected species. And that doesn’t please some of the locals, who don’t think they belong.

Ron’s family has lived on this range for more than a hundred years. His feeling towards wolves is pretty obvious, he doesn’t like them.

RON GILLETTE: What are these wolves going to eat? We’re in a wildlife disaster right now they’re killing near everything. What are they going to do eat our livestock and then start eating humans?

KIRSTY: Ron would normally be out hunting wolves by now. But the US Federal Court has put the animals back on the protected list, so they can’t be touched for the time being. It’s a frustrating situation for farmers like Luke too. He’s had to lock up his dogs and cattle behind huge fences to protect them.

LUKE MORGAN, RANCHER: Now we spend a lot of nights and days worrying about how many livestock is actually getting killed by them. It’ll put a lot of ranchers out of business, which is hard on the whole economic deal.

KIRSTY: So for some, wolves are public enemy number one. But for others, they’re great mates!

NANCY TAYLOR, “WOLF PEOPLE”: Give mummy a kiss. Give mummy kisses. Good boy!

KIRSTY: Nancy has been breeding wolves in captivity for about seventeen years. And she reckons their bad reputation is unfair.

NANCY TAYLOR: They make him out to be a monster, a snarling evil creature which he isn’t.

KIRSTY: Here, wolves look pretty similar to your pet dog. And they’re not really much different. Many scientists reckon that domestic dogs evolved from wolves. Over tens of thousands of years people have used selective breeding to get dogs for their own use.

So if that’s the case, all dogs, including this little fur-ball are pretty close relatives! Hundreds of years ago, before white people moved in, Idaho was also home to the Nez Perce Indians who feel a strong connection to the wolf. Tribal leaders are joining the battle to protect the animal.

This bloke reckons you can’t sacrifice a species just because it’s convenient. For the time being it sounds like the wolves are a bit safer than they have been in any fairytale.

Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added.

• SIX EM RODICK :

  24 Nov 2010 5:46:49pm

  as Dan said, but HIGHER fences

• 
  

  SWIFTCLAWS :

  24 Nov 2010 10:01:38am

  I seriously hate the way wolves are treated in fairy tales, they have a right to live in this world.

• 
  

  DAN :

  17 Nov 2010 1:28:50pm

  Just put up fences! Simple!

  I like wolves and I think they should continue to be protected.

• 
  

  SHAMISE :

  11 Nov 2010 10:56:50am

  Wolves are awesome like dogs they dont do anything to cattle.

• 
  

  TOP RIDER :

  11 Nov 2010 10:54:57am

  I reckon that wolves shouldn’t be hunted they have a right to live on the world

• 
  

  PITTYGIRL :

  11 Nov 2010 10:54:41am

  I think wolves do nothing to hurt livestock as long as they make secure fences

• 
  

  BOB :

  11 Nov 2010 10:53:38am

  I think that wolves should be kill because they are killing the sheep and cattle

• 
  

  MR PUFFY :

  11 Nov 2010 10:44:28am

  I think that wolves should be protected so at least one animal doesn’t get extinct

• 
  

  PLUTO :

  11 Nov 2010 10:43:00am

  I love wolves
  They should stay in America and be protected. Farmers shouldn’t shoot them.
  Wolves are wicked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• 
  

  CALLUM AND DANIEL :

  11 Nov 2010 10:38:30am

  We both think that Wolves should be killed and be protected

• 
  

  THE FANTASTIC CABBAGE :

  11 Nov 2010 10:36:26am

  The wolves should stay because the Nev Perce Indians feel a strong connection to them and they were they before the white yanks

• 
  

  LARICK97 :

  09 Nov 2010 10:50:19am

  I think they should be protected creatures because they were on land before the white people

• 
  

  EBONY03 :

  09 Nov 2010 10:50:03am

  I think the wolves should be on the protected list because it was their land first .

• 
  

  PETER GRIFFEN :

  09 Nov 2010 10:48:03am

  I think wolves should be controlled not kill them but just stop them breeding as fast but i dont think they should be killed as long as they don’t hassel the farmers to much.

• 
  

  NED :

  09 Nov 2010 10:45:54am

  I think that wolves shouldn’t be able to roam free. People should fence a big bushland area off and put them all in there. Shooting wolves should not be aloud because it is cruel.

• 
  

  KAVISH1100 :

  08 Nov 2010 4:49:31pm

  I like wolves because they are not that dangerous if you want to pet them but if you try to harm them, they will attack back.

• 
  

  JESSIE MACNEY :

  02 Nov 2010 6:39:03pm

  I absolutely agree with all wolf supporters! Wolves should definately have the rights to not be hunted! Imagine if you were a wolf and you got hunted because you were a pest to some silly old farmer. Now that is just plain unfair!!!WOLVES MUST NOT BE HUNTED!!!!

• 
  

  I LOVE ANIMALS :

  02 Nov 2010 5:57:53pm

  Wolves are amazing creatures they don’t deserve to be killed to save livestock.

• 
  

  THE GREAT CABBAGE :

  02 Nov 2010 5:19:47pm

  I thnk that it was a very touching story…. *Sniff* SAVE THE WOLVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• 
  

  THALIA :

  02 Nov 2010 4:16:34pm

  I think wolves should roam free. They can just eat the sick livestock so that the farmers don’t need to spend mutch money on curing them…

• 
  

  THE GREAT CABBAGE :

  02 Nov 2010 3:55:22pm

  I love wolves!!! DO NOT KILL WOLVES!!!

• 
  

  ANIMALS :

  01 Nov 2010 11:51:53pm

  I really think every single wildlife including wolves should be let free from captivity and I think every animal has the right to have freedom and to roam around the place. They can be free to survive and no one is allowed to hurt them. They are really rare now because harmful hunters killed them which is really bad so START SAVING WOLVES AND WILDLIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• 
  

  MEG ,12 :

  01 Nov 2010 9:37:43pm

  Wolves are native animals to the area, it could ruin eco systems to take them away.

  P.S. Wolverine was named after the animal wolverine not the wolf

• 
  

  YOONGY :

  01 Nov 2010 7:29:29pm

  I reckon wolves should be around, have u farmers thought about how much u did to those animals and wolves just to plant trees?! And ITS LIFE part of the food chain – cant they eat wat we grow as well i mean we eat them?

• 
  

  LUV 4 WOLVES :

  01 Nov 2010 7:06:15pm

  These people should be more sensitive. In the end, the wolves, as said, are just dogs. Do we kill dogs because they eat some cattle? No! (well, not domestic dogs) Wolves are wonderful animals. To harm or kill them is absolutely downright horrid and is a horrible crime. Save the wolves! Save the wolves!

  *This comment was from a 10-20 yr old girl who has a great heart for wolves*

• 
  

  CHRISY101 :

  01 Nov 2010 6:56:21pm

  Wolves are just like dogs but not as well trained.

• 
  

  IZZY :

  01 Nov 2010 6:55:19pm

  Like totally wolves are soo scary!

  • 
    

    YYYYYYYYYJ :

    05 Nov 2010 8:55:14pm

    I agree!

• 
  

  2-3B AND 2K :

  01 Nov 2010 10:34:01am

  Wolves and Dogs are related to eachother.
  We find this very interesting.
  What do you think.

  • 
    

    THE GREAT CABBAGE :

    02 Nov 2010 5:23:59pm

    Wolves ARE dogs!!!

• 
  

  GINNY :

  31 Oct 2010 8:41:17pm

  C’mon! Wolves kill livestock! It costs a lot of money and the poor farmers!

• 
  

  ADALITA :

  28 Oct 2010 8:00:06pm

  I think that it is good that they are re-breeding the wolves because it is their natural habitat. There should be no discrimination against the wolves because they would think ‘We were here before them why should we get discriminated?’
  I think it is good the way the lady cares about the wolves and how they are supposed to live.

• 
  

  SOUNDHOUND :

  28 Oct 2010 6:38:37pm

  I think wolves are great animals and should not be hunted

• 
  

  PHILLIP AND MR. CHICKEN :

  28 Oct 2010 3:09:36pm

  I like wolves and I think people should stop killing them coz there are only 116 left and they r the bomb

• 
  

  BULLBUG :

  28 Oct 2010 3:08:46pm

  I think that we should look after the wolves. Because wolves are the best.

• 
  

  BLABLABLA6671 :

  27 Oct 2010 5:59:19pm

  It’s so cruel people want to kill an animal. there so FLUFFY!!!!!!!

  • 
    

    CZCVZMNVMN :

    01 Nov 2010 8:49:41pm

    They shouldn’t kill wolves because they take too much space wolves are something like dogs that round up cattle and i do agree that they’re FLUFFY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• 
  

  GREEN_MUNKI :

  27 Oct 2010 5:57:55pm

  Yeah, I have a friend who loves wolves and I didn’t really know what she was on about before i watched this BTN story. Now i look at them and think ‘Wow, who would ever be cruel enough to want to kill this amazing creature just for fun.’ Seriously, though wolves are AWSOME!

• 
  

  LUKE :

  27 Oct 2010 4:44:18pm

  The werewolf looks weird

• 
  

  RONNIE :

  27 Oct 2010 4:37:55pm

  I think anybody who thinks they should go is mean. They have a right and anyway, they’re too fluffy to die!!

• 
  

  CHARLIE HIGHGATE :

  27 Oct 2010 4:22:37pm

  I think wolves should be let free out of captivity and not be able to get hunted down.

• 
  

  KATE :

  27 Oct 2010 1:06:41pm

  I think the wolves shouldnt be killed because the farmers livestock are being killed. I also think the farmers should be given a fence where wolves shouldnt be able to come in

• 
  

  BELLABANJO :

  27 Oct 2010 10:38:59am

  I don’t know why people would want to shoot an adorable little animal because of crops. if you were the animal that needed something to eat wouldn’t you go to farms as well??? think about it…

• 
  

  NATALIE :

  26 Oct 2010 9:09:50pm

  white wolves are so adorable and cute they look like huskies

  • 
    

    LOL :

    05 Nov 2010 8:59:56pm

    the white wolf was so cuteeeee!!
    I want one!

• 
  

  BRIDGET W.P.S. :

  26 Oct 2010 6:28:20pm

  I am glad that the wolves are protected and hope they will STAY protected.

  • 
    

    MIKE :

    28 Oct 2010 8:35:56pm

    I am also glad but they don’t need to stay protected for more then 6 months people need hunting for meat

• 
  

  LOL :

  26 Oct 2010 6:27:47pm

  I think that the farmers shouldnt be hunting the wolves because they are soo CUTE and other stuff.
  I LOVE WOLVES

• 
  

  MIKE P :

  26 Oct 2010 6:08:15pm

  They are so cute, I love Wolves

• 
  

  LOOPY LU :

  26 Oct 2010 5:25:58pm

  Just because wolves are being wolves (as they should) does not mean they should die. Farmers just need to make an effort to put high fencing on their land. These beautiful animals cannot be killed- that is just cruel.

• 
  

  SOPHIE :

  26 Oct 2010 4:19:06pm

  I think that wolves should be protected by law because they are animals and they have their rights as well as us. If farmers livestock are killed well than that’s their fault for not locking them up. Anyone else agree?

• 
  

  SHANNY :

  26 Oct 2010 10:57:22am

  I love wolves too

  • 
    

    WOLVES 88 :

    26 Oct 2010 4:08:12pm

    I know. they are so cute!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Just like cats!

  • 
    

    AUDY :

    27 Oct 2010 8:23:57pm

    I SO AGREE WTTH U

    • 
      

      BLABLABLA :

      28 Oct 2010 6:37:14pm

      WOLVES HAVE A RIGHT TO BE ALIVE!! IF WE KILLL OFF ALL WOLVES THEN THE FOOD CHAIN WILL GO OUT OF WACK!!!

    • 
      

      WOLVES333 :

      31 Oct 2010 8:24:46am

      same here

    • 
      

      MYNANEISEMILYIRULESOMUCH :

      03 Nov 2010 7:13:24pm

      =] wolves + chiwawas.related.weird.[=
      o.m.g wolves are soooo cute and….
      FLUFFY!

      yay got quiz right me cool.

      – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

I happened  to come across this old Australian article regarding wolves and I found it quite interesting! Especially the comments. To think this was written only 6 years ago! Times have changed, reached rock bottom only to start climbing slowly again. What pleases me most regarding this article and it’s comments is that the majority is pro-wolf! I’d appreciate my reader’s input through comments.

Thanks in advance!

---

Source

Advertisement

Just 89 of these Alaskan wolves remain, but are they endangered? The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) announced Tuesday that Southeast Alaska’s Alexander Archipelago wolf does not warrant protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), even though its population has seriously declined on the Prince of Wales Island.

January 6, 2016 – Source

This image provided by the National Park Service shows a gray wolf in the wild.

ENERGY/ENVIRONMENT

The USFWS suggests in a November Species Status Assessment that the Alexander Archipelago wolf population occupying Prince of Wales Island declined by 75 percent between 1994 and 2014, from 356 to 89 individuals.

The agency identified a number of stresses impacting local populations, but “most of them have the potential to affect wolves indirectly, not directly.” Notable stresses included timber harvest, climate-related events, road development, and wolf hunting.

And while climate changes and timber clearing can limit the population of deer, the wolves’ main food source, wolf hunting is the only stressor with direct mortality. Road development may seem like an arbitrary stressor, but the USFWS says it gives hunters and trappers better access to wolf populations.

All of these stresses affect individual wolves either directly or indirectly, but the USFWS said in a Tuesday press release that the island wolves don’t qualify for ESA protection because “the population does not persist in an unusual or unique ecological setting; loss of the population would not result in a significant gap in the range; and the population does not differ markedly from other populations based on its genetic characteristics.”

But wildlife advocates say the USFWS is giving up on the Southeast Alaska wolves.

“We think the US Fish and Wildlife Service didn’t get it right and that they’ve overlooked some important things,” Larry Edwards, a Forest Campaigner with Greenpeace, told Alaska Public Media. “It’s very odd to us that the Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledges a 75 percent decline in the Prince of Wales wolf population and then basically writes that population off.”

The USFWS predicts the overall population of Alexander Archipelago wolves to be between 850 to 2,700 individuals, with approximately 62 percent living in British Columbia and 38 percent occupying southeastern Alaska. But advocates for Alexander Archipelago wolf protection under the ESA say the USFWS’s wide range estimates of population levels prove their lack of knowledge about the species’ actual status.

And in an indirect way, the USFWS has admitted to sacrificing this smaller wolf population.

“We do have concern for the wolf population on Prince of Wales Island,” Drew Crane, the Regional Endangered Species Coordinator at USFWS, told Maine News. “But Prince of Wales Island in general only constitutes six percent of the range-wide population of the Alexander Archipelago wolf.”

The USFWS predicts the current population of Alexander Archipelago wolves on Prince of Wales Island will continue to decrease by another eight to 14 percent over the next 30 years.

To some Alaska lawmakers, this sacrifice is just fine with them. If the USFWS had found the Alexander Archipelago wolf worthy of endangered species status, the listing process would have limited or entirely prevented timber sales in the Tongass National Forest, the largest national forest in the United States.

“…The attempt by some environmental groups to list the wolf seemed to be an effort solely to end the last of the remaining timber industry in Southeast Alasaka,” US Senator Lisa Murkowski (R) of Alaska, said in a press release Tuesday. “Fortunately, it did not work.”

VIDEO link: http://launch.newsinc.com/share.html?trackingGroup=90962&siteSection=csmonitor_nws_non_sty_dynamic&videoId=29928299

———-

 

 

An animal advocacy group says it will sue Fur-Ever Wild if it doesn’t stop killing the wolves.

December 10, 2015

An animal advocacy group is threatening to sue a Minnesota wildlife farm and petting zoo that it claims is slaughtering gray wolves for their fur.

Fur-Ever Wild, in the city of Lakeville, allows visitors to pet gray wolf pups. But the Animal Legal Defense Fund alleges that the farm kills and skins the wolves to sell their pelts. Gray wolves are protected under the Endangered Species Act, which means it is illegal to kill them.

“We hope Fur-Ever Wild will agree to cease its wolf-killing operation in the next 60 days but, if not, we intend to sue to assure the law is enforced,” ALDF executive director Stephen Wells said in a statement last week.

The group will seek “a court order or settlement agreement that ensures that none of the wolves at Fur-Ever Wild will be killed for their pelts,” staff attorney Christopher Berry told The Huffington Post.

In a civil court deposition in 2012, Fur-Ever Wild owner Terri Petter said that most of her animals are raised for fur. When asked whether she killed animals for the fur or waited for them to die naturally, she responded, “It depends on the fur market.”

In that deposition, Petter specifically mentioned pelting wolves, saying she had just pelted two and that “there will be 25 [pelted] within the next two weeks.” She also discussed breeding wolves for larger size, which would allow her to pelt them within a year, instead of keeping them for two years.

However, Petter told The Associated Press in May that she only uses animals for fur pelts if they die naturally.

“It’s not that all the animals come in and are skinned,” she said. “That’s just ludicrous.”

Petter did not respond to a request for comment from The Huffington Post this week, and told TakePart.com she was not commenting on the ALDF case because someone had burned down one of her facility’s buildings. (She did not elaborate on whether she believed the arson was related to the advocacy group’s allegations.)

The ALDF is pointing to the annual game farm activity reports that Petter filed to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as evidence that Fur-Ever Wild has been slaughtering wolves more recently than 2012. In her report for the 2012-2013 year, Petter notes that she started with 31 wolves, and that 33 wolves were born and 24 died during the year. Six wolves were also sold that year, bringing her number at the end of the year to 34.

In the 2013-2014 report, filed this past February, Petter states that her facility began the year with 38 wolves. (It’s unclear how she started with four more wolves than she ended the previous year with). Nineteen wolf pups were born during the year, and 19 wolves died.

The wolf deaths are recorded under a category called “Number of deaths (…butchered for consumption).” Capt. Alex Gutierrez of the Minnesota DNR explained that this designation encompasses all deaths, including natural deaths and intentional killings.

Berry is skeptical that all of the wolf deaths Petter recorded were natural.

“If that many wolves are dying of natural causes then there is a very serious problem at Fur-Ever Wild that goes well beyond the pelting allegations,” he said.

The attorney said most people visiting the facility are likely unaware of what is happening to the animals.

“The average person going to Fur-Ever Wild would not think that it could be killing animals and harvesting their fur for money,” he said.

USDA inspection records from November indicate that all wolves at the facility are gray wolves.

Fur-Ever Wild has a number of other animals — including bobcats, foxes, lynx and opossums — though Berry noted that killing those animals for fur would not be against the law.

Berry said ALDF was tipped off about the alleged slaughtering at Fur-Ever Wild by local activists who were campaigning to prevent the facility from expanding to a second location in South Dakota. The second location opened briefly, but shut down after only 10 weeks due to local opposition.

“The activist effort was fueled in large part by public indignation over the compelling evidence that Fur-Ever Wild was killing its animals for fur,” Berry said.

Source – Huffington Post

Contact the author at Hilary.Hanson@huffingtonpost.com.

———-

 

Share this:

Gray Wolves are Recovered; Next Up, the Mexican Wolf

Posted At : June 7, 2013 10:06 AM | Posted By : Trott, Matthew E
Related Categories: Gray_wolf, Endangered Species Act, plains bison, director_blog, Mexican wolf, Wolves

 

We are proposing to remove gray wolves from the list of threatened and endangered species throughout the United States and Mexico. Photo by Gary Kramer/USFWS

As many of you probably know, my dad had a great, 37-year career with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and he describes the outfit as a collection of people who get things done — doers.  Nowhere is that trait more proudly displayed than in our four decade effort to restore the gray wolf to the American landscape, bringing the species back from extirpation and exile from the contiguous United States.

I’m the 16th Director of the Service. It was the 10th, John Turner, a Wyoming rancher and outfitter, appointed by a Republican President, who signed the record of decision that set in motion this miraculous reintroduction and recovery. It’s never been easy. We’ve had critics, fair and unfair. We’ve had great partners. Sometimes they have been one in the same. But this organization and its people have been constant. Steadfast. Committed. Professional. Determined. Now add successful!

More information on the wolf recovery

This great predator again roams the range, ridges and remote spaces of the Northern Rocky Mountains and the Western Great Lakes in one of the spectacular successes of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).  These recovered populations are not just being tolerated, but are expanding under professional management by our state partners.

Today, for one reason, and one reason only, we are proposing to remove the gray wolf from the list of threatened and endangered species throughout the United States and Mexico — they are no longer in danger of extinction now or in the foreseeable future.

 

National Elk Refuge Biologist Eric Cole affixes a collar on a male black wolf pup. We have been working on gray wolf recovery for decades. Photo by Lori Iverson/USFWS

Due to our steadfast commitment, gray wolves in the Lower 48 now represent a 400-mile southern range extension of a vast contiguous wolf population that numbers more than 12,000 wolves in western Canada and about 65,000 wolves across all of Canada and Alaska. Canadian and U.S. wolves interact and move freely between the two nations.

Of course, the gray wolf is not everywhere it once was, nor can it be; think Denver, or Minneapolis, or Salt Lake City, or even the now grain- and livestock-dominated American Plains. It’s not everywhere it can be, but our work has created the potential that it may be one day. 

One thing, though, is certain: It is no longer endangered or threatened with extinction.  The ESA has done its job. Broader restoration of wolves is now possible. Indeed, it is likely. As we propose to remove ESA protections, states like Washington and Oregon are managing expanding populations under protective state laws.

And as in almost every aspect of our work, there is vigorous debate.  Can a species be considered “recovered” if it exists in only a portion of its former range, or if significant habitat is yet unoccupied?  Our answer is “yes” and we don’t need to look far for other examples.

Bison on the National Bison Range in Montana. Photo by USFWS

Consider the plains bison, another magnificent, iconic animal that once roamed and ruled North American plains, coast to coast. We aren’t certain how many, but possibly 75 million. Today, there are about half a million, and they inhabit a fraction of their historical range.

But are they threatened or endangered?  No.  And in 2011, we denied a petition to give the bison Endangered Species Act protection. Wild populations are secure and growing. It doesn’t mean we don’t care about bison; it means they do not need the protections of the ESA.

Like the bison, the gray wolf no longer needs those protections.

Some say we’re abandoning wolf recovery before it is complete. That couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, we’re proposing to hand over the management of these keystone predators to the professionals at the state and tribal wildlife agencies. We’ve been working hand-in-glove with these folks to recover the gray wolf. Their skill helped bring gray wolves back, and now they’ll work to keep wolves as a part of the landscape for future generations.

I’ve always liked the analogy of the ESA as biodiversity’s emergency room.  We are given patient species that need intensive care.  We stabilize them; we get them through recovery.  Then we hand them to other providers who will ensure they get the long-term care that they need and deserve.

We have brought back this great icon of the American wilderness.  And as we face today’s seemingly insurmountable challenges, today’s critical voices, today’s political minefields, let this success be a reminder of what we can accomplish.  We can work conservation miracles, because we have.  The gray wolf is proof.

our 2012 count showed a record number of Mexican wolves in the wild. Photo by Jim Clark/USFWS

Now it’s time for us to focus our limited resources on Mexican wolf recovery and on other species that are immediately threatened with extinction.  

That is why we also proposed today to continue federal protection and expand recovery efforts for the Mexican wolf, by designating it as an endangered subspecies under the ESA and proposing modifications to the regulations governing the existing nonessential experimental population.

We have received good news on the Mexican wolf recently – the 2012 population count showed a record high number of Mexican wolves in the wild.  We have a long way to go, but we are seeing success, and we will apply the same steadfast commitment, the same dedication and the same professionalism that has been the hallmark of our gray wolf success.

By employing the full protections of the ESA for the Mexican wolf, I am confident that one day we’ll be celebrating their full recovery just like we are, today, with the gray wolf.

**Disclaimer: All the views portrayed in the article above are those of employees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. **

Share this:

Fish and Wildlife proposes removing ESA protections for gray wolf

Despite a rumored momentary hold, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has formally announced its proposal to delist the gray wolf in all areas of the contiguous United States except for the southwestern wolf recovery area.

Media attention on the proposal drew both praise and criticism from various interest groups and individuals.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) and the Public Lands Council (PLC) expressed support for USFWS’ proposal to delist the gray wolf. However, the livestock associations want Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest to also be delisted. 

“We appreciate USFWS’ recognition that the gray wolf is recovered,” NCBA President and Wyoming rancher Scott George stated. “But it’s also time to end the unwarranted listing of the Mexican wolf. Wolf depredation threatens ranchers’ livelihoods and rural communities, as well as the economies relying on a profitable agricultural industry.” 

In a letter to USFWS Director Dan Ashe, 16 scientists representing varying fields of study, including one wolf biologist, expressed their opposition to the delisting announcement. In the letter, dated May 21, the group urged USFWS to reconsider its proposal and specified four concerns with the action:

• The proposal prevents future wolf populations in areas of adequate habitat such as parts of California and the Northeast.
• The draft rule fails to delineate the protected area for Mexican gray wolf recovery.
• USFWS’ acknowledgement that more research needs to be done regarding the designation of Canis lycaon as a distinct species in the United States goes without next steps.
• Wolves in the Pacific Northwest whose origin is from British Columbia are not considered a distinct population segment.

USFWS will open a 90-day comment period during which information will be reviewed and addressed in the final determination of the proposal, which is expected to occur in early 2014. The comment period is expected to open this week.

Providing feedback during the public comment period allows interested individuals and groups to be involved in this public process. Additionally, if you or your group would like to request a public hearing in your region, USFWS will take requests in writing within 45 days of the proposal’s publication in the Federal Register.

UPDATE: The two proposed rules will publish in the Federal Register on June 13, 2013. The Fish and Wildlife Service will be accepting public comments for 90 days immediately following publication, through 11:59 p.m. on September 11, 2013. Guidance on how to provide comment is provided in Addresses section of each proposed rule. Please visit http://www.regulations.gov to view all Federal Register notices, and to submit an electronic comment.

Related links

Public comment information
NCBA and PLC press release
Letter from 16 Scientists to USFWS Director Dan Ashe