The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recently reduced
federal protections for the gray wolf under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). Previously listed as "endangered" in most of
the lower 48 states, the gray wolf has been downlisted to
"threatened." USFWS also plans to begin the process of removing
federal protections entirely for wolves in all areas of the
United States, other than a handful of southwestern states.
Once wolves are no longer protected by the ESA, their
management will be turned over to the states in which they are
currently found. Unfortunately, the management plans drafted by
these states would allow for what many conservationists and
protectionists consider to be unnecessary and liberal wolf
killings by hunters, trappers, and ranchers who feel that the
wolves threaten their livestock.
The final rule released by the USFWS to describe the wolf's
reduced federal protections is complicated and is described
elsewhere on our site (see link below). Below we examine the
management techniques and population issues integral to
understanding why gray wolves should not lose any federal
protections.
Lethal and Nonlethal
Management
The Humane Society of the United States, along with many
other animal protection and conservation organizations, has
long advocated the use of non-lethal methods to prevent wild
predators from attacking livestock. These methods can be
effective in protecting livestock and will foster peaceful
coexistence between humans and wild predators. Though an
increasing number of progressive ranchers have committed to
using only non-lethal methods in protecting sheep and cows from
predators, the vast majority turn to traditional lethal
methods.
Clearly, much of the human population residing within wolf
country is not yet ready for the peaceful coexistence
envisioned by conservationists. The state wolf management plans
reflect these negative attitudes, and demonstrate that states
will take full advantage of the wolf's reduced federal
protections.
In fact, some state and federal wildlife managers have gone
so far as to suggest that the best way to increase human
tolerance for wolves is to allow humans to kill wolves, an
argument that lacks scientific support and goes against common
sense. The opposite argument could just as easily be made: that
allowing people to behave aggressively toward wolves will
simply feed their negative feelings toward the animal.
Wolf Population Size and
Structure
Many conservationists and scientists are concerned that the
current number and size of wolf populations in the lower 48
states won't be enough to allow gray wolves to recover. Both
wolves, and the ecosystems from which they have long been
absent, would benefit from the establishment of additional wolf
recovery areas—as well as from the expansion of existing wolf
populations.
Increasing the number and size of wolf populations would
help to ensure the long-term viability of the gray wolf in
North America by allowing for population sizes sufficient to
maintain genetic variability. This should also help guard
against the loss of a wolf population hit by a disease outbreak
or catastrophic weather or chance genetic processes that can
reduce genetic variability over time.
An important fact of wolf reproduction is that only the
highest-ranking male and female in each pack reproduce. Thus,
even if a wolf population seems large, it's the number of
breeding adults—not the total number of individuals—that will
determine whether the population will be able to survive over
the long term.
Wolf populations may also suffer in less obvious ways if
they are subjected to the sport hunting and trapping under
state management plans. Killing adult pack members of this very
social animal can upset the stability of territories and result
in increased aggression between packs. This could also result
in a population composed mostly of young dispersing wolves and
fewer adults with stable territories. Finally, the alpha male
and female of a pack mate monogamously; if one member of a
mated pair is killed, it may be some time before the survivor
will form a new pair bond.
Returning this key carnivore to the wide variety of habitats
it once occupied would help restore balance to those
ecosystems. For example, certain traits—such as swiftness,
vigilance, or perceptual acuity—of many prey species evolved
because of wolf predation as a selection pressure, and smaller
carnivores such as foxes and coyotes evolved in the face of
competition from wolves. Without competition from wolves, these
smaller carnivores can reproduce more and survive longer;
competition from (and occasional predation by) wolves was an
important factor keeping smaller carnivores in check.
Of course, restoring wolves to much of their historic range
will depend heavily upon the protection of vast expanses of
public land to meet the wolf's habitat requirements and to
allow for movement of wolves among separate populations.
It's Too Early to Delist the Gray Wolf
The removal or reduction of federal protections for the gray
wolf now appears to be premature, for three reasons. First,
gray wolf populations are insufficiently recovered. Second, a
vocal minority of the U.S. public continues to express
irrational negative attitudes toward the wolf, demonstrating
their unwillingness to tolerate this native carnivore. And
third, the state plans include provisions for liberal sport
hunting and trapping of wolves, and fail to mandate protections
adequate to ensure the survival of wolves.
Coexistence with large predators requires human tolerance
and education regarding the means by which conflicts may be
avoided. That willingness to coexist has not been developed in
any portion of the gray wolf's range; therefore, simply
restoring a certain “magic number” of wolves to a region (which
has been the focus of federal wolf recovery efforts and of
existing state plans) may not be enough.
