STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh...

19
STATE of the WOLF 2004

Transcript of STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh...

Page 1: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

STATE of the WOLF2004

Page 2: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

ABOUT DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE

Defenders of Wildlife is a leading conservation organization recognized as one of thenation’s most progressive advocates for wildlife and its habitat. Defenders uses

education, litigation, research and promotion of conservation policies to protect wild animals and plants in their natural communities. Founded in 1947, Defenders of Wildlife

is a 501(c)(3) membership organization with headquarters in Washington, D.C., and 480,000 members nationwide.

© 2004 Defenders of Wildlife1130 17th Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20036(202) 682-9400

COVER PHOTO: GRAY WOLF © COREL CORP.

Page 3: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

INTRODUCTION

In January 1995, Defenders of Wildlife joined with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to bring wolvesback to Yellowstone and Idaho. Nearly a decade later, these areas once again echo with the howl ofwolves—truly one of our country’s greatest conservation success stories. To celebrate the upcoming ten-

year anniversary of this monumental occasion, Defenders of Wildlife is issuing its first State of the Wolfreport. This document provides a snapshot in time of the ongoing recovery of the wolf nationwide and thethreats that still jeopardize the future of these majestic creatures.

When Europeans first set foot on North America, the gray wolf (Canis lupus) ranged across the conti-nent from Mexico to Canada and Alaska, and from the Pacific to the Atlantic. The forests of what is nowthe southeastern United States also were home to the red wolf (Canis rufus). The two species combined mayhave numbered as many as 400,000 prior to European contact. By the 1970s, however, three centuries ofpersecution had eliminated both species from the wild everywhere in the contiguous United States except innortheastern Minnesota, where fewer than 1,000 gray wolves remained.

Today, both gray and red wolves are making a comeback in the lower 48 states. The U.S. Fish andWildlife Service reintroduced the gray wolf in central Idaho and in the Yellowstone ecosystem of Wyoming,

1

STATE of the WOLF 2004© JIM CLARK/U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Page 4: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Montana and Idaho in 1995 and they continue to expand their numbers today. Gray wolf populations havealso increased substantially in Minnesota and wolves have recolonized parts of Wisconsin, Michigan andMontana. Fish and Wildlife Service reintroductions also are returning the Mexican gray wolf to Arizona andred wolves to North Carolina.

Despite these gains, wolves still occupy less than five percent of their original range in the lower 48states, and the seemingly healthy wolf populations in Alaska and Canada face continued threats. Biologistsbelieve there are other areas of potential wolf habitat — including the Northeast, southern Rockies, PacificNorthwest and northern Mexico — that have yet to see restoration take place.

The long-term survival of the wolf depends on maintaining wolf populations that are large enough toensure the viability of the species. But even though viable wolf populations are increasingly seen as essentialto healthy ecosystems and the economic benefits wolves bring to areas where they are restored are increas-ingly being realized, the overall future of the wolf remains questionable.

In the pages that follow we provide a region-by-region breakdown of North America’s wolf populations.Each section includes an update on the current status of the wolf in that region, including latest populationestimates, as well as a discussion of the threats facing wolves and prospects for future recovery efforts.

Defenders of Wildlife was there in 1995 when the wolf was reintroduced to the Yellowstone ecosystemand we remain committed to ensuring the recovery of the wolf continues in a way that benefits bothhumans and wolves.

STATE of the WOLF 2004

2

Table of Contents

Gray WolvesNorthern Rockies 3Pacific Northwest 5

Southwest United States and Mexico 8Southern Rockies 10

Great Lakes 11Northeast 12

Alaska 13

Red WolvesNorth Carolina 15

Page 5: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Background

Gray wolves were once common throughout thenorthern Rocky Mountains, but a government pred-ator control program eliminated wolves from thisarea, including Yellowstone National Park, by the1930s. Defenders of Wildlife has been working torestore wolves to this region for nearly threedecades, culminating in the reintroduction of wolvesto Yellowstone and Idaho in 1995. Since then,Defenders has been a leading education and advoca-cy resource on the wolf and has led innovativeefforts to bridge the gap with local stakeholdersopposed to wolf reinroduction. Defenders estab-lished the hugely successful The Bailey WildlifeFoundation Wolf Compensation Trust that compen-sates ranchers for any verified livestock losses to

wolves. More recently, Defenders established TheBailey Wildlife Foundation Proactive CarnivoreCompensation Fund, which helps ranchers take stepsto prevent livestock depredation from occurring. Therestoration of wolves in this region is one of the great-est American wildlife conservation success stories ofthis century.

STATE of the WOLF 2004

GRAY WOLVES

3

CURRENT POPULATION:

Yellowstone Ecoregion — 301Central Idaho — 368Northwest Montana — 92

Northern Rockies

MT

WYID

Occupied recovery area

© COREL CORPORATION

Page 6: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Current Status and Threats

The Fish and Wildlife Service is currently looking toremove federal protections and return managementof the species to the states. The first step in thisdirection occurred in 2003 when the Bush adminis-tration released a rule to “re-classify” wolves through-out the lower 48 states, removing protections entirelyin some areas and weakening them in others. In thenorthern Rockies, the Fish and Wildlife Servicelumped wolves in Montana, Idaho and Wyomingand six other western states into a single group, butdid so without expanding population recovery goalsbeyond Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Under thisrule, wolves would be declared recovered throughoutthe northern Rockies once population goals weremet in these three states — even though northernCalifornia and Colorado, Oregon, Nevada, Utah andWashington do not yet have wolves. Before this canhappen, though, the northern Rockies states mustdevelop acceptable management plans. To date, theFish and Wildlife Service has approved the wolfmanagement plans of Montana and Idaho, but hasrejected Wyoming’s plan, which allowed for wide-spread, indiscriminate killing of wolves in 90 percentof the state.

Also of great concern is the Fish and WildlifeService’s proposal to hand control of wolves over tothe states prior to an official federal delisting. Thiswould weaken federal protections for wolves beforetheir recovery goals have been met. Under the propos-al, any citizen could essentially kill wolves based onthe belief that the animals pose a threat to personalproperty. Protecting private property is vitally impor-tant, but allowing wolves to be killed based on thebelief of a threat would invite abuse and unnecessarykilling and would create unenforceable and potentiallyunmanageable situations adversely affecting wolf pop-ulations.

The Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposal wouldalso allow state agencies to kill wolves if they want

STATE of the WOLF 2004

4

1. Stay informed. Sign up for Wolflines,Defenders’ bi-weekly, electronic newsletter tokeep abreast of current wolf issues:www.defenders.org/den/

2. Get involved. Respond to alerts for commentson federal and state actions regarding wolves.

3. Tell a teacher about our wolf education cur-riculum for grades K-12. Visit the Teacher’sTable at www.kidsplanet.org, our Web site forchildren, to preview this program of integratedlesson plans.

4. Take an ecotourism vacation to Yellowstone,northeastern North Carolina, Canada, Alaskaor other natural areas where wolves reside. Besure to use local tour operators and supportthe local economy, which helps foster positiveattitudes towards wolves.

5. Help support Defenders’ work. Visitwww.defenders.org to learn how you can con-tribute.

How You Can Help:

Five things citizens can do tohelp restore wolves

Page 7: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

to raise elk numbers, even if wolves are not a signifi-cant factor in declining elk populations. Proposedprovisions would lead to intense public and politicalpressure to reduce wolf numbers without evaluatingall factors that affect elk populations (habitat, har-vest, disease, weather, other predators, etc.). Suchmanagement actions, based on misinformation, fearand political pressures, could jeopardize ongoingrecovery and delisting efforts and lead to negativeand long-lasting impacts on endangered gray wolfpopulations in Idaho and Montana.

Defenders is currently leading a group of 19plantiffs in a lawsuit the against the Fish and WildlifeService’s effort to remove protections for wolves acrossthe western states without suitable state managementplans, and without expanding their range into stateswith significant suitable habitat. The Yellowstone andIdaho wolf reintroduction was a great first step, butwolves should be allowed to recolonize their formerhabitat to the extent possible and feasible. As wolvesplay a vital role in the native ecosystems across thewest, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species.

The Future

January 2005 marks the 10th anniversary of thewolf reintroduction to Idaho and YellowstoneNational Park and a crossroads for wolf conservationin the West. As we celebrate the success of this pro-gram, Defenders is proud of our contributions. Asof October 2004, through The Bailey WildlifeFoundation Wolf Compensation Trust, Defenders ofWildlife has voluntarily contributed more than$400,000 to western ranchers and family farmersfor livestock losses related to wolves in the northernRockies. Additionally, we have invested more than$300,000 in preventative approaches and assistanceto livestock owners since the establishment of TheBailey Wildlife Foundation Proactive CarnivoreConservation Fund in 1999. Our philosophy is to

work with livestock owners and other stakeholdersto find a mutually beneficial pathway toward wolfand human co-existence. We have established a live-stock producer advisory council to help us evaluateand adapt these programs to meet changing needswhile providing meaningful assistance to wolves andresidents in the region. As the wolf populationincreases, conflicts with livestock and hunting inter-ests will bring an increased need for our programs.Wolf supporters must vigilantly monitor state man-agement plans to ensure on-going conservation suc-cess after delisting, especially during the early stages.

Background

Gray wolves once lived throughout much of thePacific Northwest but, as in other areas, extermina-tion campaigns eliminated wolves from this regionin the 1930s. Bounty records, settlers’ travel diaries

STATE of the WOLF 2004

5

CURRENT POPULATION:

No known populations at this time.Individual wolves spotted in Washington and Oregon.

Pacific Northwest

WA

OR

CA

Potential recovery area

Page 8: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

and other government documents attest to the wide-spread presence of wolves in Oregon andWashington but less information is available onwolves in California. Recent searches of historicalrecords and information from California NativeAmerican sources suggest the wolf was widely dis-tributed throughout the state.

Current Status and Threats

In recent years, wolves from the northern Rockieshave made their way into both Oregon andWashington. In February 2002, a wolf from north-western Montana traveled briefly into eastern

Washington before disappearing into BritishColumbia. Between February 1999 and September2000, three wolves from Idaho moved west intonortheastern Oregon. The first was captured andreturned to Idaho, the second was struck and killedby a car and the third illegally shot. Each year feder-al and state wildlife officials receive numerousreports of purported wolf sightings in Oregon, andthe number has been on the rise since 1999. Noconfirmed wolf sightings have occurred inCalifornia.

Both Washington and Oregon list the gray wolfas endangered on their state endangered species lists,while California has omitted the wolf from its list.The increasing number of reported wolf sightings in

STATE of the WOLF 2004

6

© COREL CORPORATION

Page 9: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Oregon, as well as the species’ protected status understate law, spurred the Oregon Fish and WildlifeCommission to develop a state wolf managementplan. The plan, which was developed with the assis-tance of a 14-member advisory committee thatincluded a Defenders’ representative, has just beencompleted and is now being circulated for publiccomment. The plan has met with some resistancefrom segments of the livestock producer and huntingcommunities, though both were represented on theadvisory committee. The 2005 Oregon state legisla-tive session may also see renewed attacks on state pro-tections for wolves, as occurred in the 2003 sessionwhen more than nine anti-wolf bills were introduced.

In Washington, the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService is developing an interim strategy plan forwolves. However, no movement has been seen in thedevelopment of a state wolf plan, and a 2003 billintroduced in the Washington legislature wouldhave prohibited wolf reintroduction in the state.

California’s failure to list the wolf as a protectedspecies poses a threat if wolves appear in the state, asexpected.

California, Oregon and Washington are all partof the nine-state area delineated in the Fish andWildlife Service’s 2003 gray wolf reclassificationrule, resulting in a reduction in federal protections,from endangered to threatened, in these states. Iffederal safeguards are removed altogether, wolves inCalifornia would be without any protection andwolves in Washington would have no conservationplan in place.

The Future

Several scientific studies have demonstrated thatmany areas of potentially suitable habitat for wolvesremain in the Pacific Northwest. Indeed, in recentyears wolves have been reliably sighted inWashington and Oregon. Because of their proximityto wolf populations in British Columbia and

Alberta, as well as to recovering populations innorthwestern Montana, Washington state’s NorthCascades and Selkirk Mountains have a high poten-tial for natural wolf recolonization. In fact, severalwolf packs have denned and raised pups in recentyears in the North Cascades National RecreationArea along the Canadian border.

Another area targeted for wolf recovery isWashington’s Olympic Peninsula. A feasibility study ofthe area found sufficient habitat to support about 60wolves. Any wolf recovery for this area would requiretranslocating animals, however, as development in theSeattle-Tacoma area blocks the wolf ’s return to theOlympic Peninsula without human help.

Other possible restoration sites include the BlueMountains of southeastern Washington and north-eastern Oregon, the Siskiyou Mountains of southernOregon and northern California, and the northernSierra Nevada in California. Studies have shownthat as many as 470 wolves could live in a complexof wildlands that include the Modoc Plateau ofCalifornia and Oregon and the southern OregonCascades, and a recent study estimated that Oregoncould support as many as 2,200 wolves.Washington’s Northern Cascades contains morethan 9 million acres of federally controlled landswith substantial amounts of potential wolf habitatavailable. Dispersing wolves from Idaho are, at thistime, the most likely source population for wolvesin Washington, Oregon and California, thoughwolves dispersing south from British Columbia intothe Cascades could provide an additional source.

Defenders will continue to lead efforts to restorewolves to all three states in the Pacific Northwest. Inorder to help pave the way for wolf recovery,Defenders has offered to extend The Bailey WildlifeFoundation Wolf Compensation Trust to any of thestates where wolves disperse from the NorthernRockies. We also work closely with regional conser-vation groups to conduct education and advocacy.

STATE of the WOLF 2004

7

Page 10: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Background

The Southwest was once home to the Mexican wolf,or “El lobo,” a gray wolf subspecies that rangedfrom southern Arizona, New Mexico and southwest-ern Texas to the mountains of southcentral Mexico.After the population crashed, the U.S. Fish andWildlife Service captured four males and a female inMexico between 1977 and 1980. These animalswere the last known Mexican wolves in the wild,and were used to found a captive-breeding program.

In 1982, Fish and Wildlife Service adopted arecovery plan for Mexican wolves that called for acaptive breeding program followed by reintroduc-tion of captive-born animals to the wild. The plancalled for re-establishing a self-sustaining populationof at least 100 Mexican wolves within their historicrange. Mexican wolves were released in the BlueRange Wolf Recovery Area west of the Arizona-NewMexico border starting in 1998. More releases have

STATE of the WOLF 2004

8

CURRENT POPULATION:

Arizona/New Mexico — 26 wolves withradio collars. As many as 25-30 additionalwolves

Southwest UnitedStates and Mexico

Putting Our MoneyWhere Our Mouth Is …

Wolves, grizzly bears and other predatorsare slowly reclaiming parts of their formerranges in the lower 48 states and else-

where in North America. Occasionally, these carni-vores may prey on livestock or cause other problems.Defenders believes that those who seek more roomfor predators have a responsibility to help resolve con-flicts associated with the recovery of these animals.

Working with landowners, resource managers andothers to prevent or reduce predator problems hasimportant conservation benefits. Human-caused wolfdeaths, including illegal killings and lethal control bygovernment agencies in response to livestock preda-tion incidents, remains the single leading cause ofwolf mortality in the northern Rockies and theSouthwest.

Defenders created The Bailey WildlifeFoundation Wolf and Grizzly Compensation Trusts toreimburse livestock owners for verified losses to thesepredators. The Bailey Wildlife Foundation ProactiveCarnivore Conservation Fund was developed morerecently to prevent conflict between imperiled preda-tors and humans before it occurs. If landowners orother entities have repeated predator problems, weask them to propose projects that will help reduceconflict, such as putting up electric fencing, usinglivestock guardian dogs or other techniques. If theconcept is practical and within our means, we sharethe cost of the project. We believe our success atexpanding the range of predators across the West andelsewhere will be directly proportional to our successat reducing conflict between predators and humans.

AZ NM

TX

Mexico

Occupied recovery area Potential recovery area

Page 11: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

occurred since then, including as recently as August2004, which brought the known wild population toapproximately 50 wolves. The Mexican wolf recov-ery program was initiated as a joint effort withMexico and plans are currently underway for similarrestoration efforts to take place south of the border.

Current Status and Threats

The captive-bred Mexican wolves that were releasedinto Arizona and New Mexico successfully retainedthe instincts to survive in the wild and quicklybegan forming pairs and reproducing, identifyingand killing native prey, and establishing and defend-ing territories. Unfortunately the wolves are threat-ened by illegal killing: At least twenty Mexicanwolves have been shot during the first six years ofthe reintroduction program.

Mexican wolves are also threatened by a flawed“special rule” that governs the program. The rulemaintains an unnecessary boundary around the BlueRange Wolf Recovery Area that prohibits the re-colonization of suitable areas outside it. This hasresulted in the unnecessary recapture and/or removalof wolves that have caused no problems withhumans or livestock, but have simply wanderedacross this arbitrarily drawn political boundary.Additionally, the rule prohibits direct releases ofwolves into the Gila Wilderness, which contains thebest wolf habitat in the entire Blue Range WolfRecovery Area.

Fortunately the White Mountain Apache Tribehas agreed to encourage wolf recovery on their reser-vation and participates fully in the wolf manage-ment program. The Tribe’s cooperation has added1.6 million acres of prime wolf habitat to the wolfrecovery area, which currently hosts at least two resi-dent packs.

The Future

A modification to the “special rule” allowing wolves toexpand their population by establishing territories insuitable habitats is necessary for the wolf recovery pro-gram to succeed. The rule change will reduce thenumber of wolves that are recaptured or removedfrom the program simply for straying across politicallines and will allow the Interagency Field Team toplace wolves into areas where their chances of survivalare greatly improved.

Long-term wolf recovery requires opening newhabitat areas in the region to support additional popu-lations. Defenders has worked with partners in theregion to conduct reintroduction feasibility studiesthat have identified several areas that are suitable forwolves. These areas include the Grand Canyon eco-region, the Sky Islands borderlands (which spans theU.S.-Mexico border), the Apache Highlands (WhiteMountain and San Carlos Apache Reservations) andnorthern Mexico. Additionally, the ChiricahuaMountains in southern Arizona and Big BendNational Park and Big Bend Ranch State Park inTexas offer habitat suitable for low numbers of wolves.Two of the best sites remaining in northern Mexicoare the Sierra San Luis complex in northern Sonoraand the Sierra del Carmen area southeast of Big BendNational Park. Defenders continues to work with offi-cials and organizations in Mexico to help prepare forwolf recovery through continued habitat studies andby providing opportunities for Mexican biologists togain hands-on experience with wild wolves.

To help ensure the success of the reintroductioneffort and promote population expansion, Defendershas expanded The Bailey Wildlife Foundation WolfCompensation Trust to reimburse ranchers in theSouthwest for livestock taken by wolves, offered a sub-stantial reward for information leading to the arrest ofwolf killers, and conducted proactive projects to pre-vent livestock depredation, help monitor and protectnewly released animals, as well as build tolerance forwolves among local citizens.

STATE of the WOLF 2004

9

Page 12: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Background

Gray wolves roamed the southern Rockies untiltheir complete eradication in the early 1900s.Fortunately, this area contains some of the bestwolf habitat remaining in the lower 48 states. TheFish and Wildlife Service’s own studies estimatethat the region is capable of hosting as many as1,100 wolves. Furthermore, more than 60 percentof the land in the southern Rockies is publiclyowned, which could simplify wolf management.

Tragically, the same anti-conservation effortsthat are jeopardizing wolf recovery nationwide alsothreaten potential recovery in places such as thesouthern Rockies. This is especially troubling asmany recovery options remain here, and naturalsystems have degraded significantly in the absenceof top-level predators such as the wolf. In February2000, regional and national conservation groupsjoined to form the Southern Rockies Wolf

Restoration Project. This group is dedicated torestoring the wolf and throughout the region.

Current Status and Threats

Despite the ability of the region to contribute sig-nificantly toward wolf restoration, the Fish andWildlife Service is pursuing delisting of graywolves in the area and has no formal plans forrestoring wolves to the southern portions of theRockies. Because of the likelihood that federaldelisting efforts will prevent or significantly frus-trate wolf recovery in the southern Rockies,Defenders and a broad coalition of conservationorganizations have filed a lawsuit to prevent pre-mature delisting and, instead, require federalwildlife managers to consider the significant wolfrestoration potential of areas such as the southernRockies.

Additionally, the state of Colorado assembled aWolf Management Working Group to address wolfmanagement issues in the state. Defenders is work-ing via the Southern Rockies Wolf RestorationProject and in concert with other working groupmembers to help shape a state wolf managementplan that encourages both re-colonization anddirect reintroduction into suitable areas of theregion.

The Future

The southern Rockies offer several potential graywolf restoration sites, including the Vermejo RanchPark/Carson National Forest complex, the SanJuan Mountains, Rocky Mountain National Parkand the Gunnison National Recreation Area.Indeed, these areas could support an estimated 400to 1,200 wolves. Other areas that could supportwolves include large private tracts of land, such asmedia executive Ted Turner’s Vermejo Ranch,

STATE of the WOLF 2004

10

CURRENT POPULATION:

No known population at this time, althougha lone female wolf that had apparentlystrayed from the Yellowstone region wasfound dead in Colorado in 2004.

Southern Rockies

UTCO

AZ NM

WY

Potential recovery area

Page 13: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

straddling the Colorado-New Mexico border.Turner’s lands demonstrate the potential of privatelandowners to contribute to wolf restoration andthe need to develop mechanisms at the state andfederal level to encourage more private participa-tion in recovery efforts.

The southern Rockies has ample habitat tosupport wolves, but some conflicts with livestockwill occasionally occur. Defenders has extended itscompensation fund and proactive programs tocover this area to both minimize the likelihood ofconflicts and to mitigate when they do occur.

Background

The subspecies of gray wolf found in the GreatLakes region, commonly called the eastern timberwolf, once ranged from Minnesota to the AtlanticOcean and from southwest Canada to the OhioRiver and perhaps farther south. Progress toward

gray wolf recovery in the Great Lakes region hasbeen notably successful. In the 1960s, this sub-species was limited to northeastern Minnesota,where it numbered fewer than 1,000 individualsand was the last population of gray wolves in thelower 48 states.

Current Status and Threats

Federal protections fostered recovery of wolves inthis region. Today, gray wolves thrive not only innortheastern Minnesota, but also in northernWisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.Unfortunately, the Fish and Wildlife Service hasused this success to propose delisting wolves in theentire eastern United States, including areas thatcould sustain wolf populations but where no recov-ery efforts have been made. Public comments onthis proposal are being accepted until November 18,2004.

The Future

Defenders is concerned about the loss of federal pro-tections for wolves in the Great Lakes states. We areconcerned that the state management plans forwolves in the Great Lakes states do not adequatelyensure the long-term survival and viability of wolves.Minnesota’s wolf plan calls for reducing the numberof wolves in the state and Michigan and Wisconsinare under pressure to include public hunting seasonsin their plans, a move that is premature given therecent nature of the species’ recovery.

As wolf numbers increase, conflicts withhumans may also increase in this region. For thisreason, informational materials and workshops,which will offer ways to peacefully coexist withpredators, must be readily available to farmers andother residents. Defenders is expanding its efforts topromote nonlethal, proactive measures to prevent

STATE of the WOLF 2004

11

CURRENT POPULATION:

Michigan—360Minnesota—2,450 Wisconsin—373-410

Great Lakes

MNWI MI

Occupied recovery area

Canada

Page 14: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

livestock deaths caused by wolves. We are currentlyhelping to fund two studies testing nonlethal meth-ods that will provide information about the useful-ness of these techniques. A Defenders representativesits on the Wisconsin Wolf Stakeholder Committee,and we constantly monitor developments that mayimpact the success of wolves in this region.

Background

The historic range of the eastern wolf once extendedthroughout the entire northeastern United States,from Hudson Bay to northern Florida. Human per-secution and habitat destruction eliminated wolvesfrom this region by the end of the nineteenth centu-ry. No established wolf populations are currentlyfound here, although a few observations of wolvesor “wolf-like” animals have been made in recentyears throughout the Northeast, including Vermont,New York and Maine.

Current Status and Threats

In their 2003 final rule to reclassify wolves in thelower 48 states, the Fish and Wildlife Service createdone recovery zone (or Distinct Population Segment),for the entire eastern United States, despite the factthat no wolves are known to exist there. This “phan-tom” population is listed as threatened, and the Fishand Wildlife Service is currently proposing to removefederal protections for wolves in this region. If federalprotections are removed, wolf management wouldrevert back to the state management agencies that donot have wolves protected on their state endangeredspecies lists. This would all but eliminate any chancefor wolf recovery in this region.

The Future

Defenders is concerned that the Fish and WildlifeService’s rule arbitrarily ignores significant areaswithin the historic range of the gray wolf wherepotential exists for recovery. Uncertainty about the

STATE of the WOLF 2004

12

CURRENT POPULATION:

No known population at this time.

Northeast

VT

NH

NY

ME

Potential recovery area

NY

Canada

© GARY KRAMER/U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Page 15: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

taxonomic status of similar eastern species is alsocomplicating the situation. Given the radicalchanges that have occurred in the Northeast ecosys-tem since colonial times, and the lack of remainingphysical evidence of the presence of wolves, it is dif-ficult to determine which species may have beenpresent historically, the larger gray wolf or the small-er red wolf — or both. For this reason, any wolfrestoration in the Northeast would have to include adetailed analysis of the best source population foruse in the recovery process. Continued federal pro-tections and funding will be necessary in order toconduct research to determine the historic taxonomyof wolves in this region. Defenders is submittingcomments on the federal delisting proposal, and willcontinue to fight in the legal system and in the courtof public opinion to achieve wolf restoration in theNortheast United States.

Background

Alaska is the only place in the United States wherewolves are not protected as an endangered species.

The gray wolf is found throughout the state, and asubspecies, the Alexander Archipelago wolf, is foundin coastal southeastern Alaska.

Wolves in Alaska have been under attack sincethe 1940s by those who believe the animals com-pete with humans for moose and caribou. A federalpoisoning and aerial shooting campaign began fol-lowing World War II. By the mid-1950s the govern-ment had greatly reduced wolf numbers in much ofsouthcentral and interior Alaska. While poisoningwas banned after statehood in 1959, aerial shootingand bounty payments continued through the 1960s.After the passage of the Federal Airborne HuntingAct in 1972 and the termination of the bounty,wolf numbers increased. By the mid-1970s huntersdemanded state-sponsored wolf control and the

STATE of the WOLF 2004

13

CURRENT POPULATION:

An estimated 7,000 to 10,000 wolves.

Alaska

AK

Canada

© COREL CORPORATION

Page 16: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Alaska Department of Fish and Game respondedwith helicopter shooting programs. Considerablepublic opposition stopped these state-sponsoredprograms, but land-and-shoot hunting of wolves byprivate hunters continued through the 1980s intothe early 1990s. The Alaska legislature also passedan Intensive Game Management Law requiring thatthe state’s moose and caribou be managed for highconsumptive use by humans, which in many areasrequires huge reductions in wolf populations.

In 1996 a successful ballot measure bannedpublic land-and-shoot wolf hunting, and limitedaerial wolf killing to state employees only in cases ofbiological emergencies. In 1999, the Alaska legisla-ture amended the law and removed the biologicalemergency clause. In 2000, it passed a law thatwould let private hunters implement aerial or land-and-shoot wolf control on behalf of the state. Alaskavoters responded immediately with another success-ful ballot measure in 2000 which kept the prohibi-tion on public aerial wolf killing in place.

In 2003, the legislature, led by Governor FrankMurkowski, overturned the ballot measure and passeda law allowing the state to issue permits to privatehunters to kill wolves in areas approved for predatorcontrol. Under this law, aerial gunning teams canshoot wolves directly from the air, or chase them toexhaustion and shoot them on the ground. Thiscould be done even in areas where moose populationswere stable or growing, or had met population objec-tives under the Intensive Game Management law.

Current Status and Threats

Wolves are hunted and trapped on nearly 99 percentof state land and 95 percent of federal lands inAlaska. Hunting seasons in most areas begin August10 and end April 30, with bag limits ranging fromfive wolves per year to 10 per day in some areas.Trapping season runs from November 1 to April 30and there is no limit on the number of wolves that

can be killed. Fish and Game records show an averageannual harvest of 1,500 wolves during the past fiveyears. They believe the unreported harvest could beequal or double the number killed legally.

In addition to hunting and trapping, the statehas initiated several wolf-killing programs to augmentmoose populations for hunters. In 2004, 147 wolveswere killed by aerial gunning teams in a 10,000-square-mile area. The Alaska Board of Gameapproved an additional 20,000 square miles in March2004, bringing the total killing zone for the 2004-2005 winter to 30,000 square miles where nearly 500wolves will be targeted.

Snow machine wolf hunting has also beenexpanded in the state and is currently permitted ontens of thousands of square miles of interior Alaska.Hunters may chase wolves to exhaustion, and in someareas shoot them directly from a moving machine.

The Future

A small but powerful trophy hunting lobby contin-ues to pressure state officials to expand the area foraerial wolf killing. A recent proposal that includesgrizzly bear reduction programs will be deliberatedupon at an upcoming Alaska Board of Game meet-ing. The proposal calls for an additional 20,000square miles where 400 wolves are to be killed,including on federal park and refuge lands. Yetanother proposal for expansion of the killing zone isexpected at the Spring 2005 Alaska Board of Gamemeeting.

All programs, including those currently beingimplemented, are expected to last four to five years.This could result in roughly one-third to one-half ofAlaska’s wolf population being killed each year.Defenders is fighting on all fronts to maintain pro-tections for Alaska’s wolves.

STATE of the WOLF 2004

14

Page 17: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

Background

The red wolf, a smaller and more slender speciesthan the gray wolf, once roamed throughout thesoutheastern United States as far north asPennsylvania and as far west as central Texas.Because of its wide distribution, the red wolf playedan important role in a variety of ecosystems, fromlowlands to forested mountains.

Hunted like their gray wolf cousins, red wolvesby the 1970s existed only along the Gulf Coast ofsoutheastern Texas and southwestern Louisiana.Gravely endangered, the last 14 red wolves in thewild were captured by Fish and Wildlife Servicebiologists and put into a captive-breeding programin a last-ditch effort to save the species.

Reintroduction to the wild began in the late1980s with a successful but limited release of cap-tive-born wolves on Bulls Island of South Carolina’s

Atlantic coast. This experiment was followed byreintroduction of captive-born red wolves inAlligator River National Wildlife Refuge in 1987,and later into Pocosin Lakes National WildlifeRefuge in northeastern North Carolina. Notably,this was the first reintroduction of a species that wasofficially extinct in the wild. Red wolves were alsoreleased into Great Smoky Mountains NationalPark, but sadly these animals could not find suffi-cient food or raise young successfully and therestoration program there was ended.

Current Status and Threats

Thanks to the efforts of Fish and Wildlife Service,today there are at least 100 red wolves residing in afive-county area of northeastern North Carolina.Population growth has been particularly strong in thepast few years since officials began an intensive, and

STATE of the WOLF 2004

15

RED WOLVES

CURRENT POPULATION:

Approximately 100 in northeastern NorthCarolina

North Carolina

NCTN

KY

SC

VA

Occupied recovery area Potential recovery area

© JOHN AND KAREN HOLLINGSWORTH/U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Page 18: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

successful, management program to prevent hybridiz-ing between red wolves and coyotes. The Fish andWildlife Service recovery plan for the species calls forreleasing red wolves at three separate sites to create atotal wild population of 220 animals. Since the GreatSmoky Mountains release did not succeed, officialswill have to identify at least two additional sites forreintroducing red wolves in the Southeast.

As successful as the reintroduction has been, theexisting red wolf population is not immune tothreats. Despite local opposition, the U.S. Navyrecently proposed building a fighter-jet landing fieldright in the heart of red wolf country. On top ofthis, the Navy has proposed designating special-useairspace over Pocosin Lakes and other areas wherewolves reside. This action would lead to low-level,high-speed flights by military jets. Combined, thesetwo proposals would result in more than 30,000 sor-ties a year in eastern North Carolina, bringing noiseand air pollution, and hindering essential access tothe red wolves by government biologists. Defendersand a coalition of other conservation groups recentlywon a temporary injunction against the constructionof the landing field. But with the Navy appealing thecase, red wolves remain in jeopardy.

At the same time, Indiana-based Rose AcreFarms is proposing to build an egg factory in NorthCarolina red wolf territory. The four-million chick-en factory would be one of the largest egg-produc-

tion operations ever built in the United States, andwould have grave impacts on the air and water qual-ity and the environmental integrity of the area.Increased road construction for the facility will frag-ment red wolf habitat, and the facility itself mayattract wolves where interactions with humans couldprove detrimental to wolves.

The Future

Despite the challenges, there is hope for red wolves.A 2004 study by Defenders of Wildlife demonstrat-ed that red wolves can be a huge economic boon tothe rural areas they inhabit. The study surveyed visi-tors to North Carolina’s popular Outer Banks beachresorts, less than an hour’s drive from red wolf terri-tory. Tourists overwhelmingly said that they wouldspend time and money to visit the natural areas thatred wolves, black bears, alligators, river otters andother wildlife call home, generating thousands ofdollars in the region’s rural communities. Defenders,in close collaboration with the North Carolina-basedRed Wolf Coalition, is working to make these eco-tourism programs a reality. Several additional poten-tial red wolf recovery sites from Pennsylvania toFlorida have also been identified, warranting furtherfeasibility studies, as more reintroduction areas areessential for the long-term recovery of the red wolf.

STATE of the WOLF 2004

16

The wolf is slowly regaining its rightful placein North America’s web of life. Strong pub-lic support for restoring wolves to the land-

scape, coupled with the impetus of the EndangeredSpecies Act, has led to successful reintroductions inseveral parts of the country. But serious threats tothese animals remain, and obstacles to the contin-ued recovery of wolves across the country loom.

Defenders of Wildlife is working to overcome thesechallenges through ambitious outreach and educa-tion programs, innovative solutions to on-the-ground conflicts, and partnerships with other stake-holder groups. We are convinced that healthy wolfpopulations bring not only ecological benefits, buteconomic benefits as well, and are committed toworking toward those ends.

CONCLUSION

Page 19: STATE of the WOLF 2004 - Defenders of Wildlife€¦ · west, biological needs should outweigh anti-wolf poli-tics in the decision to restore the species. The Future January 2005 marks

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE

1130 17th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

202-682-9400

www.defenders.org