Throughout history, gray wolves, also known as timber wolves, have been portrayed as menacing creatures that kill and destroy whatever may come in their paths. However, wolves are part of the natural world and contribute to the overall health of the ecosystem. As early settlers began to move west to farm the vast landscape of North America during the 1800s, the wolf perhaps menaced too much. With livestock falling prey to its jaws it was only a matter of time before the beasts were targeted and bounties were offered for wolf kills. By the 1930s, wolves almost completely disappeared in the lower 48 states following their eradication from Yellowstone National Park. However, numbers of wolves remained in the Great Lakes region, (Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin). In 1974, as public opinion toward the predators began to evolve, wolves became classified as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Adding Fuel To The Fire

Under the act’s protection, wolf populations have grown in the Great Lakes region, and additionally animals have been reintroduced into Yellowstone. Upon their return to the park in 1995, amidst huge controversy and disapproval from local ranchers, wolf packs began to flourish again. By 2007 the wolf’s population quickly flourished in the northern Rocky Mountain region and they were removed from endangered status at the same time as the Great Lakes wolves. Wolves were returned to the endangered species list in 2008 because of lawsuits from various animal protection groups. In May of 2009, wolves in both regions were once again removed after President Obama upheld the decision previously made by President Bush to take wolves off the list. However, Great Lakes wolves were listed again merely a month later, because a proper public comment period, or the time allowed for the public to express its views and concerns regarding an action, wasn’t given. Northern Rocky Mountain region wolves (Montana, Wyoming, Idaho and parts of Washington, Oregon and Utah) kept their delisted status, because a public comment period was given in their case.


In 1996 gray wolves were captured in Canada and released into the United States in the effort to establish self-sustaining populations of wolves and remove the species from the endangered species list.
As the on-again, off-again process continues, wildlife organizations and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) battle for a proper wolf management plan. One of the main questions is whether wolf populations should be managed by state wildlife agencies or by the federal government?

“Keeping the wolves on the federal list is kind of a mismatch in a way, because the endangered species act is intended to recover rare species, but the wolf doesn’t really fit that classification anymore, so it’s time to transition to long-term conservation and management in the same way that we do for other wildlife,” says Carolyn Sime, gray wolf program coordinator for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

But many factors go into enacting a successful wolf management plan. Some of the things that must be taken into consideration include proper wolf habitat, which should include provisions for appropriate relations with wolves among people, other wildlife and the environment. Western states have been trying for years to make effective wolf management plans.

“It’s a pretty multi-faceted system,” says Sime. “I encourage folks to resist the temptation to oversimplify it. You can’t just pull the wolf out of the system and say, ‘everything is due to wolves’ or you can’t just pull the wolf out of the system and say, ‘none of this has anything to do with wolves.’ In reality, it’s a natural system.”

So the debate rages on. Should the wolf be listed as endangered or not, and if not, then how should the wolf be managed and by who? To get a better feel for this heated debate, lets take an in-depth look back in time as well as talk to advocates from both sides.

The Wolf’s History In America

Wolves have been a symbol of the West for quite some time. The region has been their home since before Native Americans settled the land many thousands of years ago. According to the National Resources Defense Council’s Web site, the United States was once home to 200,000 wolves, but predator-control programs, which targeted wolves for decades, made the wolf population sharply decrease. When settlers moved west, wolves’ food supply such as elk, moose and deer was depleted, leaving wolves to prey on cattle and livestock. To battle this problem ranchers then began extermination programs to rid wolves of the West, which continued until the mid-1960s.

In the 1970s, growing awareness led to public outcry demanding that the wolves make a comeback. Not long after, wolves were added to the Endangered Species Act, which protected them from hunting and trapping.

For a species to be listed under the Endangered Species Act requires that the federal government identify a species that they believe is threatened to become extinct. A habitat the species needs for survival must be identified, and from there, the


A pack of gray wolves surround a bison in Yellowstone.
federal government works to protect that species.

In 2007, wildlife officials confirmed that the wolves that had been reintroduced had reached their proposed recovery numbers, so they were no longer considered an endangered species. States also had to submit a long-term wolf management plan: these two requirements are necessary to have state control instead of federal-government control. After fulfilling both requirements, state wildlife agencies were now in control of their own wolf population, but it didn’t last long. Animal rights groups sued the federal government and were successful in reinstating wolf protection. The same argument has taken place again this year, and as of now, gray wolves are labeled as endangered in the western Great Lakes region and threatened in Minnesota, according to the USFWS Web site. Montana and Idaho wolves weren’t affected by the recent relisting.

The current lawsuit involves Earthjustice, a public interest law firm specializing in animal rights, and 13 other supporting organizations. They’ve declared the suit against the USFWS and Ken Salazar, secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior. But the USFWS plans to appeal the court’s decision to relist wolves, and an open public comment period could resume as early as this fall.

One of those groups siding with Earthjustice is the Defenders of Wildlife. Suzanne Stone, Northern Rockies representative for the Defenders of Wildlife, says that most people get confused about what the organizations are trying to do. “Actually, we’re working hard to try to get to a good delisting plan, and that’s probably one of the biggest misconceptions — that we’re trying to stop delisting from happening,” says Stone. “What we want is a good wolf delisting plan for the region that guarantees a sustainable wolf population after the federal protections are lifted.”

Defenders of Wildlife doesn’t list hunting on its Web site as one of the suggested methods of managing a sustainable population of wolves. However, the following methods are listed on its site: Properly disposing of sick, dead and dying animals; livestock guarding dogs; fencing, fladry (tying evenly placed strips of cloth to a strand of wire fencing) and night pens; range riders and herders; using scare devices; alternative grazing sites and more.

But Stone says hunting can be a viable option. “Defenders of Wildlife does not oppose regulated hunting programs in states with well-thought-out, responsible conservation-based management plans for wildlife species that are not facing conservation risks or threats,” explains Stone. “Unfortunately, the current regional wolf hunting programs are based on an inadequate federal delisting rule that allows most of the regional wolf population to be reduced to unsustainable and fragmented subpopulations that are just a fraction of the current population.”

Western states feel it’s time to remove wolves as endangered species and let their wildlife departments take over wolf management. “Delisting is appropriate,” says Sime. “The Endangered Species Act has done its job and recovery is a success.”

The Great Lakes region agrees as well, “It’s clear that wolves have recovered in Wisconsin,” says Adam Collins, spokesman for the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

A wolf management plan is key, however. States must prove their plans will work for the long-term. How wolves are classified is a factor in those plans, as well. Idaho, along with many other states, classifies wolves as a big game animal instead of a predator. One such state is Alaska, and they’ve been successfully managing wolves by means of hunting for decades.

Wolves In Alaska

Wolves that inhabit Alaska differ greatly from the rest of the United States’ wolf population. They’ve been managed by the state for years — quite effectively. Bruce Bartley, public information officer for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game says that wolf management in Alaska works because the species isn’t threatened or endangered, and their entire historic habitat is occupied. “When we first became a state 50 years ago, we had gone through more than a decade of intensive predator control by the federal government, including poisoning,” says Bartley. “One of the first things we did was reclassify wolves as big game animals, giving them the stature they deserve rather than that of vermin.”

In the 1960s and 1970s, the wolf population in Alaska began to recover, and different measures had to be taken to manage them. Aerial hunting was introduced and was an acceptable practice for many years. It involves shooting from the air to control wolf populations in areas that have abundant numbers. Now, it’s been turned around as an unfair and cruel practice, and has been continuously fought by wildlife protection groups.

“Aerial hunting is a misnomer,” says Bartley. “It is not hunting in the traditional sense where anyone can participate. There are bag limits, and fair chase principles apply. The use of aircraft is designed to remove a desired number of wolves from a specific area as quickly and as efficiently as possible.”

Bartley says that using aircraft tactics is the only means of effectively controlling wolves without resorting to things such as poison, which would affect non-target species, too. Controlling wolves effectively is a tricky process that involves assessing many issues such as wolf-human relationships and wolf-wildlife relationships.

Can Wolves and Humans Coexist?

So is it possible for wolves and humans to coexist peacefully? Yes and no. Valerius Geist, professor emeritus at the University of Calgary, says that introducing wolves into inhabited landscapes is absolutely nonsense. “Historically, it’s never worked out because wolves have been wolves.” Issues like wolves interbreeding with dogs have skewed the species’ genetic makeup. Geist says that when wolves and humans exist in close quarters, severe damage to wildlife and agriculture occurs, as well as human casualties. “Worldwide, it’s the same story, over and over again. The best thing is to have wide open spaces where they can exist and where they don’t interfere with us and where they’re also safe genetically.”

He believes that a new wildlife conservation plan needs to be put together that encompasses policies that put wildlife first. The policy must involve public support of wildlife or it won’t be able to survive, according to Geist. He believes zoning issues should be taken more seriously and that for wolf conservation to work, they have to live in areas where humans won’t bother them.

Wolves and Hunters

Human-wolf relationships play a huge role in the wolf debate. Of course, state fish and game departments believe that hunting is an effective means of wolf management. “Idaho Department of Fish and Game intends to use hunter harvest as a primary management tool and will manage wolf population numbers as we do with other big game animals,” says Jon Rachel, state wildlife manager for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

As western Great Lakes states play the waiting game with the current lawsuits, the Rocky Mountain states are planning hunting seasons for the fall, which will include wolves. The Montana Fish and Wildlife Service commission has already established their wolf quotas.

“The commission established the final wolf hunting season quota of 75 wolves statewide broken out into three different management units,” says Sime. “Licenses are available to anyone who chooses to purchase one. We’ve been really committed to putting together a hunting season proposal that’s conservative. Montana is involving hunters in the wolf management process as much as they can by trying to get a hunting season underway.”     

Some states have set their hunting seasons, but are waiting to set hunting quotas, like Idaho. “The Idaho Fish and Game Commission established wolf hunting seasons in March, but will not set quotas for wolf harvest until August 17,” says Rachel.

Predation

While wolf predation, or the act of wolves killing other wildlife, is a problem in many states, data shows that the issue isn’t as threatening in most states as some make it out to be. They’re responsible for less than 1 percent of all livestock depredations, according to studies published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Wolves’ primary source of food is ungulates, or hoofed animals, and they usually prey on the weakest and sickest animals, which ends up benefiting elk and moose populations in the long run.

However, since gray wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone, some studies have shown that elk, moose and deer populations have declined in certain states, like Montana. “We’ve been involved in a variety of research projects in southwest Montana and we have found places where wolf predation has been a factor in overall declines in elk numbers,” says Sime. “Those areas tend to be ones where we don’t have livestock. We have backed off on human-hunter opportunity for elk in those places, like upper Gallatin and the Gardiner Late Hunt.”

Another reason that can contribute to many hunters reporting low elk numbers in the Northern Rockies is that elk herds have simply changed their dispersal habits because of the reintroduction of wolves. Instead of grazing out in the open where they’re more susceptible to wolf attacks, elk are feeding on forage hidden in the woods away from wolves.

Studies taken by state wildlife agencies show that other factors are more of an issue than wolf predation. But some states, like Montana, are having serious problems with elk populations in some areas. A recent study conducted by Montana State University in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem proves that elk have changed their living and eating habits so drastically that


Yellowstone Park Wolf Project leader Dr. Doug Smith checks the new radio collar on a tranquilized wolf during collaring operations in Yellowstone on 1-09-03.
they are having fewer calves because of the stress they face from wolves and this has become the main cause for low elk numbers. Before wolf reintroduction, elk numbers in Yellowstone’s northern range were between 17,000 -19,000. Almost a decade later the studies show that elk numbers have decreased to somewhere between 6,700 - 6,300.

But some states, such as Wyoming, don’t have proper data yet to determine whether or not wolves are a major factor in elk depredation. 

“There are hundreds of different things that can affect elk populations — everything from drought, habitat changes, development, hunting and grizzly bears,” says Eric Keszler, public information officer for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. “We don’t know what kind of impact wolves are having on elk populations right now. We just don’t have data out there yet to help us understand individually the kind of impact wolves are having on elk populations. Studies are going on right now that will give us more insight.”

Studies in Idaho show that elk and deer depredation from wolves is not a widespread problem. “Most importantly, IDFG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game) statistics verify that elk and deer populations are at ecologically sustainable numbers, and wolves account for less than 10 percent of all elk and deer deaths in Idaho,” according to the IDFG Web site.

Statistics depend on the area, however. Some regions of Idaho do have low elk numbers, and during the 2009 hunting season the state is holding an extended wolf-hunting season to manage the predators in those areas. “Seasons will run Oct. 1 – Dec. 31 in most of the state, but longer seasons are being offered in wolf management zones primarily comprised of designated wilderness (Sept. 15 – Dec. 31) and in the Lolo and Sawtooth Wolf Management Zones (Sept. 1 – March 31) where wolf predation on elk has been of greatest concern,” says Rachel.

Many factors go into making sure wolves are protected properly, and states and the federal government obviously have different views of how the species should be managed. But the Rocky Mountain and Western Great Lakes states aren’t planning on backing down anytime soon. “The State of Idaho will argue in court that delisting of wolves is appropriate at this time and that the state will manage wolves responsibly with intent to ensure that wolves don’t become endangered again in the future,” says Rachel. They’re going to keep fighting until their states receive the right to manage their own wolf populations.


About the author: Kate Winford is completing an internship with Grand View Media Group in Birmingham, Ala. She is a journalism major at Auburn University and will graduate in August 2009. War Eagle!