Science Backs Delisting Rocky Mountain Wolves

By Ed Bangs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Wolf delisting is the right thing to do biologically because the best science shows wolves no longer need the protections of the Endangered Species Act in Montana or Idaho. Right now there are about 1,650 wolves in the northern Rockies and they live in about 220 packs and at least 100 of them successfully raised two or more pups in 2008.

The population is highly genetically diverse because of the way we did the reintroductions and subsequent management relocations. It amuses me that activists, politicians, and lawyers are "demanding" the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists use "best science".

There is nothing short of excessive and prolonged levels of killing by people over a very large area that could affect the wolf population into the future- and that clearly won’t happen.

The northern Rockies wolves are simply a 400-mile southern extension of a vast Canadian wolf population of over 12,000 in Alberta and British Columbia and nearly 60,000-70,000 wolves in North America. Wolves are harvested in Alaska and Canada–and most other parts of the world–and generally the populations do just fine.

Wolves are tremendously resilient and adaptable animals and in recent history wolves have the greatest natural distribution of any land mammal on earth except people.

Resident wolf packs occupy nearly all suitable habitat in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming so there really isn’t any more room for more wolf packs without lots more livestock and pet damage than we current have. Last year was a record with at least 214 cattle, 355 sheep, 14 dogs and 18 other large domestic animals confirmed killed. Studies indicate only a fraction, perhaps only one in eight of actual wolf-caused losses, are ever confirmed.

In 2008, nearly $500,000 was paid by private and state wolf compensation programs in the northern Rockies and U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services spent nearly $1 million doing problem wolf control work.

Montana has committed to manage for over 400 wolves, Idaho for over 500 wolves, and the Fish and Wildlife Service will manage wolves in Wyoming at about 300. So delisting in Montana and Idaho will not affect the Yellowstone Park wolves or any of the wolves in the Greater Yellowstone area in Wyoming and no one is suggesting there will be anything but very limited and highly regulated fair chase (no aircraft or snow machines) hunting in Montana and Idaho which will absolutely not threaten the wolf population and will maintain it at more than 1,200 wolves.

The "crying wolf" claims by some that 1,000 wolves may be immediately killed in the northern Rockies are absolutely not true. Montana and Idaho have already been managing wolves for about five years in their states under cooperative agreements with the Fish and Wildlife Service, so they have the expertise, field staff, and organization to continue to do a great job, just as they have done with managing mountain lions, black bears, elk, deer, moose, etc. Wyoming is another story and that’s why we are not removing the ESA protections for wolves there until Wyoming can demitted velop an acceptable regulatory framework and wolf management plan.

Based on some of what you have probably heard, I’d be upset too. However, most of it isn’t accurate. What is happening (as is typical when you mix wolves and people anywhere in the world) is that people are using wolves as a symbol of other human values and opinions to debate with other people.

So some of the people who don’t like the idea of wolves being killed by people (although we killed 265 wolves last year because of record levels of livestock depredation and the population still increased eight percent from 2007 levels) are making stuff up or presenting partial facts to justify their opinions.

The Fish and Wildlife Service’s job as defined by Congress and the ESA is to have the best science and use it to make rational fact-based decisions. We have a situation now where the science–and all the expert scientists we relied on as peer reviewers–is clearly saying the northern Rockies wolf population is fully biologically recovered and will never be threatened in the future unless states fail to carry out their commitments to regulate human-caused mortality.

There are some folks who don’t like that and are attempting to sway things politically to their value systems by "stretching" the truth or confusing science (facts) with human values and opinions. Science can’t resolve human moral issues. I have no problem with folks saying "I don’t want wolves hunted because I think that is morally wrong," but I do take issue with twisting the facts and science to falsely justify that their values are somehow based on "true science".

Anyway, the northern Rockies wolf population is doing great, at least biologically. The legal issues and human-value issues are legitimate ones for people to argue about and ask the courts or politicians for clarification or to better address their concerns. But the science is clear-cut, biologically the northern Rockies wolf population is in outstanding condition and is fully recovered.

The level of highly-regulated hunting that is planned by the states (just as bear, lion, elk, deer, etc, hunts have helped conserve those populations/herds) isn’t going to affect the overall wolf population or its future health. For more fact-based information about wolves and the NRM see http://westerngraywolf.fws.gov.

Ed Bangs has served as the lead biologist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the federal agency’s effort to restore the gray wolf population in northern Rocky Mountain states. He has been with the project since 1988, including the release in Yellowstone Park and central Idaho. He has remained in the job through the process of delisting this population of wolves under the Endangered Species Act.