Current Population Status

Looking at research studies around the United States, it was found that there are roughly 8,750 wild wolves present as of 2021. The common areas that these wild gray wolves are found are in the Pacific Northwest, Northern Rocky Mountains, Southwest, the Western Great Lake States, some in North Carolina, and lastly the most are found in Alaska. The red wolf is the most endangered subspecies of the wolf family, commonly found in North Carolina, “has decreasing populations, with only between 20 and 30 individuals in the U.S” (Gallagher 1). Other than them, Gray Wolves are fairly abundant throughout the United States and do not cause much harm other than to farmers livestock. With this though, there are programs that take the opportunity to try and restore wolf populations to a higher point than they are at right now. In most of the southern states, the residents that live there have driven most wolf populations to extinction, and it is a miracle that they have made a recurrence in the northwest and now Great Lakes (Defenders of Wildlife).

Current Habitat Status

Historically, wolves have occupied up to two thirds of the United states, and can thrive in just about any type of habitat. Though they are voracious predators, they kind fill a lot of different niches in different types of habitats, making them so prolific. Their native range spans from Alaska all the way down to parts of Arizona and New mexico. But different habitats face different types of challenges and the status of habitat changes and affects the wolves differently depending on where they live. Though the wolves once lived in a majority of the continental United states, they’ve since been completely wiped out of places that have been completely transformed due to human intervention, such as most of the great plains. Other places where you can still find wolves have a lot more restrictions such as the Rockies, but even places like that have changed a lot and are more fragmented than they once were. In order for wolves to fully thrive, they must have a contentious habitat where each pack can make their own home ranges. These home ranges are considerably large compared to a lot of other predators that live here in the states, and can range from 259 to 1676 km! (Mattisson. Et. al.2013). By having these fragmented home ranges, it can limit the growth and reestablishment of this population, in the near future. One natural disaster, or outbreak of disease, could kill off a pack without a connecting fragment to seed a new population to repopulate.

Threats to the Species

There are lots of imminent threats that the gray wolves face, but the predominant one being human impact. Humans impact wolves in many different ways that aren’t as obvious as some might think. Humans have altered the landscape significantly to the point where there are habitat edges stopping the growth of their pack size and populations. In large spaces that used to be an expansive wolf range, is now a small plot surrounded by farmland and altered ecosystems. Another major threat to wolf populations are these farmers. They have livestock that they need to protect because their livelihood relies on it. These people are some of the biggest proponents to the reintroduction of wolves because they can cause such a big impact to their herds. Hunting by farmers has been noted as the leading cause of why wolves nearly went extinct in the first place(Defenders of Wildlife, 2021). And now with some of the reestablished packs, they’re are some of the loudest voices trying to get them removed off the endangered species list. This way the states, which tend to be more lenient on the farmers, have more control over how their pacts are managed. And with decentralized management on this species, and fragmented habitats, this could be a grim outcome for the management of gray wolves.

Recovery Options

The idea of recovery options for the wolf is a little contested. Many people have different ideas as to what the idea of recovery implies and to what extent the population of wolves should be at. Both sides of the argument have good reasoning and arguments making it difficult to properly define. Ranchers of course are for leaving the population at what it is or making it small, believing that the amount of wolves is sufficient or too much and that they are already recovered. They are the ones actively dealing with the wolves and defending their cattle from them. Their option for recovery would be to de-list the wolf and be more loose with the restrictions on hunting or defending against them, believing that the population is already big enough. Environmentalists believe that the current data on wolf populations “contradicts the state expectation of no change in the population size” (Treves, 2021). This means that they hope to keep the wolf on the endangered species list and help its population grow. They believe the numbers of the population are less than what is reported and that the numbers are falling meaning the wolf should not be delisted. The options based on these opinions are to leave the wolf population alone and de-list it, or keep it on and help it grow.

In order for the wolf to be recovered and delisted it must reach a certain mandated population and other goals. These can include a certain number of population reached, stability of the population and overall well being of the wolves among others. The hard part about this is people arguing over definitions and data on whether they meet the goals. Also a problem arises if the wolf is delisted as it would now allow it to be more easily hunted or create a threat to it which would “undermine the overarching purpose of the ESA, which is to mitigate threats to the recovery of species.”(Bruskotter 2013).

Outlook of Recovery

The outlook for recovery seems good as most people simply want good for the wolves, it more comes down to an opinion as to what that good is. Because of this indecision it has led to an overall policy deadlock where not much is being done as neither side wants to let up.This added time has allowed for the population to grow and stabilize more meaning that regardless of the decision the wolf will hopefully be okay. Some researchers like DePerno believe “When I see that the gray wolf is being delisted, the first thing I think is that the species has met the recovery goals set by state and federal biologists and university scientists. I trust the people establishing the recovery goals and making the decisions to delist.”(Moore 2020). He is of the belief that the population is at a good enough level to delist and that they have reached the population goals. 

Evidence to Support or De-list Species

When looking at wolf populations and the answers to their conservation, the information is clouded by a vast array of opinions from the many stakeholders involved. Wolves territory intersects with many human populations in Northern America, including farming communities and larger cities. (Moore, 2020) When arguing for this species to be delisted, ranchers and hunters lead the arguments. The first main point for this idea is that wolves are harmful to both cattle and humans. While there are very few cases of wolves attacking humans, they do kill large amounts of cattle every year which becomes costly for ranchers. Hunters argue that wolves kill ungulates that would otherwise provide food and skins for human consumption. These are some of the reasons that protecting wolves would directly affect humans. (Moore, 2020) 

Wolf hunting is very popular in states such as Montana and Wyoming. (Moore, 2020) When the species are not listed, it is up to the state governments to decide how they should be protected. This has resulted in some states having inefficient regulations on wolf hunting to keep them at sustainable population levels. Environmentalists and other interested groups claim that the species needs to be listed or remain listed to prevent overharvesting. Their populations need enough of each sex to produce a sustainable number of offspring. Hunting wolves would likely prevent this from happening, and the species numbers would diminish. These animals are also beneficial for healthy ecosystems as they are a top predator in the food chain. When there are enough wolves, there are less ungulates that eat away at native vegetation when in unchecked numbers. (Bruskotter, 2013)

When comparing these options for wolf listing, it is difficult to please all of the stakeholders involved; however with some policy and extra measures there could be some compromise. If the wolves were to be listed there would likely be a higher rate of cattle killed. A system could be implemented where lost cattle could be compensated by local governments to encourage ranchers not to shoot the wolves that are found on their properties. Allowing hunters limited lottery tags if wolves reproduce past the environments’ carrying capacity could also be an option to prevent overspreading of wolves into cities and developed areas. (Bruskotter, 2013) With some compromise, the evidence points more towards listing wolves in favor of ecosystem health.

Bibliography

1. Bruskotter, Jeremy T., et al. “Removing Protections for Wolves and the Future of the U.S. Endangered Species Act (1973).” Society for Conservation Biology, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 26 Dec. 2013, https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.12081.
2. Moore, Andrew. “Should Gray Wolves Be Removed from the Endangered Species List?” College of Natural Resources News, 4 Nov. 2020, https://cnr.ncsu.edu/news/2020/11/gray-wolves-endangered-species/.
3. Treves​​, Adrian, et al. “Quantifying the Effects of Delisting Wolves after the First State Began Lethal Management.” PeerJ, PeerJ Inc., 5 July 2021, https://peerj.com/articles/11666/. 
4. “How Many Wild Wolves Are in the United States?” Wolf Conservation Center, 8 Jan. 2021, https://nywolf.org/learn/u-s-wolf-populations/. 
5. Gallagher, Katherine. “Two of the Most Endangered Wolf Species Live on Opposite Sides of the World.” Treehugger, 5 Feb. 2021, https://www.treehugger.com/are-wolves-endangered-5101178. 
6. “Gray Wolf.” Defenders of Wildlife, https://defenders.org/wildlife/gray-wolf#:~:text=There%20are%20an%20estimated%207%2C000,to%20eight%20animals%20on%20average.
7. Mattisson, J. Sand. H. Wabakken, P. Gervasi, V. Liberg, O. Linnell, J. Rauset, G. Pederson, H. 2013. Home range size variation in recovering wolf population: evaluating the effect of environmental demographic, and social factors. Oecologia. Doi: 10.1007/s00442-013-2668x