Ohio State's Jeremy Brukotter's article in THE WILDLIFE NEWS highlighted a critical question about Wolves East of the Upper Midest............ The original Great Lakes delisting ruling seemd to suggest that If the USFW did subsequently designate Wolves in the Eastern States to be a distinct species(C.lycaon) from The Gray Wolf(C.lupus),,,,,,,,,, that it would have been possible for a Federal Judge to then invalidate the entire delisting rule which would have potentially put Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin Wolves back on the Endangered Species list..........In Bruskotters's own words: "Because the proposed removal of wolves in the eastern United States relies upon "unsettled" science, it puts the whole Rule at risk from a legal perspective; that is, a judge may find no flaw in the FWS's removal of wolves in the Great Lakes, but might object to their removal from ESA protections in 29 eastern states–especially if new research contradicts the FWS's claims regarding wolves' taxonomic classification or their analysis of the historical range of the various wolf sub/species. In such a scenario, the judge may be forced to invalidate the entire rule–keeping wolves in the Great Lakes listed. From my perspective, the classification of wolves in the eastern US should be handled separately from the removal of wolves in the Great Lakes. These actions affect separate populations of potentially different species, and thus, their statuses should be judged and handled in separate rules in order not to jeopardize the rule that delists the wolf population in the Great Lakes",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Bruskotter can rest easy as a subsquent USFW update removes this concern as follows: "We are separating our determination on the delisting of the Western Great Lakes DPS from the determination on our proposal regarding all or portions of the 29 eastern States we considered to be outside the historical range of the gray wolf… A subsequent decision will be made for the rest of the eastern United States"

The Federal Status of Wolves in the Midwest and the East: Conflict on the Horizon?

In May of this year, the US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed creating a Distinct Population Segment (or "DPS") of wolves in the Great Lakes Region, and removing wolves in this DPS from federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections (76 Fed. Reg 26086). The "delisting" of wolves in the Great Lakes was recently discussed in another post on The Wildlife News, and generally enjoys widespread support by state agencies and the academic community. However, the Proposed Rule, goes well beyond just removing wolves in the Great Lakes from federal protections; in fact, the Fish and Wildlife Service conducts a review of wolves' historical range, and proposes the removal of gray wolves (C. lupus) from ESA protections in 29 eastern states, asserting that new genetic evidence indicates that a different species (C. lycaon) was present in these areas:

We also propose to revise the range of the gray wolf (the species C. lupus) by removing all or parts of 29 eastern states that we now recognize were not part of the historical range of the gray wolf. New information indicates that these areas should not have been included in the original listing of the gray wolf…we recognize recent taxonomic information indicating that the gray wolf subspecies Canis lupus lycaon should be elevated to the full species C. lycaon.

EASTERN WOLF PICTURE

Importantly, the science that the Fish and Wildlife Service relies upon is very recent, and there is still substantial disagreement in the scientific community regarding the taxonimic status of canids in the eastern United States. Thus, the proposed rule drew heavy criticism from the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, which asserted:

The proposed rule represents a fundamental, complex and far-reaching shift in federal wolf policy and in the Service's implementation of the Endangered Species Act. The proposed rule seeks to significantly alter fundamental precepts of wolf taxonomy based on a handful of genetic studies that do not enjoy broad support in the scientific community. The Service also proposes, for the first time, a new National Wolf Strategy that represents a dramatic departure from federal wolf management strategies that have existed for decades. The proposed National Wolf Strategy is based on the Service's proposed massive re-ordering of wolf taxonomy; it would also, for the first time in more than thirty years, remove federal protection from gray wolves in the Northeast and essentially abandon the Service's longstanding commitment to wolf recovery in the Northeast. (See the Memo).

GRAY WOLF PICTURE

Because the proposed removal of wolves in the eastern United States relies upon "unsettled" science, it puts the whole Rule at risk from a legal perspective; that is, a judge may find no flaw in the FWS's removal of wolves in the Great Lakes, but might object to their removal from ESA protections in 29 eastern states–especially if new research contradicts the FWS's claims regarding wolves' taxonomic classification or their analysis of the historical range of the various wolf sub/species. In such a scenario, the judge may be forced to invalidate the entire rule–keeping wolves in the Great Lakes listed. From my perspective, the classification of wolves in the eastern US should be handled separately from the removal of wolves in the Great Lakes. These actions affect separate populations of potentially different species, and thus, their statuses should be judged and handled in separate rules in order not to jeopardize the rule that delists the wolf population in the Great Lakes.
- – - – - – -
UPDATES
Thanks to "WM" and others who noted that the FWS published an updated draft Final Rule. Note, the updated Rule treats wolves in the Great Lakes region separately from wolves in the East:

We are separating our determination on the delisting of the Western Great Lakes DPS from the determination on our proposal regarding all or portions of the 29 eastern States we considered to be outside the historical range of the gray wolf… A subsequent decision will be made for the rest of the eastern United States.

The FWS also apparently is considering all of the wolves that historically occurred in the Great Lakes region to be "gray wolves" (i.e., C. lupus). This is good news for those who want to see wolves removed from ESA protections in the Great Lakes. The really interesting question (at least to me) is how will canids will be classified (from a taxonomic perspective) and treated (from a conservation perspective) in the eastern US?

Jeremy Bruskotter

Dr. Jeremy Bruskotter is an assistant professor in the School of Environment and Natural Resources at the Ohio State University where his research interests are centered around the "human dimensions" of wildlife conservation and management. Jeremy is passionate about wildlife–at one time or another, he has called himself hunter, angler, and wildlife photographer. Most of all, Jeremy is concerned with bringing the tools and techniques of the social sciences to bear on pressing issues in wildlife management.