Like many of you blog readers, I am glad that the new US Fish & Wildlife "Panel of 7" scientists who have been asked to make recommendations on Gray Wolf Delisting or NOT Delisting has concluded that the first USFW Wolf Panel that had been assigned this task had focused too narrowly on only one scientific theory(the proposition that Gray Wolves never existed in Eastern North America----and that only Eastern Wolves resided there)..............To my way of thinking, the key to not delisting Gray Wolves across all of the USA is for this "NEW PANEL OF 7" to bring into the debate the long standing historical evidence pointing to the fact that Bison ranged as far east as the Carolina's, Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York State-----It seems to me that where there were Bison, you had "BISON EATERS---GRAY WOLVES(C.lupus)--larger than the deer eating Eastern Wolf(C.lycaon and/or C.rufus),,,,,,,There are many Researchers and historicial diary accounts contending that both the Gray Wolf and the Eastern(or Red) Wolf co-existed in parts of the East prior to European colonization(.See the book entitled--- NEW ENGLAND RARITIES-- where the early explorer John Josselyn writes; "Of Wolves, there are two")....Below your will read first hand the evidence that The Smithsonian Museum in D.C. has archived regarding the documentation of Bison in Eastern North America-------The earliest discovery of the bison in Eastern North America, or indeed anywhere north of Coronado’s route, was made somewhere near Washington, District of Columbia, in 1612, by an English navigator named Samuel Argoll,[3] and narrated as follows: “As soon as I had unladen this corne, I set my men to the felling of Timber, for the building of a Frigat, which I had left half finished at Point Comfort, the 19. of March: and returned myself with the ship into Pembrook [Potomac] River, and so discovered to the head of it, which is about 65 leagues into the Land, and navigable for any ship".................. "And then marching into the Countrie, I found great store of Cattle as big as Kine, of which the Indians that were my guides killed a couple, which we found to be very good and wholesome meate, and are very easie to be killed, in regard they are heavy, slow, and not so wild as other beasts of the wildernesse".......... It is to be regretted that the narrative of the explorer affords no clew to the precise locality of this interesting discovery, but since it is doubtful that the mariner journeyed very far on foot from the head of navigation of the Potomac, it seems highly probable that the first American bison seen by Europeans, other than the Spaniards, was found within 15 miles, or even less, of the capital of the United States, and possibly within the District of Columbia itself.....................All the way up into Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York were Bison as seen by early explorers and frontiersmen...............As a result, there should not be delisting of the Gray Wolf across the USA because in fact the Gray Wolf had to have roamed these same regions to keep the Bison in check.................Instead of delisting the Gray Wolf, both it and the Eastern Wolf should be re-wilded back into the East!

Unsettled Science Behind Proposal to Lift Gray
 Wolf Protections, Panel Says

Unsettled Science

 Behind Proposal

 to Lift Gray Wolf

 Protections, Panel 

Says

By Megan Gannon, News Editor   |   February 07
, 2014 04:04pm ET

The gray wolf (Canis lupus) Credit: Kramer, Gary | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service View full size image

The drawn-out battle over the fate of gray wolves
 in the United States continues.

An independent panel of experts said Friday (Feb. 7)
 that there is wide disagreement about some of the
science the Fish and Wildlife Service used to make
 its case for ousting gray wolves from the Endangered
Species list. The review could hinder the FWS
proposal to lift federal protections for the animals
 throughout much of the United States.

"It was a very clean process and we got a unanimous
 result," said Steven Courtney, one of the scientists
 charged with setting up the independent panel at
 the National Center for Ecological Analysis and
 Synthesis (NCEAS) at the University of California,
Santa Barbara. [In Photos: The Fight Over Gray
 Wolves' Endangered Status]

The panel was not taksed with deciding whether
 or not the gray wolf should be removed from the
 Endangered Species list. Rather, they were
charged with determining whether the FWS
service's recommendation to do so was
 supported by the best available science,
 explained Frank Davis, director of the NCEAS.

The experts' main complaint was that the FWS
 proposal relied too heavily on a 2012 study
 (published in the FWS's own journal North 
American Fauna), which determined wolves
 that once occupied the eastern part of the
 country were likely a genetically
 distinct species (Canis lycaon) from the
gray wolves in question (Canis lupis). If this
 were the case, the FWS would not be
 responsible for ensuring the gray wolf's
 recovery in the eastern United States.

But scientists on the panel said the results
of the 2012 study are not universally accepted
or settled. The group decided that FWS officials
"had interpreted the science that they used fairly,
 but there has been a lot of new science on the
 question of wolf genetics, and that science
 needs to be brought into that discussion,"
Davis told Live Science.

The FWS has now reopened its public
 comment period on the proposal, which
it hopes to make a decision on by the end
of the year.

The NCEAS was brought in to lead the
 independent review of the proposal after
 the FWS was criticized for meddling with
it's own peer review panel (i.e., removing
scientists who had publicly spoken out
against the proposal). The panel's results
can be read in full on the FWS's website.

Wolves once lived across much of the
 continental United States, but by the
 mid-20th century, hunting had nearly
driven the creatures to extinction.
 Conservation efforts and federal protections
 helped the animals make a comeback, and
now there are more than 5,000 gray wolves
 in the Lower 48.

In light of their recovery, wolves were recently
stripped of their federal protections in states
 in the northern Rockies and Great Lakes
region, where several state wildlife
 management agencies have established
 wolf-hunting seasons.

Some scientists and conservationists have
expressed fear that taking gray wolves off
 the list for the entire United States is premature
, and would keep them from recolonizing other
 parts of their former habitat, like Colorado and
 Utah.

Under the FWS proposal, a subspecies
population of about 83 Mexican wolves in
 New Mexico and Arizona would keep their
 Endangered Species protections.

Follow Megan Gannon on Twitter and 
Google+. Follow us @livescience, 
Facebook & Google+. Original 
article on Live Science

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION.

UNITED STATES NATIONAL

 MUSEUM.

---

THE EXTERMINATION OF 

THE AMERICAN BISON.

BY

WILLIAM T. HORNADAY,

Superintendent of the National

 Zoological Park.

---

Inscription

---

[Pg 366]

From the Report of the 

National Museum, 1886-’87,

 pages 369-548, and plates I-XXII.

---

WASHINGTON

GOVERNMENT PRINTING

 OFFICE.

1889.

---

The earliest discovery of the bison in Eastern North
 America, or indeed anywhere north of Coronado’s 
route, was made somewhere near Washington, 
District of Columbia, in 1612, by an English navigator
 named Samuel Argoll,[3] and narrated as follows:

“As soon as I had unladen this corne, I set my
 men to the felling of Timber, for the building of
 a Frigat, which I had left half finished at Point 
Comfort, the 19. of March: and returned myself
 with the ship into Pembrook [Potomac] River,
 and so discovered to the head of it, which is
 about 65 leagues into the Land, and navigable
 for any ship. And then marching into the Countrie,
 I found great store of Cattle as big as Kine, of 
which the Indians that were my guides killed a
 couple, which we found to be very good and
 wholesome meate, and are very easie to be
 killed, in regard they are heavy, slow, and
 not so wild as other beasts of the wildernesse.”

It is to be regretted that the narrative of the explorer affords 
no clew to the precise locality of this interesting discovery,
 but since it is doubtful that the mariner journeyed very far 
on foot from the head of navigation of the Potomac, it seems
 highly probable that the first American bison seen by 
Europeans, other than the Spaniards, was found within 
15 miles, or even less, of the capital of the United States, 
and possibly within the District of Columbia itself.

The first meeting of the white man with the buffalo on the
 northern boundary of that animal’s habitat occurred in
1679, when Father Hennepin[Pg 376] ascended the
 St. Lawrence to the great lakes, and finally penetrated
the great wilderness as far as western Illinois.

The next meeting with the buffalo on the Atlantic slope
 was in October, 1729, by a party of surveyors under 
Col. William Byrd, who were engaged in surveying
 the boundary between North Carolina and Virginia.

As the party journeyed up from the coast, marking 
the line which now constitutes the interstate boundary,
 three buffaloes were seen on Sugar-Tree Creek,
but none of them were killed.

On the return journey, in November, a bull buffalo
 was killed on Sugar-Tree Creek, which is in Halifax 
County, Virginia, within 5 miles of Big Buffalo Creek;
 longitude 78° 40' W., and 155 miles from the coast]
“It was found all alone, tho’ Buffaloes Seldom are.” 
The meat is spoken of as “a Rarity,” not met at all
 on the expedition up. The animal was found in thick
 woods, which were thus feelingly described: “The
 woods were thick great Part of this Day’s Journey, 
so that we were forced to scuffle hard to advance 7 
miles, being equal in fatigue to double that distance
 of Clear and Open Ground.” One of the creeks 
which the party crossed was christened Buffalo 
Creek, and “so named from the frequent tokens 
we discovered of that American Behemoth.”

In October, 1733, on another surveying expedition,
 Colonel Byrd’s party had the good fortune to kill another
 buffalo near Sugar-Tree Creek, which incident is thus
described: “We pursued our journey thro’ uneven and
 perplext woods, and in the thickest of them had the Fortune
 to knock down a Young Buffalo 2 years old. Providence
threw this vast animal in our way very Seasonably, just
as our provisions began to fail us. And it was the more
 welcome, too, because it was change of dyet, which of
 all Varietys, next to that of Bed-fellows, is the most
agreeable. We had lived upon Venison and Bear till
 our stomachs loath’d them almost as much as the
 Hebrews of old did their Quails. Our Butchers were
 so unhandy at their Business that we grew very lank
 before we cou’d get our Dinner. But when it came,
 we found it equal in goodness to the best Beef. T
hey made it the longer because they kept Sucking
the Water out of the Guts in imitation of the Catauba
Indians, upon the belief that it is a great Cordial,
and will even make them drunk, or at least very Gay.
” A little later a solitary bull buffalo was found, but 
spared] the earliest instance of the kind on record,
and which had few successors to keep it company.

The range of the American bison extended over
 about one-third of the entire continent of North
 America. Starting almost at tide-water [Pg 377]
on the Atlantic coast, it extended westward through 
a vast tract of dense forest, across the Alleghany 
Mountain system to the prairies along the 
Mississippi, and southward to the Delta of that
 great stream. Although the great plains country 
of the West was the natural home of the species,
 where it flourished most abundantly, it also 
wandered south across Texas to the burning
 plains of northeastern Mexico, westward across
 the Rocky Mountains into New Mexico, Utah,
 and Idaho, and northward across a vast treeless
 waste to the bleak and inhospitable shores of the 
Great Slave Lake itself.

 It is more than probable that had the bison
 remained unmolested by man and uninfluenced
 by him, he would eventually have crossed the Sierra
 Nevadas and the Coast Range and taken up his
 abode in the fertile valleys of the Pacific slope.

Had the bison remained for a few more centuries in
 undisturbed possession of his range, and with liberty to
roam at will over the North American continent, it is almost
certain that several distinctly recognizable varieties would
have been produced. The buffalo of the hot regions in the
 extreme south would have become a short-haired animal
 like the gaur of India and the African buffalo. The individuals
 inhabiting the extreme north, in the vicinity of Great Slave
 Lake, for example, would have developed still longer hair,
and taken on more of the dense hairyness of the musk ox
. In the “wood” or “mountain buffalo” we already have a
 distinct foreshadowing of the changes which would have
taken place in the individuals which made their permanent
residence upon rugged mountains.

It would be an easy matter to fill a volume with facts relating
 to the geographical distribution of Bison americanus and
 the dates of its occurrence and disappearance in the
 multitude of different localities embraced within the
 immense area it once inhabited. 

While it is inexpedient to include here all the facts that
 might be recorded with reference to the discovery,
existence, and ultimate extinction[Pg 378] of the bison
in the various portions of its former habitat, it is yet
worth while to sketch briefly the extreme limits of its
 range. In doing this, our starting point will be the
Atlantic slope east of the Alleghanies.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.—There is no indisputable
 evidence that the bison ever inhabited this precise
locality, but it is probable that it did. In 1612 Captain
 Argoll sailed up the “Pembrook River” to the head of
 navigation (Mr. Allen believes this was the James
River, and not the Potomac) and marched inland a
 few miles, where he discovered buffaloes, some o
f which were killed by his Indian guides. If this river
was the Potomac, and most authorities believe that
 it was, the buffaloes seen by Captain Argoll might
 easily have been in what is now the District of
 Columbia.

Admitting the existence of a reasonable doubt as to
 the identity of the Pembrook River of Captain Argoll,
 there is yet another bit of history which fairly
establishes the fact that in the early part of the
 seventeenth century buffaloes inhabited the banks
of the Potomac between this city and the lower falls
. In 1624 an English fur trader named Henry Fleet
came hither to trade with the Anacostian Indians,
who then inhabited the present site of the city of
Washington, and with the tribes of the Upper Potomac.

 In his journal (discovered a few years since in
 the Lambeth Library, London) Fleet gave a quaint 
description of the city’s site as it then appeared. 
The following is from the explorer’s journal: “
Monday, the 25th June, we set sail for the town 
of Tohoga, where we came to an anchor 2 leagues 
short of the falls. * * * This place, without question,
 is the most pleasant and healthful place in all this
 country, and most convenient for habitation, the
 air temperate in summer and not violent in winter.
 It aboundeth with all manner of fish. The Indians
 in one night commonly will catch thirty sturgeons
 in a place where the river is not above 12 fathoms
 broad, and as for deer, buffaloes, bears, turkeys,
 the woods do swarm with them. * * * The 27th of 
June I manned my shallop and went up with the flood, 
the tide rising about 4 feet at this place. We had not
 rowed above 3 miles, but we might hear the falls to
 roar about 6 miles distant.”[

MARYLAND.—There is no evidence that the bison
 ever inhabited Maryland, except what has already
been adduced with reference to the District of Columbia.
  If either of the references quoted(above regarding
 D.C.) may be taken as conclusive proof, and I see
 no reason for disputing either, then the fact that 
the bison once ranged northward from Virginia 
into Maryland is fairly established. There is reason
 to expect that fossil remains of Bison americanus will
 yet be found both in Maryland and the District of
Columbia, and I venture to predict that this will yet occur.

VIRGINIA.—Of the numerous references to the 
occurrence of the bison in Virginia, it is sufficient 
to allude to Col. William Byrd’s meetings [Pg 379]
with buffaloes in 1620, while surveying the southern 
boundary of the State, about 155 miles from the coast
, as already quoted; the references to the discovery 
of buffaloes on the eastern side of the Virginia mountains,
 quoted by Mr. Allen from Salmon’s “Present State of 
Virginia,” page 14 (London, 1737), and the capture and 
domestication of buffaloes in 1701 by the Huguenot 
settlers at Manikintown, which was situated on the 
James River, about 14 miles above Richmond.
Apparently, buffaloes were more numerous
 in Virginia than in any other of the Atlantic States.

NORTH CAROLINA.—Colonel Byrd’s discoveries 
along the interstate boundary between Virginia and 
North Carolina fixes the presence of the bison in the
 northern part of the latter State at the date of the survey. 
The following letter to Prof. G. Brown Goode, dated 
Birdsnest post-office, Va., August 6, 1888, from Mr. 
C. R. Moore, furnishes reliable evidence of the 
presence of the buffalo at another point in North 
Carolina: “In the winter of 1857 I was staying
 for the night at the house of an old gentleman
 named Houston. I should judge he was seventy 
then. He lived near Buffalo Ford, on the Catawba
 River, about 4 miles from Statesville, N. C. I asked
 him how the ford got its name. He told me that his
 grandfather told him that when he was a boy the
 buffalo crossed there, and that when the rocks 
in the river were bare they would eat the moss
 that grew upon them.” The point indicated is
 in longitude 81° west and the date not far from 
1750.

SOUTH CAROLINA.—Professor Allen cites numerous
 authorities, whose observations furnish abundant 
evidence of the existence of the buffalo in South Carolina
 during the first half of the eighteenth century. From these
 it is quite evident that in the northwestern half of the State
 buffaloes were once fairly numerous. Keating declares,
 on the authority of Colhoun, “and we know that some 
of those who first settled the Abbeville district in South
 Carolina, in 1756, found the buffalo there.” This
 appears to be the only definite locality in which the
 presence of the species was recorded.

GEORGIA.—The extreme southeastern limit of the
 buffalo in the United States was found on the coast 
of Georgia, near the mouth of the Altamaha River,
 opposite St. Simon’s Island. Mr. Francis Moore,
 in his “Voyage to Georgia,” made in 1736 and
 reported upon in 1744, makes the following
 observation: “The island [St. Simon’s] abounds
 with deer and rabbits. There are no buffalo in it, 
though there are large herds upon the main.” 
Elsewhere in the same document (p. 122) 
reference is made to buffalo-hunting by 
Indians on the main-land near Darien.

In James E. Oglethorpe’s enumeration 
(A. D. 1733) of the wild beasts of Georgia 
and South Carolina he mentions “deer, 
elks, bears, wolves, and buffaloes.”[Pg 380]

Up to the time of Moore’s voyage to Georgia the interior
 was almost wholly unexplored, and it is almost certain
 that had not the “large herds of buffalo on the
 main-land” existed within a distance of 20 or 30 
miles or less from the coast, the colonists would
 have had no knowledge of them; nor would the 
Indians have taken to the war-path against the 
whites at Darien “under pretense of hunting buffalo.”

ALABAMA.—Having established the existence of the
 bison in northwestern Georgia almost as far down as
 the center of the State, and in Mississippi down to the
neighborhood of the coast, it was naturally expected that
 a search of historical records would reveal evidence tha
t the bison once inhabited the northern half of Alabama.
A most careful search through all the records bearing
upon the early history and exploration of Alabama, to be
 found in the Library of Congress, failed to discover the
slightest reference to the existence of the species in that
State, or even to the use of buffalo skins by any of the
Alabama Indians.  While it is possible that such a hiatus
 really existed, in this instance its existence would be
wholly unaccountable. I believe that the buffalo once
 inhabited the northern half of Alabama, even though
 history fails to record it.

LOUISIANA AND MISSISSIPPI.—At the beginning
 of the eighteenth century, buffaloes were plentiful 
in southern Mississippi and Louisiana, not only 
down to the coast itself, from Bay St. Louis to Biloxi,
 but even in the very Delta of the Mississippi, as the
 following record shows. In a “Memoir addressed to 
Count de Pontchartrain,” December 10, 1697, the 
author, M. de Remonville, describes the country
 around the mouth of the Mississippi, now the State
 of Louisiana, and further says:

“A great abundance of wild cattle are also found
 there, which might be domesticated by rearing 
up the young calves.” Whether these animals 
were buffaloes might be considered an open 
question but for the following additional 
information, which affords positive evidence:
 “The trade in furs and peltry would be immensely
 valuable and exceedingly profitable. We could
 also draw from thence a great quantity of
buffalo hides every year, as the plains are
 filled with the animals.”

In the same volume, page 47, in a document entitled
 “Annals of Louisiana from 1698 to 1722, by M. Penicaut”
 (1698), the author records the presence of the buffalo on
 the Gulf coast on the banks of the Bay St. Louis, as follows
: “The next day we left Pea Island, and passed through
 the Little Rigolets, which led into the sea about three
 leagues from the Bay of St. Louis. We encamped at
 the entrance of the bay, near a fountain of water that
 flows from the hills, and which was called at this
 time Belle Fountain. We hunted during several days
 upon the coast of this bay, and filled our boats with
 the meat of the deer, buffaloes, and other wild game 
which we had killed, and carried it to the fort (Biloxi).”

[Pg 381]

The occurrence of the buffalo at Natchez is recorded,
 and also (p. 115) at the mouth of Red River, as follows:
 “We ascended the Mississippi to Pass Manchac, 
where we killed fifteen buffaloes. The next day we 
landed again, and killed eight more buffaloes and 
as many deer.”

The presence of the buffalo in the Delta of the Mississippi
 was observed and recorded by D’Iberville in 1699. 
According to Claiborne, the Choctaws have an
 interesting tradition in regard to the disappearance
 of the buffalo from Mississippi. It relates that during
 the early part of the eighteenth century a great 
drought occurred, which was particularly severe
 in the prairie region. For three years not a drop of
 rain fell. The Nowubee and Tombigbee Rivers dried 
up and the forests perished. The elk and buffalo, 
which up to that time had been numerous, all
 migrated to the country beyond the Mississippi, 
and never returned.

OHIO.—The southern shore of Lake Erie forms 
part of the northern boundary of the bison’s 
range in the eastern United States. La Hontan
 explored Lake Erie in 1687 and thus describes
 its southern shore: “I can not express what
 quantities of Deer and Turkeys are to be found 
in these Woods, and in the vast Meads that lye
 upon the South side of the Lake. At the bottom
 of the Lake we find beeves upon the Banks of
 two pleasant Rivers that disembogue into it,
 without Cataracts or Rapid Currents.” It thus
 appears that the southern shore of Lake Erie
 forms part of the northern boundary of the 
buffalo’s range in the eastern United States.

NEW YORK.—In regard to the presence
 of the bison in any portion of the State of
 New York, Professor Allen considers the
 evidence as fairly conclusive that it once
 existed in western New York, not only in
 the vicinity of the eastern end of Lake Erie,
 where now stands the city of Buffalo, at
 the mouth of a large creek of the same 
name, but also on the shore of Lake 
Ontario, probably in Orleans County. In 
his monograph [Pg 386]of “The American
 Bisons,” page 107, he gives the following
 testimony and conclusions on this point:

“The occurrence of a stream in western New
York, called Buffalo Creek, which empties into
 the eastern end of Lake Erie, is commonly
viewed as traditional evidence of its occurrence
 at this point, but positive testimony to this effect
 has thus far escaped me. “This locality, if it actually
 came so far eastward, must have formed the
eastern limit of its range along the lakes. I have
 found only highly questionable allusions to the
 occurrence of buffaloes along the southern shore
of Lake Ontario. 

Keating, on the authority of Colhoun, however,
 has cited a passage from Morton’s “New
 English Canaan” as proof of their former 
existence in the neighborhood of this lake.
 Morton’s statement is based on Indian reports, 
and the context gives sufficient evidence of the
 general vagueness of his knowledge of the
 region of which he was speaking. The passage,
 printed in 1637 is as follows: They [the Indians]
have also made descriptions of great heards of well 
growne beasts that live about the parts of this lake
 [Erocoise] such as the Christian world (untill this
 discovery) hath not bin made acquainted with. These
 Beasts are of the bignesse of a Cowe, their flesh
 being very good foode, their hides good lether, 
their fleeces very usefull, being a kinde of wolle 
as fine almost as the wolle of the Beaver, and the
 Salvages doe make garments thereof. It is tenne yeares
 since first the relation of these things came to the eares 
of the English.’ The ‘beast’ to which allusion is here made
 [says Professor Allen] is unquestionably the buffalo, but 
the locality of Lake ‘Erocoise’ is not so easily settled. 
Colhoun regards it, and probably correctly, as identical
 with Lake Ontario. * * * The extreme northeastern limit 
of the former range of the buffalo seems to have been, 
as above stated, in western New York, near the eastern
 end of Lake Erie. That it probably ranged thus far there
 is fair evidence.”

PENNSYLVANIA.—From the eastern end of Lake 
Erie the boundary of the bison’s habitat extends 
south into western Pennsylvania, to a marsh 
called Buffalo Swamp on a map published by 
Peter Kalm in 1771. Professor Allen says it “is
 indicated as situated between the Alleghany 
River and the West Branch of the Susquehanna,
 near the heads of the Licking and Toby’s Creeks
 (apparently the streams now called Oil Creek and
 Clarion Creek).” In this region there were at one time t
housands of buffaloes. While there is not at hand any 
positive evidence that the buffalo ever inhabited the
 southwestern portion of Pennsylvania, its presence 
in the locality mentioned above, and in West Virginia
 generally, on the south, furnishes sufficient reason for
 extending the boundary so as to include the 
southwestern portion of the State and connect with
 our starting point, the District of Columbia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.