The State of the Wolves, 2015-2016

Wolf image public domain via Pixabay

For wolves and their advocates, 2015 was a year of triumph and tragedy. The year began with the glow from a great victory: wolves had been placed back under federal protection in four states where they had been slaughtered. The year ended with advocates breathing a tired sigh of nervous relief that wolves had not been stripped of that federal protection through a last-minute, cagey congressional rider.

Meanwhile, wolves did what comes naturally: dispersed in search of mates and territory. Wolves returned to their home in a state where they had not walked in ninety years. In other wolf states they dispersed into new areas.

And we humans also did what comes naturally: we let our wide-ranging beliefs about these essential predators bring out our best and worst. In one state, pro-wolf and anti-wolf groups met regularly to try and find common ground. In another state, a poacher in his truck chased an innocent wolf down, shot it, turned himself in, and was fined a measly $100 for killing an endangered animal.

Here is a wolf-state-by-wolf-state report on the triumphs and tragedies of 2015. As well as a glimpse into what 2016 may hold in store for wolves and their advocates.

California

Pups from California's Shasta pack. (CDFW)

In May and July, trail cameras in Siskiyou County recorded images of two adult wolves and five pups. California’s first wolf pack was named the Shasta Pack. Their scat was analyzed, and DNA revealed that the Shasta pack’s breeding female was born into Oregon’s Imnaha Pack, that state’s first wolf pack.

Any wolf that enters California is protected under both state and federal Endangered Species Acts. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will encourage the use of non-lethal methods to minimize livestock losses from wolves. This welcoming of wolves was, for Patricia Herman, founder of California-based Protect the Wolves advocacy group, “…our biggest success after fighting for so long with so many states to stop killing them. When we found a state that actually welcomed the idea of wolves it was a dream come true.”

The gray wolf is native to California. Records from 1750 to 1850 show that wolves roamed California’s Coastal Range from San Diego to Sacramento. From 1850-1900, they were spotted in Shasta County and in the central Sierra Nevada.

California has plenty of room for more wolves. The Klamath-Siskiyou and Modoc Plateau regions in northern California and southwestern Oregon could support up to 470 wolves, according to a study conducted by the Conservation Biology Institute and reported by the California Wolf Center.

CDFW is preparing for the return of wolves by developing a wolf management plan. “But the plan steps far outside the bounds of credible research and into the world of special interest-driven politics when it calls for authorizing the state to kill wolves when the population reaches as few as 50 to 75 animals,” says Amaroq Weiss of the Center for Biological Diversity. The deadline to comment on California’s plan is February 15, 2016.

Oregon

Wolf from Oregon's Wenaha pack. (ODFW)

By early 2015 Oregon had 81 wolves in nine packs, most in eastern Oregon. OR-7’s Rogue pack lives in the southwestern part of the state. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) confirmed that two new wolves were spotted traveling in territory near the Rogue pack.

Oregon’s response to the return of wolves has been positive. “Oregon has been the only state in the nation with a meaningful wolf population that did not kill them despite having the authority to do so,” said Rob Klavins of Oregon Wild.

But that may change. In November, ODFW stripped Oregon’s wolves of state endangered species protection. Wolves remain fully protected in the western two-thirds of state under the federal Endangered Species Act. In Northeast Oregon, where most of the wolves live, ranchers can still only shoot a wolf caught in the act of wounding, biting, killing, or chasing livestock. The state still makes non-lethal deterrence the first choice for resolving conflicts between ranchers and wolves. 

To delist wolves, ODFW had to show that wolves were not in danger of extinction or population failure. The agency claims it did that. Klavins says ODFW did not.  “They ignored substantive critiques from world-renowned scientists while justifying delisting based on a few sentences (in some cases cherry-picked) from a small number of selected experts of varying levels of credibility. They ignored over 20,000 public comments and overwhelming public testimony in favor of continued protections. They ignored troubling conflicts of interest and likely violated important legal requirements. The agency was dishonest with conservation stakeholders. Governor Brown was silent.”

On December 30, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands, and the Center for Biological Diversity filed a legal challenge to the removal of protection from gray wolves under Oregon's Endangered Species Act.

Washington

Pups from Washington's Diamond pack. (WDFW trail cam)

By early 2015, Washington had at least 68 wolves in 16 confirmed packs in the eastern and central portions of the state. Though Congress stripped wolves of federal Endangered Species Act protections in the eastern third of the state, all wolves remain protected under Washington’s ESA.

But, as elsewhere, protection hasn’t stopped the killing. According to the Seattle Times, at least half a dozen Washington wolves have been killed by poachers since 2012. This includes a Whitman County poacher fined a measly $100 last September. Another wolf was struck and killed on Interstate 90. State sharpshooters in helicopters shot and killed seven wolves in one pack in 2012 for preying on livestock.

The Western Environmental Law Center (WELC) went to court to stop such state-sponsored killing. WELC sued Wildlife Services, a federal extermination program under the USDA, challenging its authority to kill wolves in Washington. In late December the Seattle Times reported that a federal judge ruled that killing wolves “to reduce predation on livestock is not only highly controversial, but highly uncertain to work as intended, given the ongoing scientific dispute about the policy. Therefore, the agency must complete a full environmental-impact statement before engaging further in “lethal removal” of wolves…” 

As of early December, north-central Washington has a new wolf pack. The Loup Loup pack was identified after numerous reports of wolf sightings prompted wildlife officials to investigate the Methow Valley. Biologists tracked up to six animals traveling together. Because this pack is in western Washington, the animals are protected under the federal ESA. Officials plan to outfit at least one wolf with a radio collar.

Wolves have also been spotted in the North Cascades, where they have been moving back and forth across the Canadian border.  Scientists have identified more wild landscape in Washington that wolves could occupy, including on the Olympic Peninsula.

Idaho

Idaho wolf. (IDFG)

The most recent official count found 770 wolves surviving in Idaho at the end of 2014. In that same year, hunters killed 256 wolves, wildlife agents killed 67, and 19 other wolves died at the hands of humans. 

And 2015 looks to be as deadly. Wildlife Services has removed 70 wolves and as of early December 120 wolves have been shot or trapped, according to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. And 145 more could still die.

The cost of hunting licenses reveals how Idaho values wolves. A wolf tag costs $11.50, while a turkey tag costs $19.75. A tag to take an elk costs $30.75. Hunters may buy up to five wolf hunting tags per year and use electronic calls to attract wolves.

A group of hunters with the misleading name Idaho for Wildlife was planning a January 2016 wolf and coyote killing derby on public lands near Salmon, Idaho. The contest included a $1,000 prize for whoever kills the most wolves and another $1,000 to the killer of the most coyotes. But in mid-November the group canceled the derby after being challenged in the courts by the Western Environmental Law Center, representing WildEarth Guardians, Cascadia Wildlands, and the Boulder-White Clouds Council. Four other groups—Defenders of Wildlife, the Center for Biological Diversity, Western Watersheds Project, and Project Coyote—also sued the Bureau of Land Management, contending the permit opposes the federal government's wolf-reintroduction efforts.

Both lawsuits continue since the derby organizer has said that the derby would be held in January—but on private ranches in the Salmon area and on U.S. Forest Service land that doesn't require a permit.

In early-August, conservation groups won another victory for Idaho wolves. Earthjustice, representing Ralph Maughan, Defenders of Wildlife, Western Watersheds Project, Wilderness Watch, and the Center for Biological Diversity, had filed a federal lawsuit to halt the killing of wolves in Idaho’s Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness. Idaho wanted to kill 60% of the wolves in this federally protected area managed by the USFS. But the USFS has told Earthjustice that Idaho will kill no wolves in the area in the winter of 2015-2016.

Montana

Wolf from Montana's Smart Creek pack. (MFWP)

The number of gray wolves in Montana continues to fall under state management. The verified population at the end of 2014 (latest data) was 554, as compared to 627 wolves at the end of 2013, according to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP). In 2011, the year wolves were stripped of ESA protection, there were 653 wolves in Montana.

In 2014, 308 wolves died; 301 at the hands of humans. Wildlife managers, including Wildlife Services, killed 57 of those wolves. Hunters killed 206 during the state’s expanded 2014-15 hunting season. A wolf-hunting license costs $19 for residents, and 20,383 wolf licenses were sold in 2014. The combined maximum hunting and trapping bag limit is five wolves per person.

Conservation groups saved some wolves from hunters. In July of 2015 The Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission reduced from three to two the number of wolves that can be killed each year in two hunting districts near the north border of Yellowstone National Park. These districts are two of the three more tightly controlled wolf-hunting districts in the state. The third is near Glacier National Park, which already had a quota of two wolves. This quota reduction represents ongoing success: In 2014 wolf advocates were able to get the quota in those two units adjoining Yellowstone reduced from four to three wolves.

Also in 2015 MFWP brought together groups that want to protect wolves (for example, Wolves of the Rockies, Bear Creek Council, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Montana Audobon Society) and groups that want to shoot wolves (Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Montana Bowhunters’ Association, and Montana Stockgrowers' Association). The groups discussed, among other issues, whether non-hunting conservation groups and hunter conservation groups can find common ground. “This is a promising move forward in working together for the betterment of wildlife management and is open to the public to attend,” said Kim Bean, vice-president of Wolves of the Rockies.

Wyoming

Wolf from Yellowstone's Lamar Canyon pack. (Mary Strickroth)

At the end of 2014 (most recent count), Wyoming had 229 wolves in the state with an additional 104 in Yellowstone National Park for a total of 333 wolves.

In 2014 Earthjustice, representing Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Center for Biological Diversity, fought in court to keep Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in Wyoming. The coalition won and stopped the killing of Wyoming's wolves. The federal government and the state of Wyoming have appealed. “Wyoming appears determined to defend its uniquely hostile approach to wolf management,” said Tim Preso, managing attorney for Earthjustice.

History supports Preso’s statement. The federal government turned wolf management over to Wyoming in 2012. Most of the state was designated a predator zone, where anyone could kill any wolf, at any time, and for any reason. In less than two years, more than 200 wolves were slaughtered, according to Jamie Rappaport Clark, president of Defenders of Wildlife. Among the early victims of Wyoming's killing spree was 06, the famous alpha female of Yellowstone’s Lamar Canyon pack.

The return of ESA protection has not stopped the killing. Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, reported in late-October that 55 wolves have been killed in Wyoming—mostly by Wildlife Services—and that is the largest government-funded wolf killing in eight years.

In mid-November, two U.S. senators (Republicans from Wyoming and Wisconsin) vowed to push to strip federal protection from gray wolves in Wyoming and the Great Lakes states—and to prohibit courts from intervening in those states on the embattled predator's behalf.

The Great Lakes States

Wolf photo by USFWS

In June, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) estimated that 3,722 wolves live in the three Great Lakes states, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. About sixty percent of those wolves roam Minnesota. The remainder is split almost evenly between Michigan and Wisconsin.

In December of 2014, all of those wolves came back under the protection of the federal Endangered Species Act. Relisting was a huge victory for wolf advocates, but fighting to keep them listed, says Rachel Tilseth, of Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin, has been the biggest challenge of 2015. She told Wisconsin Public Radio, "Can states be trusted to manage wolves? I think not, and many other scientists agree that individual states cannot be trusted.”

In November two groups of scientists wrote letters about whether the gray wolf should be delisted as an endangered species.

First came a letter signed by 26 wildlife scientists urging the federal government to strip ESA protection from gray wolves in the western Great Lakes region. The scientists sent the letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and Dan Ashe, director of USFWS. Among those writing the letter were David Mech, a wolf specialist with the U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Minnesota. The scientists say that the integrity of the ESA is undercut if species aren't removed when they've scientifically recovered. They believe that the combined population in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin represents recovery.

Less than a week later a group of 70 scientists and scholars wrote an open letter disagreeing with their colleagues. These scientists said that removing ESA protection from wolves in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin could be justified if and when the USFWS “uses the best available science that justifies delisting," But, they added, ”Currently, it does not.”

"Quite simply, wolves still fit the legal definition of endangerment in the Great Lakes region and nationwide," said the scientists, including John Vucetich and Rolf Peterson of Michigan Technological University, leaders of a long-standing study of wolves at Isle Royale National Park in Lake Superior.

The Associated Press reported that in the rebuttal letter, the scientists said public tolerance of wolves has risen substantially since they were given protection. Any suggestions that patience is wearing thin are spread by "special interest groups that are vocal, but small in number."

Michigan

Michigan wolf (MDNR)

Michigan has about 630 wolves and all were believed to reside in the Upper Peninsula. In September, the website Michigan Live reported that the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) confirmed that a second gray wolf has reached the Lower Peninsula. Genetic testing of male wolf scat found that this dispserser may have originated in northeast Ontario. Though wolves have moved into the Lower Peninsula, there’s not yet evidence of a breeding population.

Meanwhile, in Isle Royale National Park, the wolf population has fallen to three, including one deformed from inbreeding. In 2014, park officials hoped that new wolves would come to the island across ice bridges, but that didn’t happen. "There is now a good chance that it is too late to conduct genetic rescue," John Vucetich told UPI. Vucetich and Rolf Peterson suggest that fewer and smaller ice bridges as well as development on the mainland may hinder repopulation.

Minnesota

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources said in August that the state’s wolf population estimate has not varied “significantly” over the last three years. The latest survey estimates that 2,221 wolves live in 374 packs within northern and central Minnesota. That estimate is down from the previous winter’s estimate of 2,423 wolves. 

Wisconsin

In June, wildlife officials announced that the state's wolf population is close to an all-time high. Preliminary surveys conducted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) place current wolf numbers between 746 and 771, about a 13 percent increase from last year’s 660.

In August, WDNR reported that a pack of three to four wolves resides in the Wisconsin Dells area, according to WiscNews. Except for one other location in the state’s southwest, this is the farthest south that wolves have migrated in Wisconsin.

A Look Ahead to 2016

Here’s how some of the advocates contacted for this report see 2016 shaping up.

Wolf photo public domain via Pixabay

“Sadly, our wolf, wildlife, and environmental issues will play out in the political arena based largely on special interest and politics, not on science, conservation, or preservation,” says Dr. Robin Chriss of Chriss Wildlife Consulting. “We need to be there in solidarity as wolf advocates, to be a voice. If not, we will lose a lot in 2016.”

“Corporate ranchers and farmers,” says Patricia Herman of Protect the Wolves, “don’t want to learn to coexist with wolves. They just want to continue to take more and more land, until there is no room for wildlife anywhere.”

“Keeping the Great Lakes wolves under federal protection,” says Rachel Tilseth of Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin, “is and will be the biggest challenge of 2016.” 

For Oregon Wild’s Rob Klavins, 2016 looks scary. “Anti-wolf interests and their political allies have brought anti-wolf legislation every year since wolf recovery began. They've promised to do so again, and wolves have lost some of their champions in recent years.”

Kim Bean from Wolves of the Rockies believes the attack on the ESA will continue and “wolves will most likely be delisted nationally.” This leaves the states to manage wolves without any federal help. “We as advocates,” advises Bean, “need to stand and fight even harder, and will need the help of an empathetic public to do so. We need one loud and powerful voice.”

In the Temple of Wolves
by Rick Lamplugh

More than 225 Five-Star Reviews
Amazon Best Seller

To order from Amazon

To order a signed paperback
 from Rick

Life and Death Among Yellowstone's Wolves

Photo courtesy of NPS

The big screen fills with images. A lone male wolf looks up a snowy slope. On that slope stand the seven wolves of the Lamar Canyon pack, staring back at him. Suddenly, the three Lamar adults and four pups, tails raised, sprint down the hillside toward the loner. 

Kira Cassidy of the Yellowstone Wolf Project, the presenter of the video, reveals that the lone wolf had been approaching the Lamars for a few hours. Wolves are territorial, don’t like intruders, and post plenty of KEEP OUT signs. One of those signs, their scent marks, can last as long as three weeks in the wild. Cassidy has observed wolves digging through deep snow to uncover a scent mark. Wolves also howl to claim territory. She speculates that wolves may hear a howl ten to fifteen miles away. 

Did this lone wolf miss the scent marks or howling? Did he disregard them? Was he trying to join the pack? Did he have his eyes on one of the females?

Only he knows why he chose to approach, but when he sees the seven charging wolves, he knows that it’s time to split. He bounds away through deep snow. The Lamars, following in his tracks, quickly gain on him. Two black males lead the chase. One is 755M, the alpha male. The other, 754M, is his bigger brother.  Next come the pups, two males and two females. Bringing up the rear is the pack’s famous alpha female, called 06 (oh-six) by wolf watchers. 

I am viewing this video with about 75 people, many of them avid watchers of Yellowstone’s wolves. Cassidy, who has worked with the Yellowstone Wolf Project since 2007, says that she has watched this video over and over, often one frame at a time so that she could study the behavior of each wolf. She discovered that 06, running behind the pack, is not focused on the lone wolf. Instead, 06 is looking up and down the valley, making sure that her pack will not be surprised if more wolves are nearby. A murmur of agreement comes from the audience. Many of them had observed firsthand the ample intelligence and strong leadership of 06—before she was killed in December of 2012 in a legal Wyoming wolf hunt.

On the screen, brothers 754M and 755M reach the lone wolf but hesitate to attack. The intruder is bigger than either of them. The pups arrive, glancing at the two adults for cues. Almost as large as the adults, the pups are now traveling with the pack as full-fledged members. But they are inexperienced. This may be their first battle.

Cassidy has studied how levels of aggression change as a wolf grows from pup to adult. For females, the level stays the same over the course of the animal’s life. For males, on the other hand, the level increases: males are more and more likely to be a part of an aggressive chase as they mature.

Suddenly, the brothers attack the lone wolf with no mercy. The pups join in, with the males more active than the females. 06 joins the fray and all seven wolves ravage the loner, now on his back in the snow, his body covered by a writhing mass of biting wolves. 

In the packed, darkened meeting room scattered exclamations reveal how others are as unsettled as I am by this fierce, seven-against-one assault.

The tide finally turns for the loner when he sits up and bites one of the pups on the head. All four pups back off, leaving the two brothers and 06, and she wasn’t that involved in the attack to begin with. She had continued scanning for other wolves. 

Finding some room to breathe, the lone wolf remains seated, presenting his back to his attackers so he can protect his face. Then, for no apparent reason, the attack grinds to a halt. The loner stands and starts walking away. 

As I breathe a sigh of relief, questions fill my head. How can he even move? Is it possible that the Lamars pulled their punches? Was there just not enough biting power?  

In the fatal interactions Cassidy has recorded, the killing was usually accomplished by a group of at least four wolves. In this battle, there were three adults and four pups. But perhaps, she says, the unskilled pups didn’t count for much. Perhaps just three adults were not enough to kill that big lone wolf.

Or maybe he was just lucky. Cassidy has studied data from 1995 to 2011 on 292 aggressive chases. Seventy-two of the chases escalated to physical attack. Only thirteen of the attacks resulted in a wolf being killed; many wolves have escaped what could have been fatal encounters.

Photo by NPS

For a moment, the Lamars watch the loner leave. As his walk turns to a trot, the two male pups follow but make no contact. They may have been confident enough to escort him out of the area because they knew the pack’s adults were nearby and ready.

Territoriality and aggression like we are watching has long fascinated humans. Cassidy notes that Aristotle wrote about bird territoriality. Darwin wrote on the subjects. In the 1800s, experiments were conducted with the hypothesis that aggression builds up inside—like a ticking time bomb—until the animal, even a human, explodes and attacks. Later, scientists came to believe that aggression is a reaction to something the animal experiences externally. More recently, scientists developed a theory that being aggressive must provide more benefits than it costs.

While aggression has long been studied, it wasn’t until the 1930s and 1940s that scientists began studying individual wolves and packs in the wild. Biologists would follow a single pack on the ground for months or even years. But few ever witnessed such an encounter as the one that has us nailed to the seats of our folding chairs.

All that changed in 1995. With the reintroduction of wolves, Yellowstone became the best place in the world to study wolves. Unlike many other areas where wolves are hard to see in forests, Yellowstone has wide-open, grass-filled valleys that draw elk. Hungry wolves follow. Winter snow makes this life and death drama even easier to spot and film, as renowned videographer Bob Landis did several years ago with the encounter we are watching.

As the lone wolf distances himself from the Lamar pack, he shows no obvious sign that he has even been attacked.  This surprises me but not Cassidy. She has studied a number of wolves killed by other wolves. From the outside there often appears to be little damage. There is hardly any blood. But when investigators peel back the fur of the wolf, they find a lot of hemorrhaging; damage from the attackers’ canine teeth. Those canines can even puncture a skull. 

This wolf was indeed lucky. Cassidy says that up to 70% of the known natural causes of wolf death in Yellowstone are wolves killing other wolves. During the years right after wolf reintroduction, when the population was small, there were few aggressive encounters. The number of attacks increased as the population of wolves in Yellowstone’s northern range grew. Cassidy says that once there is a jump in wolf population, the very next year there is a jump in aggressive interactions. 

The pack stands and watches as the lone wolf crosses the Lamar River and leaves their territory. When Cassidy says that the loner survived and continued roaming Yellowstone, sighs of relief flow from the audience.

                                                                    ***

Several days passed before my mind stopped replaying troubling scenes from the video. I struggled to accept that such a ferocious and one-sided assault is the natural way of things. But as a species, wolves have roamed this earth for millennia. And In all that time they have behaved just as we saw them, as they protected their young, food, and hard-won territory from intruders. Wolves die in the process, but the species survives. This is just as it should be, regardless of how difficult it may be for us to watch.

Rick Lamplugh's

In the Temple of Wolves

A great gift for yourself or others

More than 225 Five-Star Reviews
Amazon Best Seller

To order from Amazon

To order a signed paperback
 from Rick

What Readers Say: “His vivid, insightful descriptions of the landscape, its wolves, and the other animals who are all connected in survival there, had me spellbound and lost in the wonder and timeless beauty of that place.” by Erin H.

The Value of a Wolf's Life Hits Rock Bottom

photo public domain via Pixabay

Whitman County prosecutor Denis Tracy has driven the value of a wolf’s life to a new low in sentencing a farmer that intentionally killed a wolf protected under Washington’s endangered species rule. Jonathan Rasmussen will not face prosecution if he pays just $100 and commits no further game violations for the next six months.

Though the crime could have cost Rasmussen up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine, Tracy said that he chose a fine based on the administrative costs of handling the case. In other words, the killer will just pay for Tracy’s time, not for killing a wolf. 

Tracy told a reporter, “I thought about this case and how to resolve it for quite some time.” Some time indeed. Rasmussen shot the male wolf on October 12, 2014, and then called 911 to report his crime. According to the Center for Biological Diversity, the wolf did not die immediately from Rasmussen’s two bullets; he suffered until government agents arrived and put him out of his misery. Now, more than eleven months later, Tracy slaps the farmer’s wrist. 

Tracy says he spent a lot of time thinking about the case. I doubt it. Consider this: a service technician who came to our house to fix a gas stove charged $95 per hour. As he left, he handed us a bill for $145. If the administrative cost for Rasmussen’s case was only $100, Tracy—who must charge at least as much as a service technician—couldn’t have done much more than decide last October to let Rasmussen off. And to wait a long time before doing so. 

Rasmussen’s legal fate was left up to county prosecutor Tracy because wolves in eastern Washington are no longer protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. I wonder what the punishment would have been under federal law? Poaching a federal endangered species can cost you up to a year in jail and a $100,000 fine.

Of course, the feds have often been timid about taking legal action because of a little-known Department of Justice guideline referred to as the McKittrick Policy. That policy—named after the man convicted of killing one of the first wolves released into Yellowstone National Park—directs federal attorneys to take no action unless they can prove that the person knowingly killed a protected species.

Federal prosecutors would have had no problem proving that Rasmussen knew what he was doing. The wolf was walking through a field—the first wolf to do so in Whitman County in almost 100 years. When Rasmussen saw the animal, he did not feel threatened for his life or that of his family. He did not see the wolf threatening his livestock. He said that he killed the wolf because it might—in the future—kill some livestock. He had plenty of time to reconsider this preemptive strike while chasing the animal for several miles with his truck.

A featherweight fine for this brutal and calculated killing of an endangered species screams that wolves don’t matter, that even though they are endangered there are no real consequences for killing them. This travesty exemplifies why wolves need protection under the federal Endangered Species Act. But that’s not all they need. Wolves also need a national wolf recovery plan that delineates how the federal government will assist wolves in returning to most of their former range.

Existing state wolf management plans should not be confused with a hoped-for national wolf recovery plan. State plans are more about limiting wolf numbers than they are about helping wolves recover to most of their range. State plans make deadly statements about the value of wolves. Some plans, for example, define protecting wolves as keeping a certain number of wolves alive, while surplus wolves can be legally killed. Those plans endanger wolf recovery in two ways. First, the animals die in legal hunts. Second, government-sanctioned killing influences the intention to poach. If the government says it’s acceptable to hunt wolves, then citizens—like Rasmussen—figure it’s also acceptable to poach them. 

This has happened elsewhere. In Wisconsin, the state killed wolves implicated in livestock attacks, believing that taking out “bad wolves” would foster greater tolerance for wolves in general. But a study found just the opposite: Wisconsin residents who lived in wolf areas showed a decline in tolerance and an increase in intention to poach wolves. Tolerance fell even further after the state’s first legal wolf hunt. 

Our federal government should write policy, enact legislation, and create a national wolf recovery plan that sends the message that wolves matter, that killing wolves should be the last resort, not the first. Such a message might have stopped Rasmussen from pulling the trigger.

Education also helps by changing—one mind at a time—how people view predators. One study found that the acceptance of bears, for example, increased when people were given two pieces of information: how bears benefit the ecosystem and how to reduce risks posed by bears. But if people were told only how to reduce risks and not how bears benefit, acceptance decreased. 

Through a national wolf recovery plan, our government should develop and implement a nationwide curriculum to teach how little risk wolves present and how much ecological benefit they provide. Perhaps if Rasmussen understood the real benefits of wolves and not just his perceived risks, the wolf he killed could be helping the Washington ecosystem today.

Rasmussen and county prosecutor Tracy show why states can't be entrusted with the fate of wolves. Wolves everywhere should be covered by the federal Endangered Species Act until the species has recovered under a national wolf recovery plan. Keeping the ESA intact—which is not at all guaranteed—and adding a national wolf recovery plan are the only ways to protect wolves.

To Learn More:

How the ESA faces extinction

A national wolf recovery plan

Creating a culture of wolf respect

Rick Lamplugh's

In the Temple of Wolves

More than 225 Five-Star Reviews

To order from Amazon

To order a signed paperback
 from Rick





What Readers Say: “The detail, the emotion, the "put you in his shoes" kind of story will keep you reading right through the night. Don't start reading in the evening if you have to get up early!” By Patricia K

The State of the Wolves: 2014-2015

Yellowstone wolf 471F howling by Rick Lamplugh

THE BIG PICTURE

The passage of the 1973 federal Endangered Species Act enabled wolves—one by one and year by year—to reclaim a smidgen of the territory stolen from them in the Lower 48 with guns, traps, poison, and fire. Just 13 years before ESA protection, the only wolf country left in the Lower 48 was Minnesota. But with federal protection wolves dispersed eastward to northern Wisconsin. Then Wisconsin wolves drifted further east to Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, mingling there with wolves from Minnesota and Ontario. Twenty-five years after the ESA, descendants of wolves reintroduced into Yellowstone and Idaho began dispersing into Montana, as did others from Canada. Some of Idaho’s wolves swam the Snake River and adopted Oregon. British Columbia wolves slipped across the border into Washington.

The state of wolves looked promising until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service removed them from the protection of the ESA, and the killing began. More than 3,500 wolves have been killed by hunting, trapping, and other means: 2,000 in the West and 1,500 in the Great Lakes.

The USFWS now faces pressure to delist wolves—end their ESA protection—nationwide, says Kierán Suckling, the Executive Director at the Center for Biological Diversity. He recently wrote in an email, “If the government abandons wolves, the already horrendous slaughter will escalate and any chance of wolves returning to California, Utah, Colorado and the Northeast will be decimated. The tiny, fragile wolf population in the Pacific Northwest could be wiped out.”

Leda Huta, Executive Director of The Endangered Species Coalition, agrees and writes that In the coming months, “…we will continue to vigorously pressure Secretary [of the Interior] Jewell to cancel her misguided, anti-science plan to strip wolves of Endangered Species Act protections.”

Protecting wolves in 2015 will be a real legal and political battle. Trip Van Noppen, President of Earthjustice, reported late in 2014 “…the recent election left us saddled with one of the most environmentally hostile Congresses in history.” Earthjustice believes that gutting the Endangered Species Act is the real goal: “They want politicians, not scientists, to decide whether species are in danger.”

Such a move would be dire for wolves, other endangered plants and animals, and we humans that coexist with all of them.

One of first wolves released into Yellowstone. NPS

THE SITUATION IN THE WOLF STATES

Montana

The most recent official wolf count for Montana showed 627 wolves at the end of 2013. 

Wolves are delisted from the ESA. Montana allows recreational hunting and significantly expanded the circumstances under which wolves can be slaughtered without a hunting license.

Kim Bean, a wolf advocate with Wolves of the Rockies, saw some progress in 2014. “I believe we made strides in having civil and constructive dialogue with conservation groups, ranchers, hunters, and Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks. Pro-wolf advocates such as Marc Cooke, President of Wolves of the Rockies, were invited to sit down at the table with these folks to discuss the future of wolves.”  

Bean notes another accomplishment:  Wolf advocates were able to get the quota reduced in a controversial hunting unit just outside Yellowstone National Park from four to three wolves. “This win was vital for the wolves that move in and out of [Yellowstone] into Gardiner Basin during elk migration in the fall and winter months.”

Bean says the biggest challenge wolf advocates face in Montana in 2015 will be dealing with the legislature that begins in January. “We are keeping a close eye on bills that are being drafted and introduced by the house and senate members. We need a lot of voices to battle these very biased and dangerous bills—the more voices we have, the louder we are, and the more fierce we are. Fighting the legislature is no easy task and believe me when I say it's grueling, thankless, painful work. Advocates walk away after three months feeling like they had been tied to a whipping post.”

Pups from Yellowstone's Mollie's pack. NPS

Wyoming

The most recent official wolf count for Wyoming showed 306 wolves at the end of 2013. 

When wolves were delisted from the ESA, Wyoming allowed year-round, unlimited killing of wolves in most of the state. But in September of 2014, a federal judge stripped Wyoming of its authority over wolf management and restored federal protections, ruling the state plan failed to guarantee that more than a bare minimum of wolves would be maintained.

Bean believes that the judge’s decision “…sends a great message to those in power that science is indeed necessary when discussing the management of wolves and other apex predators. It was a loud and firm call from wolf advocates around the country that we will not stop or lie down in the face of adversity. We will fight on until science based management, fair chase hunting and non-lethal deterrents in ranching are recognized and utilized on our wild landscape.” 

But Bean believes that legal victory brings yet another battle: “I believe the challenge in Wyoming will be to fight the backlash of Wyoming representatives wanting to answer the re-listing ruling with a rider that would give Wyoming power over the ESA in the state.”

Idaho wolf. Idaho Fish and Game

Idaho

The most recent official wolf count for Idaho showed 659 wolves at the end of 2013. 

And those wolves are in trouble. Jamie Rappaport Clark, President of Defenders of Wildlife, wrote in an email that in Idaho “…extreme anti-wolf politicians have caused the deaths of more than 1,400 wolves since 2009 and made a mockery of wolf conservation.” 

Defenders wrote a letter to submit to Secretary of the Interior Jewell encouraging her to consider placing Idaho’s wolves back under ESA protection. The letter describes how Idaho officials are working hard to kill even more wolves. In 2014 Idaho’s Governor Otter signed a legislature-passed bill to establish a Wolf Control Board, which, if fully funded, will have at its disposal $2 million in taxpayer money to kill wolves in Idaho. Sponsors of this bill proclaimed that this legislation would enable the state to kill all but 100 to 150 wolves, the minimum number the state is required to maintain. Work to achieve their goal has begun: “The board recently announced that $225,000 was being paid to Wildlife Services [the taxpayer-funded federal agency that kills all types of wildlife—including endangered species—for all kinds of reasons] for lethal control of wolves to control livestock depredations, so work to achieve this goal has already begun. Furthermore, the Bureau of Land Management is considering issuing a permit to Idaho for Wildlife for a predator derby, including wolves, for a five-year period across millions of acres of public land.” The letter goes on to say that Idaho is “…undermining and reversing the recovery of the gray wolf in the Northern Rockies, one of our nation's flagship wildlife conservation achievements.” 

If Idaho’s aggressive—and deadly—management continues, the number of wolves may fall as low as 100 and force a review to realist wolves under the protection of the ESA.

OR-1, Oregon's first collared wolf. ODFW

Oregon 

The most recent official wolf count for Oregon showed 64 wolves at the end of 2013. 

Rob Klavins, Northeast Oregon Field Coordinator with Oregon Wild, says that after a hard-fought legal settlement, Oregon's wolf recovery is back on track under the most progressive wolf plan in the country. “Though the plan is working for all but the most extreme voices, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is entertaining proposals to delist wolves, weaken the plan, and share specific collar location data with the livestock industry.”  For Klavins, “The biggest challenge for advocates is to get the majority of citizens who value wildlife to speak as loudly and regularly as those who fear wolves.”

Bob Ferris, Executive Director of Oregon-based Cascadia Wildlands says that the most exciting news for Oregon wolves in 2014 was “…that we saw the creation of a wolf pack in the state’s southern Cascades within 20 years of the first releases in Yellowstone and central Idaho.  That is remarkable and betters the pace many of us imagined two decades ago.” Ferris was involved with that reintroduction.

Ferris believes that the biggest challenge that wolves and advocates face in Oregon and elsewhere in 2015 is “…the anachronistic and undemocratic stranglehold continually maintained by livestock producers, trophy hunting interests and other natural resource exploiters on federal and state wildlife agencies.  This powerful minority hugely impacts everything from federal delisting, state management plans and recovery actions on all levels.  These are public resources owned by all and this dynamic has to change.” 

Pups from Washington's Lookout pack. WDFW

Washington

The most recent official wolf count for Washington showed 52 wolves at the end of 2013. 

Washington state flared into the newest battleground in the war against wolves. The state kills wolves that attack livestock, but does not allow hunting. Late in 2014, the alpha female of the Teanaway pack was illegally shot and killed, throwing that pack’s future into jeopardy. With so few wolves in the state, the suspected intentional killing of the alpha female is even more of a loss.

An anti-wolf group has begun paying for huge billboards filled with lies and propaganda intended to incite fear. The group would have people in Washington believe that young children will be attacked by wolves. Defenders of Wildlife has paid for nine billboards that show the truth: you are more likely to die from a lightning strike or in an ATV accident than from a wolf attack.

Defenders’ Rappaport Clark described how the state’s wolves ”…are being illegally killed as the hate-based claims become more and more farfetched. It’s a familiar tactic. Fuel old fears and prejudices to turn public opinion against wolves. Then, press for state wildlife rules that permit ‘kill first, ask questions later’ tactics against these magnificent animals.”

Two gray wolves. Wisconsin DNR

Great Lakes states

Just 13 years before the ESA protected them, the only wolf country left in the Lower 48 was Minnesota. The population was slow to rebound at first, but wolf numbers jumped as wolves dispersed to Wisconsin and Michigan.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials tried to remove gray wolves from the Endangered Species List in 2004, 2007, and 2009. The last two attempts were stopped by legal action from the Humane Society of the United States. Wolves were delisted from the ESA in 2012, putting the states back in charge. Minnesota and Wisconsin immediately legalized wolf hunting and held their first hunting seasons that year. Michigan passed a law allowing wolf hunting in 2013. More than 1,500 wolves have been killed in the Great Lakes states, according to the Jonathan Lovvorn, senior vice president of the Humane Society of the United States.

In December, a U.S. District Judge ruled that the removal of the Great Lakes wolves from federal protection was "arbitrary and capricious" and violated the federal Endangered Species Act. The order—which affects Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin—protects about 3,700 wolves.

Unless overturned, the decision will block the three states from scheduling additional hunting and trapping seasons for wolves. All three had at least one hunting season once ESA protections were lifted, while Minnesota and Wisconsin also allowed trapping. According to Leda Hula of the Endangered Species Coalition, “Wisconsin has ignored scientists that have questioned their monitoring and is the only state that allowed ‘hounding,’ or the use of dogs to pursue wolves, in addition to indiscriminate trapping and sport hunting,”

Rachel Tilseth, founder of Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin, says that the biggest victory in 2014 was the wolves being ordered back on the Endangered Species List, “thus putting and end to reckless trophy hunts on wolves.”

The challenge for 2015 is similar to that of Wyoming: “With Wisconsin wolves now under federal protections we see a great deal of anger from fringe wolf hunters that are making threats to continue killing wolves illegally, threats from disgruntled pro-wolf-hunt politicians to stop any wolf management by the state, fear mongering from Cattlemen's Associations, denial from Wisconsin Houndsmen, and scapegoating of wolves for killing all the deer, hound-hunting dogs and livestock.”

Here’s Tilseth’s recipe for successful coexistence: “Management of wolves must move forward with science and social and economic plans that protect the species and humans and teach how to coexist alongside of wild wolves. Education, dispelling myths, facts, predator-friendly methods, wolf ecotourism, are the building blocks needed in wolf management. And most of all opening dialogs between pro- and anti-wolf factions.”

Grand Canyon's lone wolf. Center for Biological Diversity

Arizona and Utah

DNA tests released in late 2014 confirmed that a wolf repeatedly photographed at the North Rim of Grand Canyon National Park was a female that began her journey in the northern Rocky Mountains.  The minimum straight-line distance from her home to Arizona’s Grand Canyon is about 450 miles, but she probably meandered even farther.

However, on December 30, 2014, Kierán Suckling of the Center for Biological Diversity announced in an email that this dispersing wolf may have been gunned down in Utah—about 150 miles north of the Grand Canyon—by a hunter who claimed he mistook the wolf for a coyote. DNA testing may confirm the wolf’s identity. Suckling wrote, “It’s normal for younger wolves to leave their pack and set off looking for a new mate and new territory. But again and again—in Colorado and Iowa, in Washington and now Utah—these wolves have been gunned down in horrific cases of malice and mistaken identity.”

Suckling estimates that anti-wolf forces “…have influential friends like Utah's own Congressman Rob Bishop, the powerful new head of the House Natural Resources Committee, who has vowed to end protection for wolves from coast to coast -- making what happened near Beaver neither illegal nor rare. The government of Utah has even spent $800,000 on lobbyists to strip protection from wolves so they can be freely killed in the state. They don't want to learn to live peacefully with wolves. They want to destroy them.”

Yellowstone's Gibbon pack. NPS

THE BEST OF ALL SCENARIOS

Reinstating Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in the Great Lakes region could have a profound impact on other areas of the United States that wolves don’t yet call home, according to wolf experts gathered by the Minnesota-based International Wolf Center. The experts said the court decision may bolster efforts that would see wolves return to places like western Colorado or the Dakotas.

Dave Hornoff, a long time advocate and founder of the Facebook page “The Wolf Advocate,” agrees and writes, “This also serves to encourage advocates to continue their fight in what will be endless battles to maintain wolves in a healthy population in all parts of the U.S. Sometimes it can be very discouraging but with positive news like this it helps many to stay focused and encourages others to join the fight.”

Given ESA protection and a best case scenario, what might happen?

The International Wolf Center has an online data base chock-full of wolf information. Below is their prediction of ten states (listed in alphabetical order) that may one day have resident wolf packs. Also listed is where those wolves may disperse from.

1. California: wolves from Idaho, Washington, Oregon
2. Colorado: from Idaho, Wyoming
3. Maine: from Canada
4. Nevada: from Idaho, Wyoming
5. New Hampshire: from Canada
6. New York: from Canada
7. North Dakota: from Canada, Minnesota, Montana
8. South Dakota: from Canada, Minnesota, Montana
9. Utah: from Idaho, Wyoming
10. Vermont: from Canada

Map produced by Center for Biological Diversity

The Center for Biological Diversity produced this map showing the historic habitat (gray), current habitat (light green), and potential habitat (dark green) for gray wolves. They also released a first-of-its-kind analysis identifying 359,000 square miles of additional wolf habitat in the Lower 48 that could significantly boost wolf recovery. The study found that the gray wolf population could be doubled to around 10,000 by expanding recovery into areas researchers have identified as excellent habitat in the Northeast, West Coast and southern Rocky Mountains, as well as the Grand Canyon.

The map shows that some of the current wolf states—Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington, and Oregon—have room for more wolves. Still more exciting: there’s plenty of gray wolf habitat in new states such as those listed by the International Wolf Center.

Even if wolves filled these new areas and doubled their numbers, they would still occupy only a shadow of their original habitat: as many as two million wolves roamed much of North America when colonists arrived. As 2014 ends, wolves are by no means out of danger of being endangered. And with the political and legal battle evolving for 2015, the future of wolves in the Lower 48 is far from certain. 

Rick Lamplugh
is the author of

In the Temple of Wolves

More than 225 Five-Star reviews

To order from Amazon

CLICK HERE


To order a signed paperback
 from the author
CLICK HERE



What Readers Say: “Watching wolves hunt elk, watching the slow death of a bison calf, dragging a road-killed yearling bison off to become food for a host of scavengers—these are not experiences for those who want to see Yellowstone in Disneyland terms. However, if you want to read about the real Yellowstone and participate in the author's occasional ambivalence about what one sees when immersed In the Temple of Wolves, this is the book for you.“ by D.B.