Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70045256

The challenge of wolf recovery: an ongoing dilemma for state managers

Abstract

“Dave, would you do another legal declaration on the wolf for us?” The weary voice on the phone belonged to Mike Jimenez, Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Management and Science Coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). He was calling from Wyoming to ask me to prepare a document to address a legal challenge to the FWS’s August 2012 delisting of the wolf (Canis lupus) in Wyoming, a highly controversial move. Mike’s tone reflected the reality that — as so many wildlife biologists know and live each day — wildlife management is mainly people management. This contention could not be truer for managing any wildlife species than for managing the wolf. Dubbed “the beast of waste and desolation” by Teddy Roosevelt (The Wilderness Hunter 1893/1900), wolves had been universally hated as prolific predators of valuable livestock and game. Around the turn of the 20th century, members of the U.S. Biological Survey and various state agents, ranchers, cowboys, and other frontiersmen poisoned and persecuted wolves, extirpating them from most of the contiguous United States (Young and Goldman 1944). By 1967, Minnesota and nearby Isle Royale National Park in Michigan held the only remaining wolves in the Lower 48 states, prompting the FWS to place the wolf on the Endangered Species List (established by the Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966). The wolf then became the list’s poster species, and the timing was ideal: Silent Spring (Carson 1962) had just seeded and fertilized the environmental movement, which blossomed on Earth Day (April 22, 1970) into the environmental revolution. “Save the wolf!” became one of the movement’s rallying cries. And save the wolf we did.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L. David Mech. 2013. The challenge of wolf recovery: an ongoing dilemma for state managers. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70045256

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

A RADical approach to conservation in Alaska: Rapid climate change requires a new perspective

In Alaska, conservation areas are managed to promote the persistence of wild species, habitats, cultural resources, visitor experiences, and ecosystem services. Many conservation areas are managed by federal or state agencies, and have specific boundaries, missions, and legislative mandates. Many are also the domains of Indigenous and local people who derive livelihoods and cultural identity from these lands. These areas vary considerably as to whether they are managed solely for conservation versus other additional values. Myriad threats challenge the sustainability of these values, and conservation areas often exist to mitigate such threats. But regardless of jurisdiction, legal contexts, or historical impacts, all these places face challenges, unprecedented during human habitation, from one globally pervasive threat: anthropogenic climate change. Yes, ecosystems, including people who depend on them, have adapted to constant change in Alaska over most of the Holocene if not before (at least the last 18kyr). And this experience has conferred upon its constituents learned adaptive capacity, capabilities, and knowledges among the most flexible on the planet. We discuss the implications of the Resist, Accept, Direct adaptation framework in the context of conservation management in Alaska.

Alaska

Restoring a forest icon: Could returning the American chestnut remodel our wildlife landscape?

Mother Nature was not making it easy. It was February 18, 2009, and winds were gusting, sleet was falling, and temperatures were hovering around 40° F. Our crew of 9 which consisted of personnel from the USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station, the Cherokee National Forest, and The University of Tennessee’s Tree Improvement Program, was attempting to establish the first test planting of American chestnuts ( Castanea dentata ) bred for resistance to an exotic fungal pathogen, the chestnut blight ( Cryphonectria parasitica ). With each hole dug and seedlings tamped into the ground, our hope was that we were one step closer to restoring an important wildlife food to eastern hardwood forests.

Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois,