BREAKING NEWS: Northern Rockies Wolves Back on the Endangered Species List

Karen Cilman — Aug 6 2010 01:00 AM

Congratulations!

Krista — Aug 6 2010 02:13 AM

Thank God! I am so happy!! I have been not sleeping worrying about the decision every day. I just hope it doesn't backfire in some way with the crazy hunters hating wolves even more now and trying to kill them. I am so glad this judge found some sanity.

Krista — Aug 6 2010 02:15 AM

Thank the Lord!! I am so happy. I have been worried every day about this.

Jessica Brooks — Aug 6 2010 09:16 AM

I'm glad they put them back on the endangered species list! I was wondering what was the point of building them back up just to turn around and let people hunt them all over again. I'm sure the wolves are very grateful for being protected again!

Matt Passen — Aug 6 2010 09:51 AM

Congratulations, Matt. That's great news.

Ruth Shipley — Aug 6 2010 10:42 AM

This is good news. I've been concerned about them having been taken off. Protect our wolves!

Marc Cooke — Aug 6 2010 11:27 AM

Matt and the entire NRDC team. Thanks for all you do. At last.... Justice!

Morningstar Dick — Aug 6 2010 11:47 AM

Save the wolves

wendy neu — Aug 6 2010 11:56 AM

Thanks to the entire team at NRDC we can now rest a little easier.

Craig — Aug 6 2010 01:32 PM

Thank you NRDC, one of the few charities that lobby that GET RESULTS! You'll have my support for the foreseeable future!

John Zahara — Aug 6 2010 03:40 PM

Best news of the day...

Thanks for your efforts on this NRDC

Robin Thompson — Aug 6 2010 04:59 PM

Three cheers for the wolves and their advocates. Perhaps now the nudniks in Idaho and Montana (and US F&W) will awaken from their stupor. This is very good news.

Shawn White — Aug 6 2010 05:18 PM

I am so happy to hear this, I am jumping for joy on this news.
Thank you Thank You, NRDC and the 13 other conservation groups, represented by Earthjustice.

Thank you so very much.
Shawn

Barbara Hoffmann — Aug 6 2010 05:48 PM

The most wonderful news I have heard since they were put on the endangered list years ago, Congratulations on a hard fought battle!

Mary — Aug 6 2010 06:18 PM

I wish to thank the NRDC and the other wildlife protection groups for never giving up on the wolves. Additionally I am grateful to every activist who has fought to protect them. Finally we can breathe a sigh of relief.

Paul Hester — Aug 6 2010 07:03 PM

Great work NRDC! I have been battling Salazar over his illegal policies. I hope this can also shed light on what he is doing to the "Wild Horses and Burros", which is just as careless and without ANY data for such action, as was his dispicable delisting of the Wolves! I started with the wolves and soon discovered after receiving FOIA documents that showed just how lame and irresponsible he was making that decision! He is a walking disaster for wildlife and I have been demanding his resignation for about a year and a half now.

Thank you all so much for all that you have done and are doing for the animals!

With much respect,

Paul Hester

Mitch McFarland — Aug 6 2010 10:11 PM

As a Montana nudnik, and a native of Idaho (does that make me a double nudnik?) I have to offer a contrary opinion of the wolf ruling. Everyone seems so willing to sacrifice our elk, deer, moose, coyotes, and small game for the wolves. I hope NRDC will work as hard to restore those populations as well in the next few years.
When the wolves were originally transplanted, the best available science was used to create the recovery plan, now apparently that plan is flawed, however wolf populations are growing at a rate faster than originally estimated and wolf populations have expanded outside of the recovery areas. The elk and deer populations were probably at all time highs in Idaho and Montana, now the wolves have started to take a noticeable and dramatic toll. The northern Yellowstone herd is estimated to be down 60% due to wolf predation and the Shiras moose has been almost wiped out. The only way, without hunting, that the wolf population can be controlled will be after they have killed all the available elk, deer, and moose and start to starve or are forced to move to find food.
I knew of at least two packs of wolves that were viable in Idaho before the transplant, but we just didn't have a politically correct number, so I'm sorry but I don't trust the science being used either by NRDC or the game departments, none of them really know how many animals are in the woods or what impact the wolves are having. Those of you living in the east and the cities should come out west(course you'd have to associate with a nudnik or two and heaven forbid maybe see or talk to a "crazy hunter") and see a herd of elk after they have been hit by a wolf pack, or at the very least spend some time in the mountains to fully appreciate nature's diversity. Possibly then you would be as upset as I am about man's need to play GOD and readjust the ecosystem to what he thinks it should be, based more on political agendas than sound science or facts, rather than trusting Mother Nature to balance herself and accepting that man is part of the equation.

Elana Royer — Aug 6 2010 11:17 PM

Brilliant.

Gopala Raghuram — Aug 7 2010 12:54 AM

I am very happy that the NRDC and the other conservation groups have been victorious in their struggle to restore protection to the wolves under the Endangered Species Act. I congratulate NRDC and the other conservation groups and wish them many more victories in the future.

Amanda Watkins — Aug 7 2010 02:03 AM

My great respect to Mitch McFarland, who's comments above, are intelligent & accurately based. His views are both realistic and ethically responsible. His concern well-founded & applicable.

Too often opinions & actions are made out of emotion, rather than logic.
And too often it's emotion from those who are not walking the talk, and are completely without understanding for a situation. There's just so much hype, and much mis-information, from those unaffected, who aren't in the position to even comprehend.

As someone who has lived my entire life in northern Minnesota, and property owner in northern Ontario, (for those who don't know... these are the boreal forest areas where wolves naturally, natively, live & thrive) and also as a part of the earth's ecosystem & food chain as a human, I see the crisis in balance caused by protection of wolves.

My family lives, or would like to live, largely on wild game as our food source, white tail deer in our case.
In the food chain, there is no balance when the wolves eat & diminish all the deer and no one kills the wolf. You end up with a whole lot of wolves and no deer. I understand that we do need some wolves to manage the deer, just as we need human hunters, or the deer become overpopulated, as we've seen in places, becoming diseased, or resulting in more of them hit on highways than hunted & consumed.
But the fact that humans are predators, and a part of the ecosystem seems all too often overlooked, forgotten, or ignored in modern day civility, a time of convenience & ignorance. Maybe because a small percentage actually live in areas where it is an issue. Maybe because many humans simply eat at McDonalds.
But some still like the ways of living off the land, the way things seemed originally intended. Farming & agriculture are a big part of what's ruined habitat. Ruined man, some might even venture to say.
Hunting & gathering what's native to the landscape is part of the earth's natural life cycle.
In that viewpoint, considering how natives lived.. they would have starved in winter had they not competed with the wolf, eliminating some of them to preserve some food for their own survival.
The wolf kills coyotes & bears & fights cougars because they are it's predatory competition for food.
We humans are the apex of all hunters,
We are one of the wolf's competitors.
These days, we can supplement our food supply, I suppose. But we should be able to eat wild game, and the fall of wild game in wolf protected land is a valid concern.

There are so many aspects of concern over this political intervention to our ecosystem.
The overpopulation in concentrated wolf areas not only affects wild game as a food source, but each as a species. The more wolves there are, protected, the more they'll multiply, kill, and eat, and the more the other species will decline. It affects the wolves themselves. Overpopulation for any species is not healthy. Mange is a terrible thing.
Then there is the issue of wolf / human interaction, wolves growing in number & becoming bold, unafraid of humans, approaching villages or homesteads, attacking & killing pets and/or worse. (again, in concentrated areas.. where this is a valid issue.)

It's easy to support total protection of the wolf from sitting in a chair in an office in a city somewhere.
I've had wolves present in the very place where my small daughter picks daisies, and am in support of the protection of my children.

Studies show time & time again that wolves are at no risk of extinction. DNR members admit locally, that our wolf population is near epidemic.

I don't think any species should be irradiated. But having them 100% protected doesn't seem the answer to either. The thriving concentration of wolves in certain areas needs some management control. It is naturally essential that no one species, especially the apex predator, goes 100% protected.

Each extreme step like this taken by government & groups is a step backward in the overall ecosystem of life on earth.

Nate 2012 — Aug 8 2010 10:38 AM

Firstly, superb work NRDC.!

With half a day's investigation into this, I find it tediously inevitable that there is virtually a 100% affiliation, in these opposing states, to the NRA (National Rifle Association) by the heads of each state of Idaho and Montana as signed up members. Also no fluke then that Lynn Scarlett (who reversed the Endangered Species decision in 2009) has made her way to the top by lecturing, writing about, and actively promoting incentive-based environmental policies. The proposed cull number of the Wolf would inevitably involve a huge government backed program running into many millions of dollars. The NRA would be at the heart of any such funding, for obvious reasons. The real 'incentive' would appear to be clear then? Again the poor Wolf is made the scape-goat for a money spinner, and I amazed that the same ignorant attitudes still survive from the almost near extinction of the Wolf at the beginning of the last century. However, it is the so-called 'Sportsman' who's voices worry me more than the ranchers! the adrenaline addicted weekend-away, vacational trigger happy shootist.

And lets be clear here, the ranchers apparent 'concern' for their animals is based on market price per head of cattle alone. All this is a money issue, as the passing of the buck (pun intended) is manipulated by them conveniently to animals on both sides of the argument. These people could care less about animals!

I admire the skills of a true 'tracker', yet even the Native Americans respected the Wolf. Most Wolf head-dresses were only taken from those Lupus found dead. In this age where our every conceivable need is catered for us, the average person has no NECESSITY or REQUIREMENT to kill any animal indiscriminately. It is repulsive! If we are to hunt, then let's remove the trappings of our current spoiled existence, with our supermarkets, monetary system, safe homes, and other comforts we take for granted, and return to a true 'Hunters' life; Killing for survival only, with due respect given to the wild and mother nature as they deserve and require. 'Hunting' these days is a mere rush of endorphine, the 'high' felt from committing murder in a predominantly one-sided affair. If you can track a Wolf until you find one, I respect your acumen, but any moron and coward can fire a trigger on something defenseless. Especially something that would rather have nothing to do with you in the first place. It is a tragedy of the human condition that we cannot help but continually attempt genocide on our own and other species for the sake of a coin. It MUST stop! But then I am reminded of the ancient Cree text that says,

"Only when the last tree has died and
The last river has been poisoned and
The last fish has been caught,
Will they realize that
We cannot eat money"

Robert Wisehart — Aug 8 2010 01:07 PM

Thank you!

At least for now the irrational slaughter of wolves with every means possible (including the use of aircraft and automatic [assault] weapons) will stop and these magnificent creatures will again have a chance at true recovery.

Mitch McFarland and Amanda Watkins have made some ridicules allegations, including the idea that wolf recovery means decimation of prey populations. As far as I have been able to discover, only one predator species on this planet has ever hunted its prey populations to extinction: HUMANS. That is the primary reason that Congress enacted the Endangered Species Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency was established: to protect the planet and its inhabitants from humans.

Thank God there are organizations like the NRDC who have taken up this mission as their raison d'être.

Klio — Aug 8 2010 07:45 PM

Thank you from Bozeman, Montana!

We were dreading this fall wondering if the wolves we see would be the next hunted. What a relief! Thank you!

Bruce Savage — Aug 9 2010 08:17 PM

Its really sad that emotions run without fact. Its true that the wolves should have never been hunted to extinction - that was an emotion issue of the time. However, the same is being done now (oh, the poor wolf ... a magnificent creature ... it should be unbounded).

Mitch McFarland offers real facts and all Robert Wisehart can add is hype by stating that the "irrational slaughter of wolves with every means possible (including the use of aircraft and automatic [assault] weapons)" That statement is not true. As an Idahoan (called a nudnik by Robin Thompson), I saw first hand how the hunts were carried out. No aircraft or assault weapons were used.

The wolves are back and their populations are expanding faster than anyone predicted. Also, this isn't the untamed west of 200, 150 or even 100 years ago. Anyone that thinks it is or that it should be is living in la la land. The wolves should be here but they they should be managed along with other wildlife.

Many people enjoy hunting or do it to supplement their food supply. You may not agree with it but its a fact that many people do enjoy it. Those that fight against it are just intolerant of others and their beliefs. The ironic thing is that those people are usually the ones that claim to be tolerant, but they are tolerant only to ideas that they believe. No ones forcing anyone to hunt, but hunting has occurred for 1000s of years. And contrary to a previous post, Native Americans did hunt wolves when the opportunity presented itself. In many tribes, it was considered a heroic act to kill a wolf.

I support having wolves in the Rockies but let the managed hunting continue. The wolves are here to stay (great!) but control them and keep the elk, deer and moose populations intact and then we all win.

R.K.Sharpe — Aug 10 2010 07:07 PM

I am rather afraid now that a senator will try to change the endangered species act.

Helen A. — Aug 11 2010 01:45 PM

Hurrah for you and NRDC's Montana staff, Matt. Without such commitment and hard work by you, the wolves would have lost their place in the ecological chain. Best, Helen

gordon nelson — Aug 13 2010 12:49 PM

to mitch and amanda
the wolves were here first. if you really think you need protection from the wolves then you should move.

noman — Aug 13 2010 12:53 PM

Hunters don't trust the objectivity of the NRDC, conservationists don't trust the motives of the hunters. For the sake of the deer, elk, antelope, wolves, and whatever else...beavers and bison, you'll all have to learn to work it out together with no name calling or finger pointing.

Stefan Konstantopoulos — Aug 13 2010 12:53 PM

This is truly amazing news and I am proud of all you who worked tirelessly to make this happen!! I understand what it takes to achieve what you have all done and know that this was not a victory that came easy. You have proven to all of us lovers and protectors of nature that the system can indeed work with the right amounts of talent, determination, perserverance and pressure! I am incredibly inspired by all who helped make this possible!

Great article, Matt!! Keep that good news coming!

Platypus LAH — Aug 13 2010 03:05 PM

At a gut level I favor Judge Molloy’s opinion as this species should be protected. However I am uncomfortable with the legal logic. The judge stated that the USFWL acted illegally when it removed wolves from the endangered species list in Idaho and Montana but left them on the list in Wyoming, splitting the population along political, rather than biological, lines. This is because the Endangered Species Act does not allow the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to list only part of a ‘species’ as endangered.” If this were true, then why is the same species not endangered in Alaska? Note; I am not championing changing the Alaska status, just questioning the logic. The geographic split is Canada but is that not a political division as well?
The growing success of the reintroduction of the Northern Wolf back into the fabric of these Western states’ native wildlife is commendable. They should not become a sort of regional historical natural wildlife footnote. What concerns me though is that too many view these issues as “victories” between intractable foes, tree-huggers vs anti-earth despoilers, agriculturists against naturalists, etc, etc. Few of us are so absurd as to believe our country should be restored to some former pre-Columbian arcadian past or believe the only mammals outside of a zoo should be squirrels. One of the greatest strengths of this country has been our ability to pull together an incredibly diverse group of people and make common cause for the national betterment.
Having won the day, would it be too much to expect that the NRDC and we other like-minded groups offer an olive branch for example to the cattlemen and sheep farmers in these states that are economically impacted by the wolf’s natural instinct to view livestock as legitimate prey. Can we as fellow Americans take some share in understanding the rancher’s problems and help pursue an acceptable way to mitigate their economic losses? Must there be losers? In a practical sense, we will not agree on all levels. But progress is made by looking for common ground, widening it as much as possible through sometimes painful compromising and providing a way forward. This just does not strike me as an insoluble or even intractable goal.

Sally Bunney — Aug 13 2010 09:57 PM

Excellent work, team!
A fraction of despair at the state of the world has been lifted from me. Today, I smile.

Kanelle Charief — Aug 14 2010 03:22 AM

Bravo pour cette bataille qui n'a pas été sans mal. C'est une victoire qui j'espère ne sera pas de nouveau révisée. Félicitation à NRDC et tous les autres groupes qui ont participé au combat juridique pour sauver les loups.

Irene Smith — Aug 14 2010 01:32 PM

God watches over chidren, animals and idiots. I know this is true, because NRDC is fighting for the animals, the Courts are finally starting to fight for children's safety and rights regrading pedophiles (MONSTERS) and because G.W. Bush is still walking among us although he started this with the wolves' protection under the Endangered Species Act to be removed. So, yes God watches over idiots also!! Thank God for NRDC!!!!

Old Man — Aug 15 2010 03:02 PM

First of all, so many thanks to the NRDC team and associates for getting a STOP sign posted in the wilderness. Let's be real, without protection, in this high tec, low effort civilization, the wolf population would probably have been decimated to close to pre-reintroduction levels. GPS, absurd
ballistic capabilities, and way too many wanna-be
shooters living a weekend dream with-out a thought to the long range ramifications would have caused havoc.

I am thoroghly disgusted at myself, but I will be the first to salivate over a medium rare sirloin, but has anyone seen the video on how the entire
cattle for food industry has manipulated it's dollar driven way to hugh government subsidies, along with fresh water and agriculture rights! The true cost of a pound of beef is somewhere around
$150+ a pound. Who in their right mind can side with the rancher who loses a few cows?
It is interesting to note that one of the main arguments now for controlling the wolf is the loss of natural prey herds. This is probaby much closer to reality as a wolf "problem" than the domestic calltle loss issue.

It is too true, much research needs to be done to strike a medium of balance. It is our duty to undertake this task, now that we have, for good or bad, decided to play "mother nature" by re-
introducing this truly wild and magnificent creature. Whatever your reason for or against these animals, an unemotional compromise can be reached.

Platypus is right, this is not an unsolvable problem.

Lionel — Aug 18 2010 01:32 AM

Yes! Finally the wolves are back in the Endangered Species List.

I have been constantly signing and taking action to protect these wonderful American animals from extinction.

The wolves should be left alone and do what they want on their turf. These animals have been living in North America for years, before the Europeans came. This is their land and humans have NO right to take it away from them and their environment.'

Thank You NRDC!!!
Great Job, eh!

Doug Fater — Aug 18 2010 09:00 PM

While I support the preservation of wolves, the fact is that the rapid growth of wolves in Montana are making elk an endangered species there! We must reach a balance to preseve both species in harmony with one another,

Heather Rudin — Aug 25 2010 12:31 PM

Too bad it took Judge Molloy an entire year to figure out that what the government did was wrong. Slaughter is not the way to manage any animal population and this was one of the most unacceptable and appalling aspects of the wolf situation. It's obvious that there will be a lot of illegal killing of the wolves and in my opinion, we should not attempt another wolf recovery in states that will only continue to hate these fabulous animals and blame them for everything that happens to wild herds. If it weren't for the fact that elk and moose, etc are hunted for sport by several clubs, like Safari International, which provides revenue to Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, wolves probably wouldn't even enter into the picture as a threat. And those that have encountered wolves in their backyards, well, who lived on the land first? Many people in our state have encountered coyotes and mountain lions and realize the threat, but most people don't want the animals harmed and have decided to enclose their yard, even with a chain link covers to protect their families and pets. Wolves are the natural predators of coyotes and foxes and their presence in their natural areas is vital. The victory is not final because of the continuing hatred for the wolves and the desire to eradicate as many of them as possible. We should spend our resources on live-trapping as many as possible and getting them out of harms way. If the prairie dogs can be successfully relocated into a protected area, we should be able to do the same with wolves. Re-establishing them in areas where they will remain threatened is counter-productive. We must establish new sanctuaries and preserves for many of our endangered animals. "Logic is not necessarily persuasive" and we will just be wasting precious time, money and resources by attempting to keep the wolves in the Northern Rockies. The NRDC and its conservation partners must look to new ways of dealing with this situation so another horrible slaughter will be avoided.