Game and Fish disputes expansion of range to Rim Country
By Pete Aleshire
The battle to prevent the expansion of the range of the endangered Mexican gray wolf took another turn this week with word of a lawsuit by the Arizona Game and Fish Department.
In addition, biologists are investigating the reported shooting death of a gray wolf in Utah, which is probably the same wolf that had showed up near the North Rim of the Grand Canyon before Christmas.
Biologists believe the wolf had wandered hundreds of miles into Arizona from Idaho or perhaps Utah before heading back north.
A hunter shot the wolf, which was wearing a no-longer functioning radio collar. The hunter said he mistook the wolf for a coyote.
Some speculated that the wolf in the Grand Canyon was a dog-wolf hybrid, but DNA tests on the animal’s scat showed it was a Northern gray wolf, reintroduced in recent decades and recently taken off the endangered species list in most of its reclaimed range.
Meanwhile, the debate continues about expanding the area for the Mexican gray wolf, a still-endangered subspecies.
Arizona Game and Fish filed its lawsuit threat this week in an attempt to block a proposed expansion of the 15-year-old federal recovery plan for the Mexican gray wolves. The program has struggled to establish a self-sustaining wolf population in a remote area near Alpine that includes wilderness areas in both Arizona and New Mexico. More than 83 wild-born wolves now live in the recovery area, but federal biologists decided that the wolves need a much larger recovery area, which would include most of Arizona south of Interstate 40 including all of Rim Country. They also have proposed expanding the target population from 100 in the smaller area to 300 in the two-state area.
Game and Fish has spent an estimated $7 million so far assisting the federal government reintroduce the Mexican gray wolf.
Fifteen years of effort has resulted in about 19 wolf packs and 83 wolves in the current recovery area in Arizona and New Mexico. The current ground rules require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to recapture wolves that wander outside that recovery area. As an “experimental, non-essential” population, biologists and ranchers can kill or recapture wolves attacking cattle or pet dogs or threatening people.
Game and Fish filed a “notice of intent,” the first step before actually filing a lawsuit.
Game and Fish Director Larry Voyles said, “This notice of intent is an effort to ensure that the Fish and Wildlife Service adheres to its legal obligation to develop a thorough, science-based plan that will lead to a successful recovery outcome that recognizes Mexico as pivotal to achieving recovery of the Mexican wolf given that 90 percent of its historical range is there.”
One of the major reasons USFWS cited for expanding the recovery area was to connect the isolated reintroduced packs in Arizona with the wolves’ historic range in Mexico’s Sierra Madres. Mexico is also attempting to reintroduce wolves there, but with less success.
Arizona Game and Fish officials argued that the federal government shouldn’t finalize any change in the wolf reintroduction program until it has a detailed, coordinated, bi-national plan that includes Mexico.
Game and Fish called the science underpinning the plan to expand the wolves’ reintroduction range scientifically flawed. “This misguided approach could jeopardize genetic integrity of the subspecies if the Mexican wolf is permitted to re-establish in close proximity to the Northern gray wolves.”
At least 7,000 Northern gray wolves live in Alaska, 3,700 in the Great Lakes region and 1,675 in the Northern Rockies and Pacific Northwest. Yellowstone National Park also has a population of Northern gray wolves, but they remain on the protected list. The expanded area for reintroduction of the Mexican gray wolf would not be in direct contact with areas occupied by Northern gray wolves, but as the wolf in the Grand Canyon indicates, single wolves can wander hundreds of miles looking for a vacant territory or a mate.
Newly elected Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich said he supports the Game and Fish lawsuit. “I fully support today’s action and I look forward to working with the department to develop a legal and sound plan for the recovery of the Mexican wolf.”
Congressman Paul Gosar (R-Prescott) also strongly supported the state’s proposed lawsuit against the federal government, insisting that the revised recovery plan is based on bad science and remains outdated. He said the plan to increase the recovery area “will result in huge swatches of lands becoming blocked off for other uses and in most cases prevent things like energy extraction, mining, timber harvesting and various other forms of economic development. Additionally, the proposed designations would negatively impact ranchers, businesses and residents throughout Arizona.”
The reintroduction of the wolves in the existing area has affected ranchers who lose cattle grazing on public lands to the wolves every year. However, the introduction effort has had few effects on other uses of the land otherwise. The reintroduction of the wolves usually focuses on wilderness areas. The endangered species act generally requires the federal government to consider the impact of federally permitted activities on the wolves on federal land, but doesn’t necessarily bar other uses and generally does not affect the use of private land. The categorization of the wolves as an “experimental, non-essential” population gives the federal government greater flexibility in dealing with problem wolves.
The Arizona Legislature passed several bills supported by Rim Country representatives that would have authorized the state to essentially ignore the federal rules for the reintroduction of the Mexican gray wolves.
The plan to expand the range of the reintroduced Mexican gray wolves has so far spurred some 40,000 comments and substantial local opposition, mostly by elk hunters and ranchers.
The state’s lawsuit seeks to prevent the federal government from acting on the conclusions in the final Environmental Impact Statement completed in November. The USFWS proposal would continue reintroductions for another 12 years to build up to a population of at least 300 wolves in an area south of I-40 to the Mexico border. The plan would continue listing the wolves as an experimental population, with rules for when biologists, ranchers and others could kill or capture wolves attacking livestock and non-feral dogs. It would also allow federal officials to reduce wolf populations if the packs had too great an impact on elk and deer populations.
The current population of some 83 wolves suffers a mortality rate in excess of 10 percent annually, caused mostly by humans either driving cars or wielding rifles.
Federal biologists said that since wolf packs defend a roughly 220-square-mile area from other wolves, they have run out of room to introduce new packs in the existing reintroduction area.
Critics of the wolf reintroduction effort say they fear the wolves will drive ranchers out of business by preying on cattle and sheep and reduce hunter success by preying on deer and elk. The federal government reimburses ranchers for livestock lost to the wolves, relying in part on donations. However, ranchers in the existing reintroduction area complain that the payments don’t fully cover their losses.