Wolves and the Endangered Species Act

The Animal Welfare Institute opposes the use of legislation to exempt entire species or regional populations defined by political borders from the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The following bills introduced in the 112th Congress would seriously undermine the ESA, the chief federal law for protection of species:

• H.R. 509/S.249, "To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide that Act shall not apply to the gray wolf (Canis lupus)," sponsored by Representative Denny Rehberg (R-MT), and its Senate companion bill S. 249 sponsored by Senator Orin Hatch (R-UT), would carve out an exemption to the ESA for the entire species.
• H.R. 510, "Idaho and Montana Wolf Management Act of 2011," sponsored by Representative Rehberg creates an exemption for wolves within the borders of Idaho or Montana. The bill provides that wolves within these states shall not be afforded any status (endangered species, threatened species, essential experimental population, or nonessential experimental population) under the Act and gives the states exclusive jurisdiction over wolf management within their respective borders.
• H.R. 838, "Western Great Lakes Wolf Management Act of 2011," sponsored by Representative Kline creates an exemption for wolves with the Western Great Lakes area. The bill provides that wolves within this area shall not be afforded any status (endangered species, threatened species, essential experimental population, or nonessential experimental population) under the Act and gives the area exclusive jurisdiction over wolf management within the region.

Unfortunately, in April 2011, Congress did get involved to the detriment of the wolves, the ESA and science. In a brief rider quietly attached to the budget bill for FY 2011, lawmakers – with the Obama administration’s support – removed wolves in Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and Utah from the federal endangered species list, returning wolf management to the states.

Why is this important?

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is a landmark piece of legislation that has helped arrest the decline, prevent the extinction, and, in some cases, promote the recovery of myriad species, including the iconic bald eagle, the grizzly bear, the sea otter, and a cornucopia of others ranging from mollusks to the great whales. The Act is one of the most important laws for the protection of imperiled species ever promulgated by any country.

The ESA listing and delisting process uses science-based decision making, with public input, to determine if a species, subspecies, or distinct population segment and their habitat warrant protections afforded by the Act. Congress has NEVER exempted a species from the Endangered Species Act. To do so sets a terrible precedent that could lead to a cascade of future species-specific legislative exemptions for the benefit of a variety of special interests.

Gray wolves have been listed under the ESA since the Nixon administration in 1974, when the first subspecies, the Northern Rocky Mountain wolf (C. l. irremotus) was listed. Since then, wolf numbers have risen and now stand at over 5,000 in the lower 48 states - still a fraction of their original numbers and occupying only a small portion of their historic range.

Without the protections provided by the ESA, wolves could not have begun to resume their critical ecological role in wild America. Although they are subjected even now to unwarranted and heavy-handed lethal management techniques, the return of wolves to Yellowstone, central Idaho, and elsewhere has been among America’s greatest conservation victories.

Significant energy and expense were involved in getting wolves listed, as well as in developing and implementing recovery plans and monitoring progress over the past 30+ years. Exempting wolves now and re-exposing them to the threats that caused their original declines is short-sighted and irresponsible.

Those who want wolves removed from the ESA are permitted under the Act to file a petition presenting substantial scientific information to warrant the delisting of one or more wolf populations. Legislators should allow the science-based ESA listing/delisting process to proceed without interference. They should not seek to circumvent an established and carefully considered landmark law by attempting to push through politically expedient and hastily drawn exceptions.