Utah wolves are in line to lose protection in the delisting
Technically there aren’t any wolves in Utah, although there really are probably a few in northern Utah. Nevertheless, Northern Utah was included in the Northern Rockies wolf delisting.
So was Eastern Oregon and Eastern Washington. All these places would highly likely to see wolf in-migration.
I can see only one reason for this — it’s to prevent the recolonization of any adjacent Western States by wolves.
Article in the Salt Lake Tribune. Utah wolves are in line to lose protection. But technically there aren’t any. By Joe Baird

Ralph Maughan
Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is President of the Western Watersheds Project.
2 Responses to Utah wolves are in line to lose protection in the delisting
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Recent Posts
- BLM to rip, tear, and burn huge area of public lands in southwest Idaho February 14, 2019
- Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition February 13, 2019
- Livestock responsible for climate warming Response to Golden February 9, 2019
- Logging Wendell Forest will decrease forest health February 6, 2019
- More prescribed burning not likely to influence smoke February 5, 2019
Recent Comments
- Nancy on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- idaursine on BLM to rip, tear, and burn huge area of public lands in southwest Idaho
- idaursine on BLM to rip, tear, and burn huge area of public lands in southwest Idaho
- idaursine on BLM to rip, tear, and burn huge area of public lands in southwest Idaho
- idaursine on BLM to rip, tear, and burn huge area of public lands in southwest Idaho
- Candace Saunders on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- Nancy on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- Bruce Bowen on BLM to rip, tear, and burn huge area of public lands in southwest Idaho
- WM on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- idaursine on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- Immer Treue on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- idaursine on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- idaursine on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- Ed Loosli on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
- Immer Treue on Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition
I’ve been waiting so long for wolves though. I want to go up to my aunt’s cabin (Bear Lake Utah) and be able to watch for wolves.
I remember attending a wolf hearing back in Wisconsin where the value of lumping the northeastern U.S. with the Midwest management zones was under debate, the focal point being that the low or nonexistent populations in, say, Maine or upstate New York would fall under the same regulations as the burgeoning Great Lakes population (correct me if I’m wrong here).
I’m with Brooke. I’m here in northeastern Oregon, where wolves have been officially reported in the Wallowa Mountains, and I certainly hope measures are taken to ensure recolonization.
It’s obvious that wolves have immense ecological capacity to disperse, and they consistently surprise us with their ability to occupy habitat we might previously have considered unsuitable. We’re dealing here with the human carrying capacity for the species, which, thanks to this legal wrangling, has suddenly become much lower for places like Oregon and Utah.