When the new draft recovery plan for Mexican wolves (Canis lupus baileyi), a.k.a. lobos, came out at the end of June, there were immediate concerns about the scuttling of science that resulted in the Service cutting population targets and habitat goals for the species. Some of those concerns were covered in an earlier TWN post here.
One of the biggest issues – the power of Arizona and New Mexico to “determine the timing, location and circumstance of releases of wolves into the wild within their respective states” – isn’t just an issue of the federal abdication of its responsibilities down the road; it’s also part and parcel of how we got where we are today with a plan that limits wolf recovery to two states, south of Interstate 40.
A new report, “Whose side are they on? Four States’ Efforts to Derail Wolf Recovery,” (pdf) takes Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado’s role in lobo recovery head on, addressing the influence and perspectives that these anti-lobo states have had, and that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has, apparently, bought into with its new recovery plan. The report is well worth a read and demonstrates just how politicized wolf recovery is.
Comments are due on the draft recovery plan by August 29, 2017. More info can be found here.
Print Friendly
Greta Anderson
Greta Anderson is a plant nerd, a desert rat, and a fan of wildness. She is the Deputy Director of Western Watersheds Project.
Damaging and/or eliminating the ESA and other environmental protection laws and setting the country back pre-1970 is not good at all:
http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/hearing-saturday-on-mexican-gray-wolf-plan/article_a36d27f6-0a64-570e-ad02-90bbc62787d8.html