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
Comments
2 responses to “Utah wolves are in line to lose protection in the delisting”
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.