Part II – Grey Wolf Advocacy and Grey Wolf Project Reflection
Now that you have learned so much about the grey wolf situation and conservation in general, you have become inspired to do some personal advocacy on behalf of the course of action you recommended.
Grey Wolf Advocacy Assignment
– 4 points
Now that you have organized your thinking by writing the Gray Wolf Project recommendation report, write an opinion article or a letter to a relevant representative persuading the reader of your stance. See details down below.
Grey Wolf Project Reflection
– 1 point
Reflect on how adequately prepared you were to complete this assignment. Start by identifying for which parts you felt well prepared. Distinguish areas in which you were strong before entering the course and areas in which this course gave opportunities for strengthening. Finally, identify the areas of knowledge or skill deficiencies that arose in the process of doing this project. How did you overcome the deficiencies as the project progressed? If you had it to do over again, what would you change?
Advocacy Letter or Op-Ed
4 points
Your goal for either of the below options is to persuade someone to agree with you. Remember, if you are not an authority, it helps to quote an authority. Appeal with logic to show how deeply you have thought about the issue. Top it off with studies showing how needed the intervention is as well as how effective your course of action will be (if available). Cite specific examples wherever possible as this illustrates your point better than explanation.
Option 1) Letter to Elected Official
Based on your research for the grey wolf delisting recommendation report, write a letter to a public official stating your support or opposition to a policy. Note, you can choose to write to any person important to decision making processes about gray wolves, not only in Washington State, but elsewhere in the country.
Your
letter
should be no more than one page if written on standard 8.5” by 11” paper and no more than 3 paragraphs if e-mailed. If emailed, please cc me at [email protected]. As this is a letter, of course you may write it from your perspective (“I feel,” etc.) Letters will be graded on your ability to outline the issues in a clear and concise manner, clearly stating the action to be taken, use of evidence or logic to support your argument, and the clarity and persuasiveness of your writing. Upload a
separate document
with a short paragraph explaining who the representative is and how you went about determining to whom to write. As with any other written work, you should appropriately give credit for any information you use that was not generated by yourself. You may actually cite your sources as you did in the recommendation report, or you may use phrases such as “according to the National Academy of Sciences….” or, ideally, establish the scientific credibility of your source by saying “in a peer-reviewed scientific study conducted by investigators at the University of Wisconsin, Holbrook et al show…”
Checklist – did you…
Provide strong support in the form of logic and studies with reputable sources?
Upload both your letter and a separate document describing chosen recipient and why?
Cc me in email (or upload document providing evidence of submission, for instance a photograph of the addressed envelope)?
1
GREY WOLF
NAME:
AFFILIATION:
COURSE:
TUTOR:
DATE:
2
A member of the canid clade is the grey wolf. Because of its wide range and diversified food of
medium-sized animals like deer may be found across North America. Grey wolves, like humans,
are very versatile and can thrive in a wide range of environments. Until the early 1900s, Grey
wolves could be seen roaming freely throughout the lower 48 states of the United States. Human
actions such as poisoning, trapping, and murdering wolves brought to the United States by
humans who originally migrated from Europe have almost wiped off the country’s wolf
populations.
In the early 20th century, wolves were almost extinct in the conterminous United States. As
eastern woods were logged and later converted to farmland, predator-control operations targeted
wolves, whose habitat was transformed and eliminated. Settlers and market hunters also nearly
wiped out the wolves’ primary food source, the woodland caribou, bison, and beaver. Predator
control measures, habitat degradation, and a shortage of food led to the extinction of Grey
wolves in most of the continental United States, with the exception of northern Minnesota and
Isle Royale, Michigan (Moore, 2020). A tiny number of individuals have managed to survive in
the northern Rocky Mountains.
As a result of the passage of the Endangered Species Act in 1973, the Grey wolf population
began to rebound (ESA). In line with the ESA, the federal government is required to aid species
that are in danger of extinction by raising the number of individuals living in those species. As of
1978, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) determined that there were no Grey
wolves (Canis lupus) in the lower 48 states (with the exception of Minnesota) that were
considered endangered. In 2020, Moore proposed a new approach. A decade ago, tough
restrictions and effective reintroduction efforts resulted in the return of more than 2,000 wolves
3
to the lower 48 states of the United States. Under Section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act of
1982, which was passed by Congress that year, an endangered or vulnerable species may be
reintroduced (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2021). In this context, reintroductions are
described as “experimentation.” People in a study population may be treated as threatened
species to engage in activities like “take” that would not be allowed if the species were listed as
endangered.
As an experimental population, wolves do not have the same level of protection as an
endangered species. The captive breeding of Mexican Grey wolves is under strict control as part
of the government’s wolf conservation initiative. The Mexican Grey wolf population reached 247
individuals as of August 2002. (Moore, 2020). Private property ranchers continue to shoot and
kill animals spotted harming cattle.
When wolves were returned, many residents who had previously welcomed their absence were
dismayed. As a result, the FWS faced many legal problems after introducing the experimental
wolf populations to their new habitat. There have been cases when people have alleged that the
Federal Wildlife Service (FWS) unlawfully reintroduced animals from Yellowstone National
Park (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2021). Only one of the many problems with wolf
conservation is brought to light by the research populations. As a result, there is much debate
over how the Endangered Species Act (ESA) treats wolves. The ESA status of wolves is critical
because it dictates what may and cannot be done to the animals.
For some years now, the Grey wolf population has outperformed recovery forecasts. Grey wolf
population management should be delegated to the states and tribes to restore local control and
protect livestock, families, and towns. A significant step toward Grey wolf recovery has been
4
achieved as a result of the collaborative efforts of federal, state, tribal, and local authorities to
conserve and increase the Grey wolf population. They have been delisted, which is an important
step toward their recovery. Endangered Species Act delisting allows federal agencies to focus
their efforts on species at greater risk of extinction while maintaining a focus on habitat
management in places where recovery has been effective (U.S. Department of the Interior,
2021). For the Grey wolf, the Endangered Species Act is an example of how it may benefit the
species. It is comforting to know that the federal government acknowledges the importance of
local conservation initiatives, whether they be in Central Washington or elsewhere in the United
States. It gives states the authority to manage wolf populations, trusting science rather than
politics to guide management decisions.
Grey wolf populations have flourished thanks to federal safeguards, and this regulation gives
states the authority to manage Grey wolves once again. Farmers and rural towns in Minnesota
will benefit from this shift in policy. With the adoption of this final rule, Minnesota will be able
to tailor its safeguards for Grey wolves to meet the specific interests of its residents. A longstanding danger to farms, families, and livelihoods has come from the Grey wolf, which the
state’s residents have done much to protect. Farmers in Minnesota will defend their property and
cattle better if the Grey Wolf is delisted. As a result of this species’ impressive recovery,
Minnesotans of all political stripes have long campaigned to restore local sovereignty.
The ESA’s ultimate objective must be delisting. Grey wolves have been removed from the
endangered species list by the federal government, and that accomplishment should be praised.
The delisting of a species that is no longer in danger should be expedited. The science and the
states’ ability to manage species should be considered when making listing decisions. Science
5
shows that wolves have been reintroduced (National Park Service, 2022). The advantages to
other animals, cattle, and our environment suggest that state management is working in Idaho,
which has been the test case. Measuring the wolf population scientifically has repeatedly shown
the significant restoration work achieved (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2021). Wildlife
populations can be better managed while safeguarding farmers, ranchers, and businesses thanks
to the expertise of state and local governments.
Science and wildlife management has won a significant triumph today. Since the Grey wolf has
met all of the Endangered Species Act’s standards for delisting, it is one of the Act’s few actual
triumphs. Taking the property off the list will give states and tribal governments back control
over it (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2021). It is now time for Grey wolves to be given the
attention they deserve after a long period of neglect. In order to work together, local and state
governments are willing and able (National Park Service, 2022). A good illustration of what can
be accomplished when governments at all levels collaborate is the recovery of Grey wolf
populations in the lower 48 states. Due to the scientific approaches that have been used, northern
Rocky Mountain populations are flourishing. The delisting of Grey wolves in the lower 48 states
today demonstrates that the population recovery goal for the species has been achieved.
Declining the endangered species status of Grey wolves might have both positive and negative
effects on the animal and those states where they have been returned to their native habitat.
When Grey wolf populations are delisted, they are projected to stay stable in their existing
ranges, he added. There are, however, concerns that eliminating federal protections for all
members of a species might jeopardize recovery efforts in other locations, including Colorado
(National Park Service, 2022). So that we may conserve those species that are repopulating in
6
new locations, we should withdraw protections for those populations in the West and the Great
Lakes.
To ensure that the Grey wolf population under state and tribal wildlife agencies is stable but does
not put pressure on other resources, adaptive resource management measures will be used. One
illustration of this is lethal means like hunting and trapping seasons (National Geographic
Society, 2014). In the United States, wolf hunting and trapping have become contentious topics.
Unlike animal rights activists and environmentalists, wildlife professionals believe that the
regulations are required for conservation. Hunters and trappers are often misunderstood. They
are essential for keeping animal numbers under control.
In 2011, when the federal government removed Grey wolves from the Great Lakes region’s
endangered species list, several states established hunting and trapping seasons. Between 2012
and 2014, when Minnesota’s wolves were relisted, hunters and trappers killed more than 400 of
the animals (National Geographic Society, 2014). State and federal agencies closely regulate
hunting and trapping to safeguard animal populations, altering seasons and quotas based on
species size. For example, authorities may extend the hunting and trapping season and increase
the number of animals harvested to limit part of the overpopulation of wildlife. In the event of a
decrease in the number of animals, on the other hand, authorities may tighten laws. It’s important
to keep in mind that hunting and trapping are tools for landowners to use. They are not meant to
eradicate a whole species. For decades, the department has effectively controlled wolves by
following the research and rules that guide our management practices. The management of
wolves, including hunting, shall be founded on scientific principles and carried out openly and
7
democratically. Participation from the general public and indigenous groups will be encouraged,
and we welcome any points of view.
The biological criteria for removing wolves from the endangered species list have been met by at
least 300 wolves and at least 30 breeding pairs in three recovery zones over three consecutive
years. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will carefully monitor Montana and Idaho’s delisted
wolf populations. The FWS may consider a relisting or emergency relisting of the species if the
available data indicate that such action is necessary. State, tribal, and federal authorities are now
in charge of overseeing wolves in national parks and wildlife refuges, with the guidance of
current statutes and rules governing the animals’ authorization and management.
8
References
Moore, A. (2020). Should Grey Wolves be removed from the endangered species list?
National Geographic Society. (2014). Grey wolf educator guide
National Park Service. (2022). Wolf restoration
U.S. Department of the Interior. (2021). Trump administration returns management and
protection of Grey wolves to states and tribes following successful recovery efforts
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
