OutdoorHub
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Backs Away From National Wolf Recovery Plan
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has announced it will not release the National Wolf Recovery Plan it previously said would be published next month—a move drawing strong criticism from conservation voices and reigniting debate over wolf management across the lower 48 states.
The announcement stated that “a recovery plan for the listed gray wolf entities would not promote their conservation because listing is no longer appropriate” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The statement immediately raised concerns among groups that have long pushed for a consistent, science-driven approach to gray wolf conservation.
Agency Says Listing “No Longer Appropriate”
According to the original report, critics argue this shift suggests the administration is continuing to pursue nationwide wolf delisting. They point out that the agency is required to rely on the “best available science,” and that wolf populations in the lower 48 states have not fully recovered from the widespread extermination campaigns of the past century.
Threats to wolves—including poaching, shrinking habitat, and inconsistent state-level management—remain key challenges. Those calling for the reinstatement of a National Wolf Recovery Plan say it would have allowed input from stakeholders such as ranchers, hunting communities, and wildlife advocates to build unified, modern recovery benchmarks.
For reference, OutdoorHub has previously covered wolf-related management controversies in states like Idaho and Wyoming in our Wolves series.
Concerns About State-Level Wolf Management
Without federal protections under the ESA, gray wolf management falls entirely to individual states. The report notes that wolves are already delisted in the Northern Rockies—Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming—where year-round hunting, trapping, snaring, and aerial gunning are used in some areas. Idaho and Wyoming also allow hunters to pursue wolves with hounds, and state-backed payments exist in Idaho and Montana for harvested wolves.
One widely publicized incident from last year—in which a Wyoming man reportedly ran down a young wolf with a snowmobile, taped its muzzle, dragged it into a bar, posed for photos, and later killed it—was cited as an example of how state oversight can fail. The man has since been indicted, though many criticized the state’s initial response.
Scientific Concerns Over Pack Stability and Neighboring Populations
Research shows that removing individual wolves can destabilize entire packs—leading to the loss of territories, increased pup mortality, and disrupted breeding structures. These ripple effects may also hinder recovery in neighboring regions, even in areas with stable wolf numbers.
A Wisconsin hunt in 2021 illustrates a particularly severe example where more than 200 wolves were killed in under 60 hours. Because Wisconsin state law mandates a hunt when wolves are not federally protected, delisting would trigger another season that could include hunting, trapping, snaring, and pursuit with hounds. Minnesota and Michigan could follow similar paths.
Conflict With Livestock Remains Low, Experts Say
Despite common public concerns, ranching losses attributed to wolves appear low. Fewer than 1% of cattle and sheep deaths are caused by any native carnivore, including wolves. Reports stress that wolf attacks on humans in the lower 48 states remain undocumented in terms of fatalities.
Survey data shows that most Americans—including many ranchers—support continued ESA protections.
Image courtesy of User:Mas3cf, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
The post U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Backs Away From National Wolf Recovery Plan appeared first on OutdoorHub.
