Gray wolf range- 2010 IUCN Status – “Species of Least Concern”

The most important court case in the history of wildlife management in the United States is about to unfold.

Based on a scientific assessment of the true biological status of gray wolves, the Trump administration is making moves to delist the species throughout the entire U.S. and simultaneously turn over all management responsibilities to the states.

To counter this move, the Center for Biological Diversity is preparing yet another lawsuit against the Trump administration. This latest lawsuit alleges that USFWS has not complied with the Endangered Species Act by creating a “NATIONAL RECOVERY PLAN” for the gray wolf.

Background: Gray wolves currently enjoy the widest circum-polar range of any large terrestrial predator on the planet.  Wolves have never been in danger of extinction and are currently listed by the IUCN as a “Species of Least Concern”.   However they remain listed as an “endangered” species in some 33 states because, despite their current population levels, which are off the charts, and their huge global range,  which exceeds any other large predator on earth, gray wolves were once even more numerous and had, in the not too distant past, enjoyed an even more expansive range.

Based on precedent set in previous court cases, I believe this latest lawsuit has a better than 50/50 chance of succeeding. I urge support for the Trump administration as they attempt to navigate the legal mine field on this issue. Legislation is also being proposed in Congress to de-list gray wolves permanently, but no action is likely to occur until well after the mid-term elections and may, in fact, be wholly dependent on the outcome of those elections.

The “Manage our Wolves Act”, HR 6784 introduced Sept. 12, would delist wolves by the end of fiscal year 2019 and would return their management to state control within the contiguous 48 states. However, there is no guarantee this bill will ever make it through the process and reach the President’s desk.  The bill is sponsored by Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash. Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rogers, R-Wash., Sean Duffy, R-Wis., and Collin Peterson, D-Minn.

Absent any legislative fixes, the CBD’s latest lawsuit has the potential to be the most important court case in the history of wildlife management in the United States.  They are going “ALL IN” to keep wolves on the Endangered Species List.



“The Manage Our Wolves Act received a 19-15 vote before the House Natural Resources Committee during markup yesterday.”

CBD files lawsuit to keep gray wolves listed “endangered”…

Text of suit:

Click to access 2018-11-14-Complaint-Wolf-Recovery-Plan.pdf





    I shared your article on Big Game Forever Colorado page. Thanks for your research and input.


  2. rockholm66

    If we would merely repeal Equal Access to Justice, we could destroy a significant portion of their revenue stream. In doing so, knowing these slimy law firms, they’ll cut and run.

  3. Yeah, that would go a along way. However we also know that hundreds of millions of dollars have been legally flowing into environmental organizations from China and Russia and other foreign sources. Not only does the EAJA have to go away, but so does the non-profit status any group that uses foreign money to campaign against common sense land and wildlife management polices, or the energy sector, i.e. fossil fuel development. This is collusion on a grand scale, and very very dangerous to our Republic. China and Russia have a vested interest in supporting the demise of the U.S. fossil fuel industry. China would like nothing better than to sell us more wind turbines, manufactured in their own unregulated coal fired steel plants which operate using slave labor.

  4. Along with repealing the EAJ, we need to revise NEPA to limit only true stakeholders from taking part in decision making and protest/appeal of management decisions. The system is broken because lawyers created an industry out of environmental concern and litigation. Only those who are truly affected by resource management should have a say. Only those who live in and among the resource should be heard. Some emotionally driven individual from Florida should not have any say in what happens in western states.

  5. Alan

    @crypto666 I don’t agree with the last sentence of your paragraph. I do believe that local people are best off managing local land, I do think that regulations on a central scale have to exist in order to prevent over use of natural resources and pollution. By ‘over use’ I mean, for example cutting down trees in a nearby forest to the extent that the long term health of the forest and it’s very existence because several threatened.

  6. Rob

    ‘Based on a scientific assessment of the true biological status of gray wolves, the Trump administration’

    LOL. I’d be amazed if Trump knew basic multiplication, let alone based any of his policies on ‘scientific assessment’.

  7. Rob,
    Normally I wouldn’t post a comment like yours that doesn’t add anything to the conversation. But sometimes I let a troll through just so sane people can see how asinine, hate filled, and narrow minded some of the green kool-aid drinkers really are.

  8. Rob

    Very nice of you Steve.

    Let me ask you this: Do you think Trump is an intelligent person who would be able to read scientific studies and papers and come to a conclusion based on that.

    Speaking of ‘hate filled’. Some of Trump’s supporters are also full of hate. Just spend time at to work that out. There are hateful people on all sides of the political spectrum though.

  9. Rob,

    The question you raised in both comments is irrelevant and absurd.

    USFWS biologists are charged with assessing the status of species and creating management plans for those species, not the President. In this context, the status of gray wolves was determined to be stable and expanding. The IUCN lists gray wolves as a “Species of Least Concern”. I would assume USFWS biologists and the globally recognized experts and authorities at the IUCN know what they are talking about. In this case, the USFWS is acting on the best available science.

    The USFWS is part of the executive branch of government acting under the authority of the Secretary of Interior, which is part of the Trump administration. Thus it is entirely appropriate to attribute the decision to de-list wolves to the Trump administration. Please note – under Sec. Zinke there have been significant personnel and policy changes in the Interior Department, some of which I am opposed to.

    As for there being mean people on both sides of the political aisle, both sides of the wolf debate, I am in complete agreement.

  10. kip Roberts (aka Henry)

    Hey Steve: Is that you, my old roomey? I sure hope it is because we can sing to each other in church (I left my pagan ways years ago) Let me know if we in fact do know each other. I had wanted to share some amazing vaccine material but your old landline was defunct . Hoping it’s you, Kip

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s