Advertisement

The Role of the Endangered Species Act in Midwest Wolf Recovery

  • Ronald L. Refsnider
Chapter

20.1 Introduction

In its 1978 Tellico Dam Snail Darter ruling, the US Supreme Court called the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (available at http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa/content.html( “the most comprehensive legislation for the preservation of endangered species ever enacted by any nation.” For those who have been involved in its implementation for a decade or more, this statement certainly rings true. However, we are also well aware of its weaknesses, inconsistencies, the difficulty with which it can be applied to complex biological situations, and, above all, its openness to citizen involvement and litigation. In this chapter, I examine the listing, recovery, and delisting of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), which serves as an informative case history demonstrating many aspects of the ESA.

20.2 The Endangered Species Act – An Overview

The ESA directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce (delegated to the US Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS] and National...

Keywords

Recovery Plan Gray Wolf Wolf Population Endangered Status Wolf Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Fuller, T. K., Berg, W. E., Radde, G. L., Lenarz, M. S., and Joselyn, G. B. 1992. A history and current estimate of wolf distribution and numbers in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:42–54.Google Scholar
  2. Hammill, J. 1992. Wolf reproduction confirmed on mainland Michigan. International Wolf 2: 14–15.Google Scholar
  3. Mech, L. D., and Nowak, R. M. 1981. Return of the gray wolf to Wisconsin. American Midland Naturalist 105:408–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. USFWS. 1978. Recovery plan for the eastern timber wolf. Washington, DC: US Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  5. USFWS. 1992. Recovery plan for the eastern timber wolf. Twin Cities, MN: US Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  6. Wilson, P. J., Grewal, S., Lawford, I. D., Heal, J. N. M., Granacki, A. G., Pennock, D., Theberge, J. B., Theberge, M. T., Voigt, D. R., Waddell, W., Chambers, R. E., Paquet, P. C., Goulet, G., Cluff, D., and White, B. N. 2000. DNA profiles of the eastern Canadian wolf and the red wolf provide evidence for a common evolutionary history independent of the gray wolf. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78:2156–2166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Wisconsin DNR. 1989. Wisconsin Timber Wolf Recovery Plan. Wisconsin Endangered Resources Report 50. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.Google Scholar
  8. Wydeven, A. P., Schultz, R. N., and Thiel, R. P. 1995. Monitoring of a recovering gray wolf population in Wisconsin, 1979–1991. In Ecology and Conservation of Wolves in a Changing World, eds. L. N. Carbyn, S. H. Fritts, and D. R. Seip, pp. 147–156. Edmonton, AB, Canada: Canadian Circumpolar Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.US Fish and Wildlife ServiceFederal BuildingFort SnellingUSA

Personalised recommendations