In an attempt to delist the Mexican gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), Sen. Jeff Flake ( R-AZ) introduced a bill on Jan. 4 that would require action when the species is sufficiently recovered as determined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
The Mexican Gray wolf, which was reintroduced in Arizona, was originally listed as an endangered subspecies in 1976. In 1998 the USFWS designated the Mexican wolf as a nonessential experimental population under section 10(j) of the ESA which was revised in 2015.
Flake’s proposed legislation, S. 2277 was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. The bill says that on the date the director of USFWS makes a positive determination the Mexican gray wolf should “no longer be included on any list of endangered species, threatened species or experimental populations under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.” The pending bill also says that management of the Mexican gray wolf should be assumed by each state where the wolf is present.
Flake has introduced similar legislation in past sessions that failed to gain enough support to pass. His attempt to require enforcement of the ESA is welcomed by livestock producers including the Arizona Cattlemen’s Association (ACA), Public Lands Council (PLC) and National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA).
The ESA recovery plan called for a population of just 100 wolves in the wild to be considered recovered. According to the most recent count, there are “at minimum 113” Mexican gray wolves in the wild in Arizona and New Mexico, according to wildlife officials. USFWS will be conducting a new survey of the population beginning Jan. 22; the effort is expected to take two weeks.
A USFWS Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery Plan was finalized and a first revision released in November 2017. That plan included increased population numbers of up to 300 animals before the wolf would be delisted.
The change in numbers is considered by livestock producers to be changing the rules, or “moving the goal posts” on an already-established playing field.
In comments last year, Flake said, “The Mexican gray wolf recovery plan proposed by the Fish and Wildlife Service is yet another federal regulatory nightmare for ranchers and Arizona’s rural communities.” He went on, “I am disappointed in the federal government’s decision to ignore productive comments to the draft recovery plan and the reasonable path laid out in the Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery Plan Act.”
Finally, Flake said, “I plan to continue my efforts to push for real recovery that takes into account the needs of the local stakeholders impacted by this policy.”
At press time, Flake’s office had not responded to WLJ’s request for additional comments.
The concerns of livestock producers worried about predation are not without evidence. A December, 2017 report by the Mexican Wolf Interagency Field Team noted that between Jan. 1 to Dec. 31 last year there were 19 confirmed depredation incidents in New Mexico and 15 confirmed depredations in Arizona.
Patrick Bray, ACA executive vice president, told WLJ his organization is pleased with Flake’s proposed legislation that would move management of the wolf out of the hands of the federal government and to state wildlife officials. He noted that the Arizona Game and Fish has always played a critical role in making the wolf program work. “We believe they know what they are doing, and they should be the sole decisionmaker on this side of the line as to what happens with wolves in Arizona.”
Commenting on the minimum population number released by USFWS at 113, Bray emphasized that is a minimum number, adding, “I would easily guess that there are 20 to 30 percent more wolves on the ground than their minimum count.”
Although similar legislation has failed in the past, Bray told WLJ there is great hope that it will grow legs and run this time. Noting that members of Congress have a lot on their plates right now, he added, “At the very least we think it sends a good message that the federal government is failing at their job; the Endangered Species Act is failing us and failing the species, and it’s not working.”
Ethan Lane, executive director of PLC and NCBA federal lands, speculated to WLJ that similar legislation hasn’t moved ahead because it is very specific to Arizona and New Mexico. And, while PLC and NCBA are trying to build support for Flake’s bill, it may be difficult, even from lawmakers facing issues with other types of wolves in their states because of views that the Mexican gray wolf is still viewed as a struggling subspecies.
“This is one of those issues that it is easy for members of Congress to kind of play for the home team and look out for their state, but when it is time to get them to look more national or even regionally in some cases, sometimes the issue in their back yard looks very different than the one down the street,” Lane said.
Responding to WLJ’s request for comment on the pending legislation, John Bradley, external affairs specialist with USFWS’ Southwest regional office, said the agency doesn’t have a position on the bill at this time.
A timeline for further consideration by the Senate is unknown. — Rae Price, WLJ editor
