The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) submitted an appeal to a federal appeals court to remove protections for gray wolves in the Lower 48 states. If granted, wolves would be managed by individual states.
In documents filed Sept. 13 with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, USFWS requested the court appeal the 2022 decision by a California district court that blocked a Trump-era rule to remove Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for wolves. The court ruled to keep wolves listed as endangered in 44 states, keep wolves in Minnesota listed as threatened and delist wolves in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, eastern Oregon, eastern Washington and north-central Utah.
“After (a) thorough analysis, the Service concluded that no configuration of gray wolves was threatened or endangered in all or a significant portion of its range,” the agency wrote in the appeal. “That analysis was well-reasoned and well-supported by the administrative record.”
USFWS continued that if the court disagreed, it could remand the matter back to the agency, but the court should “correct the district court’s misunderstanding of both the ESA and the role of a reviewing court under the Administrative Procedure Act.”
The agency noted the appeal is, at its core, whether the purpose of the ESA is to recover endangered and threated species to the point where they are not in danger in extinction, or whether the ESA requires a species be restored to its historical range before delisting.
“The ESA is clear: its goal is to prevent extinction, not to restore species to their pre-western settlement numbers and range,” USFWS contended. “Only species that are in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future may be listed and protected under the ESA.”
The agency said it has begun a nationwide conversation to encourage wolf conservation after delisting, but Congress has not authorized the government to keep using the protections of the ESA once a species is no longer considered at risk.
USFWS defense
“The district court misunderstood the ESA’s clear mandate and compounded that error by imposing its own views of the science,” USFWS said. “Its decision invalidating the rule should be reversed.”
USFWS analyzed gray wolf populations in three separate configurations and found none of the configurations warranted listing wolves as endangered or threatened. The agency said the gray wolf is one of the ESA’s biggest success stories and wolves thrive in two large, expanding metapopulations that number close to 5,000 wolves. The wolves were also found to interconnect with about 15,000 wolves in Canada.
Additionally, the agency argued that the court erred in its finding that USFWS failed to consider threats to wolves in regions where wolves are no longer present. The agency contended that it was illogical to require a direct analysis of the threats wolves might pose to humans in areas where wolves do not currently exist.
USFWS said the district court also incorrectly weighed threats to individual wolves instead of emphasizing the agency’s analysis of the overall species.
“Putting a spotlight on the most vulnerable individuals of a species will always lead to the conclusion that those individuals are at risk,” USFWS wrote. “But that does not mean that every species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range now or into the foreseeable future.”
If the gray wolf was to be delisted, the species would still be considered “sensitive” for a minimum of five years and remain under federal regulations.
Greens’ reactions
Environmental groups disagreed with the administration’s request to delist wolves.
“Wolves have made monumental progress toward recovery but have yet to re-establish sustainable populations in much of the available habitat across the Lower 48,” said Ellen Richmond, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife. “Delisting at this time would set us on a backward trajectory, imperiling the species before it’s made a full recovery.”
The Endangered Species Coalition called the appeal “bewildering” and said the interpretation of the ESA would halt wolf recovery.
“The Service announced in February that they would do a first-ever recovery plan, as part of a settlement agreement for a separate court case,” the group said. “If the government is successful in reinstating the Trump delisting rule, it is possible that the USFWS would abandon those efforts.” — Anna Miller, WLJ managing editor
