“Northeastern wolf” back in the news

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced yesterday it would not develop a plan to protect wolves in northern New York and New England.

From the Associated Press wire:

Wildlife Service officials say the decision was made because there is no distinct breeding population of wolves in the region that could be protected.

This needs a little deconstruction:

Some animals–according to their DNA–are wolves. Gray wolves, for instance live in the North American West (though they are moving slowly eastward–there are anecdotal reports of gray wolves as far east as Minnesota).

Coyotes are not wolves. Their DNA is different. But here in northern New York, this crisp distinction between the two species blurs.

Some biologists say coyotes here bred with wolves from northern Ontario and Quebec (read all about it here). This, they say, explains why coyotes in northern New York are much bigger than coyotes out west. It may also explain why coyotes here have been reported exhibiting the kinds of pack behavior more like that of wolves than other coyotes elsewhere.

These biologists also say that, because of this coyote-wolf breeding, there’s no good reason to re-introduce wolves in the area. There is also some evidence that our coyotes are already filling wolves’ traditional role as a top-tier predator.

After the Wildlife Service said it wouldn’t draft a plan to protect wolves here, the Center for Biological Diversity issued a press release quoting Mollie Matteson at the group’s Vermont office:

There is extensive habitat for wolves in the Northeast.

On this point, I think there’s wide spread agreement. Between the town of Cranberry Lake and Old Forge, it’s pretty easy to imagine a wolf family or two living quite happily. But Matteson also said this:

The only obstacle to the return of the wolf in the Northeast is leadership and a clear plan for their recovery.

It’s far less clear that this is true. If the research on wolf-coyote hybridization is corroborated, then the behavior of the wolves themselves is an obstacle to re-introduction in northern New York and New England.

Again, from the Associated Press wire:

…advocates wanted the Wildlife Service to declare Northeast wolves a distinct population, which would require the federal government to create a plan to restore the animals.

So re-introduction of wolves is not an option in northern New York and New England (at least right now). But it’s important to remember that it doesn’t need to be.

Individual wolves do turn up every now and again in the region. And when they do, these animals are protected by the federal Endangered Species Act.

Personally, I’d love to see (or, more likely, hear) wolves in northern New York. Other top tier predators scare the stuffing out of me. Wolves do not. I have avoided being “et” by a bear twice, thankyouverymuch, and I know I’m no match for a mountain lion.

But wolves seem much more akin to humans, more understandable maybe. Wolves live in a family structure similar to humans. The animals are deadly, certainly, but human fatalities caused by wolves are very rare.

I’ve encountered a wild wolf once. There’s no sensation like it. Fear, wonder and admiration mix with a sense of shared (familiar?) understanding.

It’s this familiarity that can shatter whatever boundaries we may think exist between us and wilderness (or capital-“N” Nature). And this may be one reason why so many people want to re-introduce wolves where they are.

But I think we need more information–more scientific research–before restoring wolves here.

What do you think?

55 Comments on ““Northeastern wolf” back in the news”

Leave a Comment
  1. scratchy says:

    Wolves are beautiful animals and would help control the deer population.

  2. mervel says:

    Well I think Walker with permits the number given are limited in number and it is done by lottery. So for example there are only so many black bear permits given in NYS and you may or may not get one when you apply, so it is not about the money.

    I think that you could do the same for the high peaks. Set a monthly limit of permits for hiking during June-Sept you would charge but it would not be onerous. They already have set some limits on total group size for example so we can do this.

  3. Bret4207 says:

    Nope, I have to be HUNTING to need a hunting license. Except it doesn’t work that way, does it? And since when does pollution or noise having anything to do with permits and licensing? Our beloved, politically correct hikers do far more damage to the High Peaks and other trial systems than hunters or fishermen do. Go to the Blue Ledges area and see what rafters have done to the area. Nice. But they don’t “take”, do they? And they get a free pass.

    Wrong is wrong and fair is fair.

  4. just say no says:

    The “beach” at blue ledges is the toilet stop for the guided rafting tours.
    Post a ranger there for a couple of days and he could write enough tickets to finance a proper latrine…

    I don’t know Bret, walking in the woods with a firearm is probably considered hunting by most, whether you bag anything or not.
    If i went canoeing and had a pole and tackle in the bottom of the canoe, even if the line never hit water, and if i was stopped by DEC, i better have a permit.
    You know enough about my attitude by now to figure i don’t like rules imposed upon me, i wan’t the opportunity to screw up before i get fined, and the oportunity to do the right thing without one assuming i won’t.
    If the rule was that when i caught fish i would have to go to the ranger station, weigh-in and pay per pound i would- that would be fair in my eyes- like you said the license doesn’t mean you’ll catch fish-
    But that’s in the “perfect”, “honest”, “respect what is everyone’s” world.
    This ain’t that world. It’s plain unfortunate that your prerferred activity is one that has fees not right, or wrong. sour grapes.
    Q: does the raft tour enterprises pay fees to the state, or need a special use license? that would seem fair since they do bring a ton of traffic into the area- -those rafts arrive on a schedule better than a nyc train– and even if they did i don’t think they should be able to turn such a wonderful spot into a waste station.

  5. Bret4207 says:

    Say no, I saw the same thing when I was guiding rafters close to 30 years ago. I doubt the area is in better shape today. I don’t know if the companies pay a fee, but I would think they do. BTW, what type of permit would be required to place a public restroom in a Forever Wild area like the Blue Ledges? The mind boggles at the thought!

    If you have a fishing pole in your canoe and you get stopped and someone writes you a ticket, you go right ahead and you plea not guilty and I’ll come and be a character witness or I’ll even plea your case to the court- for FREE. If you weren’t FISHING, then no violation occurred and the ticket is unjustified. Just like me walking around in the woods. Believe it or not there are still some folks out there who just never took to my effervescent personality and friendly demeanor, thieves, rapists and druggies mostly. So at times I have been known to carry a gun when walking the streets and woods of northern NY. Now if I’m just walking around on State Land with a gun in my pocket, it’s not a real big gun, and some ECO stops me and accuses me of hunting…I would have to disagree. Yet, some here claim it’s “what I could do” that matters. Nope, I don’t think so.

    It’s all a theoretical discussion anyway folks. I don’t much care for STUPID rules. The common sense ones I can live with, like seat belts and speed limits. Of course stupidity is in the eye of the beholder, right?

Leave a Reply