Cross-fostering is a useful and important tool, but one with significant downsides for rapidly addressing the genetic health of the population. Meanwhile, genetically important adult wolves ready for wild-releases are languishing in captive breeding facilities precisely because of Arizona’s recalcitrance.
Mexican wolf. Photo: Jeffrey St. Clair
The Arizona Game and Fish Department has been busy promoting
recently published research which documents ample habitat for
Mexican wolves in Mexico. This supports the recovery criteria in the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s official recovery plan and the
Department’s desire to assume management of Mexican wolves, which
will occur when the delisting criteria have been met. It also
supports the Department’s position that wolves shouldn’t be allowed
to go north of Interstate 40 into suitable and protected habitats in
northern Arizona, Utah, northern New Mexico, and Colorado, despite
the potential for Colorado to consider Mexican wolves in their
current voter-mandated wolf reintroduction effort. And it supports
the Department’s hardline, unscientific position that the number of
wolves allowed to live in the U.S. should never exceed 325.
What the Department hasn’t been readily admitting is that predicted
habitat availability and restoring a sustainable wolf population on
the ground are separate things. Models that predict suitable habitat
and sufficient prey do not address the question of the feasibility
of wolf recovery success in Mexico. Mexico has far fewer protected
public lands than the United States. Most of the best habitats in
Mexico are on private lands and long-term protections in place on
those lands vary. Mexico’s wolf recovery program is staffed by
tenacious, dedicated biologists, but it is only recently succeeding
again after a few years of uncertainty with regard to federal
priorities and funding. These complexities cannot be overlooked
because the ESA requires that conservation efforts are “sufficiently
certain to be implemented and effective.” The United States has no
authority over the sovereign nation of Mexico and should not expect
them to shoulder the weight of species’ recovery as a way to avoid
thorny politics in our own country.
We need to put our own house in order – and soon – if we intend to
meaningfully recover this subspecies north of the international
border. The wolves in the wildlands of Arizona and New Mexico are,
on average, as closely related as brothers and sisters. The genetic
bottleneck facing this population is real and threatens their
persistence.
If the Arizona Game and Fish Department really wants to support wolf
recovery, it would stop preventing the releases of adult wolves and
wolf families into the state. The Department repeatedly caps the
potential for new genes by only allowing twelve pups to be
cross-fostered into the wild population each year. Cross-fostering
is a useful and important tool, but one with significant downsides
for rapidly addressing the genetic health of the population.
Meanwhile, genetically important adult wolves ready for
wild-releases are languishing in captive breeding facilities
precisely because of Arizona’s recalcitrance. Claims are made that
releasing captive adults causes more conflict with humans, but the
truth is, the release of a well-bonded pair with pups hasn’t been
tried since 2006, and we’ve learned a lot since then. Releasing
breeding pairs into the wild would more quickly boost population
genetic diversity, but both Arizona and New Mexico have been keeping
that off the table despite scientific recommendations.
Mexican wolf recovery in Mexico is important and worthy of our
continued support, but we can’t rely on the wolf population in
Mexico to achieve legally mandated long-term recovery in the United
States. To achieve restoration that is secured by law under the ESA,
the Arizona Game and Fish Department needs to support the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service in following the best available science for
ensuring wolf recovery in the United States, too.