• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 Tuesday, April 1, 2003
Part II
Department of theInterior 
Fish and Wildlife Service50 CFR Part 17Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule To Reclassify and Remove the Gray Wolf From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in Portions of the Conterminous United States; Establishment of Two Special Regulations for Threatened Gray Wolves;Final and Proposed Rules
VerDate Jan<31>2003 16:28 Mar 31, 2003Jkt 200001PO 00000Frm 00001Fmt 4717Sfmt 4717E:\FR\FM\01APR2.SGM01APR2
 
15804
Federal Register
/Vol. 68, No. 62/Tuesday, April 1, 2003/Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORFish and Wildlife Service50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018–AF20
Endangered and Threatened Wildlifeand Plants; Final Rule To Reclassifyand Remove the Gray Wolf From theList of Endangered and ThreatenedWildlife in Portions of theConterminous United States;Establishment of Two SpecialRegulations for Threatened GrayWolves
AGENCY
:
Fish and Wildlife Service,Interior.
ACTION
:
Final rule.
SUMMARY
:
The U.S. Fish and WildlifeService (Service or we) hereby changesthe classification of the gray wolf (
Canislupus
) under the Endangered SpeciesAct of 1973, as amended (Act). Weestablish three distinct populationsegments (DPS) for the gray wolf in theconterminous United States. Graywolves in the Western DPS and theEastern DPS are reclassified fromendangered to threatened, except wherealready classified as threatened or as anexperimental population. Gray wolvesin the Southwestern DPS retain theirprevious endangered or experimentalpopulation status. All three existinggray wolf experimental populationdesignations are retained and are notaffected by this rule. Gray wolves areremoved from the protections of the Actin all or parts of 16 southern and easternStates where the species historically didnot occur. We establish a new specialregulation under section 4(d) of the Actfor the threatened Western DPS toincrease our ability to respond to wolf-human conflicts outside the twoexperimental population areas in theWestern DPS. A second section 4(d)special regulation applies provisionssimilar to those previously in effect inMinnesota to most of the Eastern DPS.We find that these special rules arenecessary and advisable to provide forthe conservation of the Western DPSand the Eastern DPS. The classification,under the Act, of captive gray wolves isdetermined by the location from whichthey, or their ancestors, were removedfrom the wild. This final rule does notaffect the protection currently afforded by the Act to the red wolf (
Canis rufus
),a separate species found in thesoutheastern United States that is listedas endangered.
DATES
:
This rule becomes effective April1, 2003. The explanation of the need foran immediate effective date is found inthe
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
sectionunder the heading
Need for ImmediateImplementation.
ADDRESSES
:
The complete file for thisrule is available for inspection, byappointment, during normal businesshours at our Midwest Regional Office:U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FederalBuilding, 1 Federal Drive, Ft. Snelling,MN 55111–4056. Call 612–713–5350 tomake arrangements. The comments andmaterials we received during thecomment period are also available forpublic inspection, by appointment,during normal business hours at thisand other Regional Offices and severalof our Ecological Services field offices.Use the contact information in the nextparagraph to obtain the addresses of those locations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
:
Direct allquestions or requests for additionalinformation to the Service using theGray Wolf Phone Line—612–713–7337,facsimile—612–713–5292, the generalgray wolf electronic mail address—
GRAYWOLFMAIL@FWS.GOV,
or writeto: GRAY WOLF QUESTIONS, U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service, Federal Building,1 Federal Drive, Ft. Snelling, MN55111–4056. Additional information isalso available on our World Wide Website at
http://midwest.fws.gov/wolf 
.Individuals who are hearing-impaired orspeech-impaired may call the FederalRelay Service at 1–800–877–8337 forTTY assistance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Background
This rule begins with discussions onthe biology, ecology, taxonomy, and thehistorical range of the gray wolf. Wethen describe previous Federal listingactions taken for the gray wolf. Next weprovide information concerning specificissues related to this rulemaking,including our Vertebrate PopulationPolicy, experimental populationdesignations, and wolf-dog hybrids. Weconclude this introductory section witha discussion on the recovery of the graywolf.We next provide a summary of themany and diverse comments andrecommendations on the proposal. Allsubstantive issues that were raisedduring that comment period aredescribed, and we present our responseto each of those issues.A detailed discussion is thenpresented for the five listing factors asrequired by the Act. We analyze thesefactors for the reclassification of certainpopulations in response to the currentstatus of the species, whichencompasses present and future threatsand conservation efforts. We designatethree distinct population segments(DPSs), and we also discuss how thislisting affects wolves in captivity andtheir role in wolf recovery.We next describe the differences between our July 13, 2000, proposal (65FR 43450) and this final rule. In ourproposal, we identified a variety of alternative actions that we considered but did not propose, and we explainedthe reasons for selecting the proposedaction. We also requested comments onthose alternatives. Those alternativeswill not be discussed in this rule exceptin the cases where they were adopted orpartially adopted in our final decision,or were otherwise addressed insubstantive comments that we received.Separate sections explain the twospecial regulations that are beingadopted and how these specialregulations are consistent with theconservation of the gray wolf withintheir respective DPSs. We also explainthe conservation measures that are beingprovided to the species by this rule. Thetext of the regulatory changes for thegray wolf is found at the end of thisdocument.
A. Biology and Ecology of Gray Wolves
Gray wolves are the largest wildmembers of the Canidae, or dog family,with adults ranging from 18 to 80kilograms (kg)(40 to 175 pounds (lb))depending upon sex and subspecies(Mech 1974). The average weight of male wolves in Wisconsin is 35 kg (77lb) and ranges from 26 to 46 kg (57 to102 lb), while females average 28 kg (62lb) and range from 21 to 34 kg (46 to 75lb) (Wisconsin Department of NaturalResources (WI DNR) 1999a). In thenorthern U.S. Rocky Mountains, adultmale gray wolves average just over 45 kg(100 lb), while the females weighslightly less. Wolves’ fur color isfrequently a grizzled gray, but it canvary from pure white to coal black.Wolves may appear similar to coyotes(
Canis latrans
) and some domestic dog breeds (such as the German shepherd orSiberian husky) (
C. familiaris
).However, wolves’ longer legs, largerfeet, wider head and snout, and straighttail distinguish them from both coyotesand dogs.Wolves primarily are predators of medium and large mammals. Wild preyspecies in North America include white-tailed deer (
Odocoileus virginianus
) andmule deer (
O. hemionus
), moose (
Alcesalces
), elk (
Cervus canadensis
),woodland caribou (
Rangifer caribou
)and barren ground caribou (
R. arcticus
), bison (
Bison bison
), muskox (
Ovibosmoschatus
), bighorn sheep (
Oviscanadensis
) and Dall sheep (
O. dalli 
),mountain goat (
Oreamnos americanus
),
VerDate Jan<31>2003 16:28 Mar 31, 2003Jkt 200001PO 00000Frm 00002Fmt 4701Sfmt 4700E:\FR\FM\01APR2.SGM01APR2
 
15805
Federal Register
/Vol. 68, No. 62/Tuesday, April 1, 2003/Rules and Regulations
 beaver (
Castor canadensis
), andsnowshoe hare (
Lepus americanus
),with small mammals, birds, and largeinvertebrates sometimes being taken(Mech 1974, Stebler 1944, WI DNR1999a). In the Midwest, during the last22 years, wolves have also killeddomestic animals including horses(
Equus caballus
), cattle (
Bos taurus
),sheep (
Ovis aries
), goats (
Capra hircus
),llamas (
Lama glama
), pigs (
Sus scrofa
),geese (
Anser sp.
), ducks (
Anas sp.
),turkeys (
Meleagris gallopavo
), chickens(
Gallus sp.
), pheasants (
Phasianuscolchicus
), dogs, and cats (
Felis catus
)(Paul 2001, Wydeven
et al.
2001a).Since 1987, wolves in the northernRocky Mountains of Montana, Idaho,and Wyoming have also killed domesticanimals, including llamas, horses,cattle, sheep, and dogs (Service
et al.
 2002).Wolves are social animals, normallyliving in packs of 2 to 12 wolves.However, 2 packs within YellowstoneNational Park (NP) had 22 and 27members in 2000, and Yellowstone
sDruid Peak pack increased to 37members in 2001 (Service
et al.
2001,2002). Packs are primarily family groupsconsisting of a breeding pair, their pupsfrom the current year, offspring from theprevious year, and occasionally anunrelated wolf. Packs typically occupy,and defend from other packs andindividual wolves, a territory of 50 to550 square kilometers (sq km) (20 to 214square miles (sq mi)). However, in thenorthern U.S. Rocky Mountainsterritories tend to be larger, usually from520 to 1,040 sq km (200 to 400 sq mi),and in Wood Buffalo National Park inCanada, territories of up to 2,700 sq km(1,042 sq mi) have been recorded(Carbyn
in litt.
2000). Normally, onlythe top-ranking (
‘‘
alpha
’’
) male andfemale in each pack breed and producepups. Litters are born from early Aprilinto May; they can range from 1 to 11pups, but generally include 4 to 6 pups(Michigan Department of NaturalResources (MI DNR) 1997; Service1992a; Service
et al.
2001). Normally apack has a single litter annually, butproducing 2 or 3 litters in one year has been documented in Yellowstone NP(Service
et al.
2002). Yearling wolvesfrequently disperse from their natalpacks, although some remain with theirnatal pack. Dispersers may becomenomadic and cover large areas as loneanimals, or they may locate suitableunoccupied habitat and a member of theopposite sex and begin their ownterritorial pack. Dispersal movements onthe order of 800 km (500 mi) have beendocumented (Fritts 1983; JamesHammill, Michigan DNR,
in litt.
2001).The gray wolf historically occurredacross most of North America, Europe,and Asia. In North America, gray wolvesformerly occurred from the northernreaches of Alaska, Canada, andGreenland to the central mountains andthe high interior plateau of southernMexico. The only areas of theconterminous United States thatapparently lacked gray wolf populationssince the last glacial events are parts of California and portions of the easternand southeastern United States (an areaoccupied by the red wolf). In addition,wolves were generally absent from theextremely arid deserts and themountaintops of the western UnitedStates (Young and Goldman 1944, Hall1981, Mech 1974, Nowak 2000). (Referto the
Taxonomy of Gray Wolves in theEastern United States
section below foradditional discussion.)European settlers in North Americaand their cultures often hadsuperstitions and fears of wolves. Theirattitudes, coupled with perceived andreal conflicts between wolves andhuman activities along the frontier, ledto widespread persecution of wolves.Poisons, trapping, and shooting-spurred by Federal, State, and local government bounties-resulted in extirpation of thisonce widespread species from morethan 95 percent of its range in the 48conterminous States. At the time of thepassage of the Act, likely only severalhundred wolves occurred innortheastern Minnesota and on IsleRoyale, Michigan, and possibly a fewscattered wolves in the Upper Peninsulaof Michigan, Montana, and theAmerican Southwest.Researchers have learned a great dealabout gray wolf biology, especiallyregarding the species
adaptability andits use of nonwilderness habitats. Publicappreciation of the role of predators inour ecosystems has increased, and we believe that the recovery of the speciesis widely supported. Most importantly,within the last decade the prospects forgray wolf recovery in several areas of their former historical United Statesrange have greatly increased. In thewestern Great Lakes area, wolves havedramatically increased their numbersand occupied range. Gray wolf reintroduction programs in the northernU.S. Rocky Mountains have shown greatsuccess. Additionally, thereintroduction and recovery program of the Mexican wolf in the AmericanSouthwest, although in its initial stages,is beginning to show similar progressafter only a few years.The gray wolf (
Canis lupus
) is one of two North American wolf speciescurrently protected by the Act. Theother is the red wolf (
C. rufus
), aseparate species that is listed asendangered throughout its range in thesoutheastern United States andextending west into central Texas. Thered wolf is the subject of a separaterecovery program. This final rule doesnot affect the current listing status orprotection of the red wolf.
B. Taxonomy of Gray Wolves in theEastern United States
Both the 1978 and 1992 versions of the Recovery Plan for the EasternTimber Wolf were developed to recoverthe gray wolf subspecies
Canis lupuslycaon
, commonly known as the easterntimber wolf.
C. l. lycaon
was believed to be the gray wolf subspecies historicallyoccurring throughout the northeasternquarter of the United States east of theGreat Plains (Young and Goldman 1944,Hall 1981, Mech 1974). Since thepublication of those recovery plans,various studies on the subspecifictaxonomy of the gray wolf have beenconducted with conflicting results(Nowak 1995, 2000; Wayne
et al.
1995;Wilson
et al.
2000).At the time we prepared the July 13,2000, gray wolf reclassificationproposal, new information had recently become available that called intoquestion the identity of the large canidin southeastern Canada, an area with anextant wolf population adjacent to thenortheastern United States. However,we believed that the preponderance of available data supported the positionthat the historical canid in thenortheastern United States was asubspecies of the gray wolf, probably
Canis lupus lycaon.
An alternative position advanced byWilson
et al.
(2000) appears to begaining wider acceptance. That view isthat the wolf currently occurring inAlgonquin Provincial Park, and possiblythe ancestral wolf of southeasternCanada and the northeastern UnitedStates, is a smaller form of wolf that issimilar to or indistinguishable from thered wolf (
C. rufus
). Still others arguethat ecologically, the ancestral wolf innorthern Maine, New Hampshire, andVermont, where moose and woodlandcaribou were the predominant ungulateprey (Hall 1981), was likely to be alarge-bodied
C. lupus,
rather than asmaller, deer-eating wolf such as the redwolf (Daniel Harrison, University of Maine, pers. comm.).The coyote is the dominant canid inthe northeastern United States today,although wolf genetic material is alsopresent in these animals. Prey species
 ranges in the Northeast have undergonesignificant changes in the last hundred-plus years as the whitetail deer hasexpanded north into Canada, while the
VerDate Jan<31>2003 16:28 Mar 31, 2003Jkt 200001PO 00000Frm 00003Fmt 4701Sfmt 4700E:\FR\FM\01APR2.SGM01APR2
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...