Gray wolf returns to endangered list in northern Midwest

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


After just a couple months off the endangered species list, the gray wolf in the western Great Lakes is back to “threatened” status. A government reversal, not a sudden drop in the 4,000-plus wolf population, put the animals back on the protected list, the Associated Press reports.

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, which manages the endangered list, removed the wolves in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin in early May for the first time since they were placed under federal protection 35 years ago.

But the agency neglected to get public comment before making the change, prompting a lawsuit from a handful of environmental groups. A settlement will reverse the removal.

“We hope that the Fish & Wildlife Service will honestly assess the scientific information it previously refused to review,” said Nicole Paquette, senior vice president of Born Free USA, an animal protection nonprofit, according to the Green Bay Press Gazette.

State and federal agencies maintain that the wolf populations have recovered from past overhunting. They will continue to press for removal of the wolves from the protected ranks.

“We need the flexibility to properly manage wolves and address them preying on livestock and pets,” a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. The state department estimated that wolves were responsible for killing 21 dogs and 43 farm animals last year.

Image courtesy of dallidee via Flickr

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe