Your chance to comment on wolves in Arizona

A statement by the Az Deer Association:

Below is a statement from the Arizona Deer Association and the Arizona Elk Society. This statement has been sent to the Arizona Game & Fish Department and will serve as our comments on the procedural changes being discussed for the Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery Program. We are asking all Arizona Sportsmen Conservation Organizations to send in comments to the AZGFD by the June 25th deadline. Please feel free to use any or all of our information in your statement to the AZGFD.

An Evaluation of Proposals to Expand the Mexican
Gray Wolf Recovery Area

Prior to European settlement of western North America, the Mexican wolf occupied much of the American Southwest, ranging as far south as perhaps central Mexico. This subspecies occupied most biotic communities with the exception of low deserts. The Mexican wolf’s diet consisted primarily of deer (both white-tailed and mule) and elk. With European settlement of northern Mexico and the American Southwest, domestic livestock including cattle and sheep were introduced and wolf depredation on these animals occurred. This in turn set up a conflict between livestock operators and wolves that lead to programs to eradicate the Mexican wolf, which was accomplished.
Two decades, the 1980s and 1990s were dedicated to the evaluation of the potential to recovery the Mexican wolf and to establish the most appropriate approach to Mexican wolf recovery. During this time, public involvement and agency coordination were extensive.
As a result of the nearly 20 years of discussions and scientific review relative to the best approach to take in recovering the Mexican wolf, the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area (BRWRA) was established as the core of the recovery program. This decision was based on both societal and biological factors and was believed to be the best location to begin recovery efforts for this extirpated wildlife resource.
To date, the Mexican wolf recovery program has failed to achieve goals outlined in the 1996 Final EIS, and in fact, Mexican wolf population levels were reported to have declined in 2007 compared to reported data from 2006. Further, the population count as projected in the FEIS has failed to meet objectives in all but one year and the number of breeding pairs has never met the FEIS targets and in 2006, were less than 40% of the FEIS targets.
In reviewing the current status of the project, it is a poor plan to expand the wolf reestablishment area until greater success is achieved and targets outlined in the FEIS are met. Therefore, for the following reasons, we urge the Adaptive Management Oversight Committee and all of the cooperating agencies to stop consideration of reestablishment area expansion and focus on meeting the goals of the 1996 FEIS within the BAWRA, the site selected for the high likelihood of success.

• The Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area was selected in part due to the relatively low human activity and residence in the area and hence, reduced likelihood of human-wolf conflict. Recreational use of the area being considered for recovery area expansion is among the highest in Arizona, which will lead to a high rate of conflicts and likely higher wolf mortality or removal; a factor that could reduce public support of the effort in the BRWRA.

• Lead agencies indicate that adequate funding is needed to carry out the reestablishment project in BAWRA. Greatly expanding the wolf recovery area to include areas of the Mogollon Rim and Coconino National Forest would dilute available funds, that to date have been limited. This will reduce the likelihood of obtaining the population goals outlined in the 1996 Final Environmental Impact Statement.

• Dietary studies have documented that Mexican wolves prey heavily on native ungulates, including elk, mule and white-tailed deer, and potentially bighorn sheep and pronghorn, and that their diet does contain domestic livestock as well. Livestock production is a common practice in the area being evaluated for recovery area expansion and it is likely that introducing wolves into this area would heighten conflict between legally-permitted livestock use and wolf reestablishment efforts. This has a high potential to cause eroded support for the reestablishment program in BAWRA, an unfortunate outcome.

• Published data from Mexican wolf diet studies indicate that nearly 90% of the diet of this subspecies consists of native ungulates, primarily elk. It is important to note that both wildlife viewing and big game hunting are important economic factors in the Mogollon Rim/Coconino National Forest area and any conservation program that would have the end result of reduced native wildlife densities would be viewed negatively by the conservation community, which could erode support for the BAWRA program.

In summary, the Mexican wolf recovery effort has had very limited success and expanding efforts to other areas before meeting projected targets in the 1996 FEIS will have adverse societal and biological ramifications. Until greater success is obtained in the recovery program, all efforts should focus on the Blue Area, the area selected after 2 decades of study. To do otherwise is both fiscally and biologically irresponsible for all cooperating agencies.