The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service reported last week it will not prepare plans for recovering the gray wolf because the species no longer requires Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections.

The agency found recovery plans would not promote conservation of the gray wolf because “listing them is no longer appropriate under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary,” the agency said in the decision last week.

“In the context of recovery planning this means that the Service includes in recovery plans all methods necessary to bring a listed species to the point at which protection under the Act is no longer necessary. Thus, per the statutory and regulatory language above, we can only decline to develop a recovery plan when it would not benefit the species through contributing to its recovery,” the agency reported.

This comes after the agency had pledged to publish recovery plans by Dec. 12 of this year and after a federal judge ruled in August gray wolves in the West were wrongly denied endangered species protections.

Debate over the management of wolves has included more than two decades of legislation, litigation and rulemaking. Wolf recovery to date has been construed around specific legal questions or science-driven exercises about predicted wolf population status. Courts have invalidated five out of six rules finalized by the Service on gray wolf status, citing at least in part a failure to consider how delisting any particular population of gray wolves affects their status and recovery nationwide, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Gray wolves are listed under the ESA as endangered in 44 states, threatened in Minnesota, and under state jurisdiction in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, as well as portions of eastern Oregon and Washington, and north-central Utah. Yellowstone area wolves, including those in Wyoming, were delisted in 2017 and, since then, state management has included a limited hunting season in the regions around the park, where the species is listed as a trophy animal, and open season on wolves in the rest of the state.

Based on the latest data, there were approximately 2,797 wolves distributed across at least 286 packs in seven states in the Western United States.

This population size and widespread distribution contribute to the resiliency and redundancy of wolves in this region, according to the agency. The population maintains high genetic diversity and connectivity, further supporting their ability to adapt to future changes.

If circumstances for gray wolves change in the future, the agency reserves the right to change its minds and make a recovery plan. However, the decision does open the door to delisting the iconic predator in the near future. The USFWS based its decision on its belief that wolf populations in these areas have recovered and that state wildlife agencies are now capable of managing the species. This reversal has been met with criticism from conservation groups who disagree with the “recovered” status and plan to challenge the decision and the announcement sent shockwaves through conservation and environmental nongovernmental organizations.

The Humane World for Animals, formerly called Humane Society of the United States, said the ruling comes despite 78% of those surveyed by the organization support continuing federal Endangered Species Act protections for wolves. Moreover, those in strong support of continued protection outnumber those who strongly oppose it by nine to one, the organization reported. Even among socio-demographic groups one might expect to have more negative feelings toward wolves, the authors found strong support for continued Endangered Species Act protections. 

For example, 75% of rural residents in states with gray wolf populations support continuing federal protection, and 79% of people who strongly or very strongly identify as a farmer or rancher support doing so as well.

After the decision, more than two dozen House Republicans, led by Rep. Jack Bergman R-Mich., called on the agency to fully delist wolves nationwide.

The coalition of House members are calling on newly confirmed USFWS Director Brian Nesvik to “immediately delist the gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and return management authority to states and tribes.”

In a letter sent to Nesvik, Bergman and 24 of his colleagues congratulated him on his confirmation and urged the FWS to rely on science — not politics — in determining the gray wolf’s status. The members underscored that wolf populations across the country have long surpassed recovery goals and continued federal protections ignore both the law and on-the-ground realities in rural communities.

“Gray wolves have recovered far beyond the levels that originally warranted their listing,” Bergman said. “The science is clear — these populations are stable, self-sustaining, and thriving. It’s time to return management to the people who live with these animals every day, not judges or bureaucrats in Washington.”

The letter urged the Service to reissue its 2020 Trump administration rule delisting the gray wolf and to stand behind state and tribal wildlife management programs, which have proven capable of maintaining healthy wolf populations while reducing human-wildlife conflict. The USFWS published the “final rule” in November 2020, delisting the gray wolf, but a U.S. District Court in California overturned it in 2022, citing concerns about the species’ absence from parts of its historic range.

In its decision, the USFWS said that while Section 4 of the ESA directs the Service to develop and implement recovery plans for the conservation and survival of endangered and threatened species, the requirement is dropped if and when it finds that such a plan “will not promote the conservation of the species.”

It’s a certainty new lawsuits will be filed to challenge the current ruling to not write a plan. A coalition of conservation groups, led by the Center for Biological Diversity, has already initiated a lawsuit due to the decision.