YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK, Wyo. -- It's been 25 years since wolves were brought back into Yellowstone National Park, and park officials say the animal's future is on track to continue to be a healthy, contributing member of the Yellowstone family.

Park representative Linda Veress says wolves have a significant role to play in the park's ecosystem.

Elk population numbers were very high at the time of reintroduction, and their overgrazing resulted in loss of willow and aspen. Wolves helped bring elk numbers back to normal levels.

"With the decrease in elk populations, the willow and aspen had a chance to rebound and recover, which also resulted in bird populations increasing," Veress explains.

After decades of habitat loss and extermination by humans, wolves vanished from their historic territory.

Wolves were placed on the Endangered Species List in 1973, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated Greater Yellowstone as a key recovery area.

From 1995 to 1997, 41 wild wolves from Canada and Montana were released into the park.

The program has been controversial, with hunters concerned about loss of game and ranchers concerned about the safety of livestock.

According to the group Defenders of Wildlife, elk populations across Wyoming have gone up in the past 25 years, and just one tenth of 1% of livestock numbers have been lost since the reintroduction.

Wolf numbers have climbed as well.

Veress says as of December 2018 there were some 80 wolves in nine packs in the park, which she says is a stable population.

"The number one cause of mortality in wolves in the park are by other wolves, just in competition for food and for territory," she points out.

Park officials have several events planned to commemorate the 25th anniversary, notably a weekly series of live broadcasts on Facebook starting in March.

Experts will cover topics including the ecological role of wolves in the ecosystem, the global impact of reintroduction and the future relationship between wolves and people. Details are online at www.nps.gov/yel.


get more stories like this via email

Monarch butterflies could be on the federal Endangered Species list by year's end.

Eastern monarchs found in New York and other northeastern states saw an 80% population decline between the 1980s and 2020. Their Western counterparts have seen a 90% population drop. Environmental groups petitioned for them to be listed as "threatened" back in 2014 and the monarch became a candidate species in 2020.

Rebeca Quiñonez-Piñón, monarch recovery strategist and climate resilient habitat director for the National Wildlife Federation, said monarch butterflies face many threats.

"The main threats that we have identified for the monarch butterfly are habitat loss and fragmentation of the remaining habitats," Quiñonez-Piñón outlined. "Climate change is at the top of the list, definitely, and the excessive use of pesticides."

She called monarch butterflies a "canary in the coal mine" for pollinators and the ecosystem, a warning more needs to be done to help the environment. A dozen species of bumblebees are also candidates under the Endangered Species Act. They also fall victim to the same threats of monarch butterflies.

Home gardeners can play a role in helping monarch butterfly populations, by planting milkweed and goldenrod, which are helpful to the species. Milkweed is the only plant on which monarch butterfly caterpillars can eat and survive.

Mary Phillips, head of native plant habitat strategy for the federation, said there are some mistakes people make in trying to help monarchs thrive.

"Don't worry if, you know, you see the various predators," Phillips advised. "There's also a milkweed bug that sometimes goes on these plants. People get nervous about that. It's OK, it's natural, it'll go away. It will not harm the milkweed overall."

She added another common mistake is spraying garden or systemic pesticides which can harm monarchs. Some states are taking action to end the use of certain pesticides harmful to bees, butterflies and other pollinators. New York passed a law banning some uses of neonicotinoids because of their harmful effects on pollinators and other species.

A federal court in Montana has held a hearing more than two years after a coalition of environmental advocates sued the U.S. Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service over expanding cattle grazing in the Paradise Valley, part of the Custer Gallatin National Forest.

The coalition, which includes Alliance for the Wild Rockies and the Western Watersheds Project, sued the agencies for extending the cattle grazing season by a month on nearly 1,400 acres of forest land.

Mike Garrity, executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, said the plan will mean more interactions between young, unattended cattle and grizzly bears, which would not end well for either one.

"Putting calves out a month early when they're very small just provides a 'fast food snack' for a grizzly bear," Garrity pointed out. "A small calf makes an easy target for a grizzly bear. They can't defend themselves. They're not very big."

Garrity noted ranchers then complain about bear activity to the Fish and Wildlife Service, which traps and kills the grizzlies. The Forest Service said the new policy does not increase grazing because it is counted by plots of land rather than acreage.

Garrity pointed out groups are working to restore the grizzly bear, which is currently listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. He added the Forest Service is not doing its part to help achieve balance.

"There's about a thousand grizzly bears in the greater Yellowstone ecosystem," Garrity reported. "There's hundreds of thousand of cattle. We don't have a shortage of cattle in this country but grizzly bears are threatened with extinction."

The federal judge could overturn the new grazing rules or order a complete environmental review.

From Little Red Riding Hood to the Halloween thriller "Wolf Man," stories often paint wolves as scary creatures but conservationists argued it is the wrong view.

Most gray wolves across the contiguous U.S. are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. An exception includes the Northern Rocky Mountain population in parts of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, where states are in charge of managing wolf populations.

Eric Clewis, senior Northern Rockies representative for Defenders of Wildlife, said wolves have proved polarizing in recent years but they do not need to be.

"The preferred outlook really is just wolves as a native wildlife species on the landscape, rather than treating it as either this pure icon of wilderness or this just bloodthirsty animal that's out there trying to reduce elk or deer populations or decimate livestock," Clewis urged.

The gray wolf was one of the first species listed under the 1973 federal Endangered Species Act, when he said the population was "pretty much wiped out." He believes people should "take pride" in the recovery of the wolves so far.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees endangered species, announced a first-ever National Recovery Plan for the species, with an expected completion date at the end of next year. The agency said in a news release it plans to continue to work with tribes and states to "craft enduring solutions."

Clewis argued recent actions by state agencies have been misguided.

"We've had a whole suite of bills passed in all three states that are aimed more at reducing the wolf population than actually managing it based on any biological justification or recent science," Clewis explained.

The Fish and Wildlife Service noted Idaho and Montana had recently passed laws "designed to substantially reduce" the wolf populations there, "using means and measures that are at odds with modern professional wildlife management."