As U.S. Wolf Populations Slowly Rebound, A Conservation Expert Reflects on Her Decades of Research
Feature Story
By Sydney O’Shaughnessy
Last update October 16, 2023
Q: You have had an expansive career studying the behavior, conservation, and management of wild wolf populations. How did you get started in the field, and what drew you to study wolves?
Boyd: My first experience with wolves was in 1976 as a volunteer at a captive wolf research facility 30 miles outside of Minneapolis and St. Paul. L. David Mech, Ulysses Seal, and Jane Packard were conducting research on wolf reproductive ecology. I volunteered in northern Minnesota during the summer of 1977, on Dr. Mech’s wild wolf study on the Superior National Forest. In 1979, I worked as a biological technician for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, removing livestock-killing wolves and radio-collaring non-depredating wolves in north central Minnesota.
I moved to Montana in September 1979 to begin my master’s research at the University of Montana on one wolf — the only wolf in the wild in the lower 48 outside of the Midwest — and the coyotes she shared the landscape with. I was instantly hooked on research in the most spectacular landscape I had ever visited: Glacier National Park, and southeastern British Columbia and southwestern Alberta. Northwestern Montana became home to a growing, naturally recolonizing wolf population as Canadian populations moved south and set up territories in the wolfless terrain of Montana. It was fascinating to document how these intelligent and resilient carnivores found each other over vast distances, survived, and reproduced. In 1997, I completed my Ph.D. [from the] University of Montana, documenting this natural wolf recovery.
Q: What is the current protected status of wolves in the United States?
Boyd: Gray wolves, Mexican wolves, and red wolves are currently protected as “endangered” under the Endangered Species Act [ESA] throughout their ranges in the lower 48 states, with the exception of the Northern Rocky Mountain wolf population, which are not protected and are managed by the states. In Minnesota, wolves are protected as “threatened” under that ESA.
Red wolves are critically endangered, with extremely low population estimates — fewer than 50 in the wild and a few hundred in captivity — and their habitat is extremely restricted. Similarly, there are only about 240 Mexican wolves in the wild in the United States. Gray wolves have a global distribution of approximately 200,000+ wolves in the wild, and most populations are expanding, including in the U.S.
Q: The National Academies report you helped author concluded that the Mexican gray wolf was a valid taxonomic subspecies and the red wolf a valid species. What does that mean, and why is species taxonomy important for wolf conservation?
Boyd: Before a species can receive protection under the Endangered Species Act, it must be determined to be a valid species or subspecies. If recognized as distinct and valid, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will offer funding to proceed with conservation efforts under the ESA. FWS asked our committee to independently assess the taxonomic validity of the Mexican gray wolf and the red wolf.
Q: Do you think science and evidence are informing national and state decisions about wolf management and conservation?
Boyd: Recovery goals, population numbers, and timelines have been established by highly qualified scientists to determine when wolves [are] no longer endangered and could be delisted. The basic premise of the ESA is to help conserve struggling species so they can grow out of the endangered or threatened status and then can be delisted. The fact that the recovered gray wolf populations are being used by various administrations as a political football to list, delist, or relist the species undermines the validity and power of the ESA. It also fuels the polarization of wolf opponents and proponents, setting back wolf conservation.
On the other hand, I don’t like what has happened with state wolf management in the western states due to the lack of protection for wolves. Wolf management has become ruled by political agendas. Wolf management is challenging and needs to be science-based instead of being politically driven.
Q: As you look back over your career, what highlight are you most proud of?
Boyd: I have enjoyed a tremendously rewarding career with many highlights, so it is hard to pick just one. That said, probably the most amazing career highlight was being part of the early wolf recovery efforts and documenting Montana’s population go from the first single wolf to the present population of about a thousand wolves.
Q: What was the most challenging aspect of your career?
Boyd: In the late 1970s, I was privileged to be one of the very few people in North America studying wolves, and a miniscule fraction of these researchers were women. There was no gender equality mindset back then. Carnivore research was almost completely done by men; I encountered some narrow-minded people and uncomfortable situations because of my gender. I ignored them, worked harder, and stubbornly kept moving forward.
Q: Where would you like to see wolf conservation policy and action go in the next decade?
Boyd: I would like to see significant funding and research put into wolf conservation policy and action. We need more attention on wolf-human conflict resolution, particularly in preventing or mitigating livestock depredation and helping wolves and humans coexist.
We also need education on living with wolves and appropriate wolf removal, because wolves will continue to expand into unexpected places and anthropogenic landscapes. We need better assessment of predator-prey relationships, as well as [the] means to get this information out to the general public in accessible formats. “Wolves have killed all the game” is a common theme that is not supported by the science. And finally, management agencies need to build flexibility into their wolf management plans to allow reasonable management adjustments to achieve conservation goals.
Related Resources
Featured Publication
Consensus
·2019
Scientists strive to develop clear rules for naming and grouping living organisms. But taxonomy, the scientific study of biological classification and evolution, is often highly debated. Members of a species, the fundamental unit of taxonomy and evolution, share a common evolutionary history and a c...
View details
