for Wolf Recovery in the Northeast United States
Nina Fascione
Defenders of Wildlife, 1101 14th St. NW, Suite 1400, Washington DC 20005; NFascione@Defender.Defenders.org
Lisa G. L. Osborn
Defenders of Wildlife, P.O. Box 756, Shelburne, VT 05482; losborn@defenders.org
Stephen R. Kendrot
USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services, P.O. Box 130, Hull Street Rd., Mosely, VA 23120; KendrotS@MWAA.com
Paul C. Paquet
Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; ppaquet@sk.sympatico.ca
Abstract
Efforts to restore wolves to the northeastern United States have been confounded by a new
taxonomic proposal: that the wolf historically inhabiting this region was not, as previously
thought, a subspecies of gray wolf commonly called the eastern timber wolf
(Canis lupus lycaon),but rather a separate species closely related to the red wolf
(Canis rufus) of the southeast UnitedStates. This hypothesis raises numerous biological, legal, policy, and management questions
about potential wolf restoration. While restoring wolves could complete a broken food chain by
providing a natural predator for moose in the northern forest ecosystem, the process of wolf
restoration in the Northeast is in its infancy. Further studies must address biological, sociological,
and economic impact questions, as well as answer the basic question of what wolf originally
inhabited the northeastern forests?
