| Alexander Archipelago Wolf | |
|---|---|
| Scientific classification | |
| Kingdom: | Animalia |
| Phylum: | Chordata |
| Class: | Mammalia |
| Order: | Carnivora |
| Family: | Canidae |
| Genus: | Canis |
| Species: | C. lupus |
| Subspecies: | C. l. ligoni |
| Trinomial name | |
| Canis lupus ligoni Goldman, 1937[1][2][3] |
|
The Alexander Archipelago Wolf (Canis lupus ligoni), also known as the Archipelago Wolf[4] and the Islands Wolf,[5] is a subspecies of the gray wolf, Canis lupus, and primarily resides in the areas in and around the Alexander Archipelago. This region composes a part of the Tongass National Forest, where this species makes its home.[6] There have been multiple attempts to have the Alexander Archipelago Wolf listed as threatened on the Endangered Species List, but they have all failed.[7]
Contents |
Typically smaller than the other Alaskan subspecies of wolf, the Alexander Archipelago Wolf averages between 30-50 pounds.They are about 3 1/2ft long and 2ft high at the shoulder. Their coat is generally a dark gray, with varying patterns of lighter shades.[4] Individuals from different islands in the archipelago have a propensity for different color phases, from pure black to combinations of black and white to a much brighter cinnamon color.[1]
The primary prey of this species is the Sitka Black-tailed Deer, of which it consumes more than 90% of the time. The next closest consumed species, less than 10%, is the North American Beaver. It is estimated that an average member of the Alexander Archipelago Wolf species eats around 26 deer per year.[4][7] This habit of feeding almost entirely on a single species is peculiar to the Alexander Archipelago Wolf and is not seen in other North American wolf species.[8] They have also been found to feed on salmon.
The range of the Alexander Archipelago Wolf covers all of southeastern Alaska (the Alaskan panhandle) except the Admiralty, Baranof and Chichagof Islands.[7]
No population estimates have been made since the mid-1990s. A radio collar study done at the time produced a regionwide population estimate of 750 to 1,100, with the fall 1994 (pre trapping season) population estimated to be 908. That study was conducted on Prince of Wales Island, and the regionwide estimate was made by an extrapolation based on the varying habitat capability for prey.[7] The Prince of Wales population was estimated to be 300-350.
During field work in summer 2010, the Alaska Dept. of Fish & Game determined that the Prince of Wales Island wolf population has recently declined sharply. ADF&G was unable to collect enough wolf scats to make a population estimate based on DNA. Reportedly, "only a 'small fraction' of the expected number of scats" were found during this effort, in which a number of known denning sites were checked and transects were checked over an extensive part of the island.[9] In a regulatory proposal for the Alaska Board of Game's November 2010 meeting to help protect the species, ADF&G estimated the island's wolf population to be 150,[10] down by half or more from the 300-350 for the island determined by the 1990s radio collar study.
In southeast Alaska, pups are usually born during the last 2 weeks of April. Dens are usually built 4 to 5 weeks prior to the birth, between the roots of trees, in small caves or crevices in rocks, abandoned beaver lodges, or expanded mammal burrows.
Early taxonomists were able to determine that the Alexander Archipelago wolf was its own unique subspecies due to "common cranial characteristics". It has been suggested more recently by taxonomists that the species may have originated from another subspecies known as Canis lupus nubilis.[7][11]
The Alexander Archipelago Wolf first arrived in Alaska somewhere between 7,000 and 8,000 years ago, after the end of the Wisconsin glaciation period. The species was likely following the migration of the Sitka deer as they traveled north because of geographical and climate change in the area.[4][7] The first observation of concern for the possible instability of the Alexander Archipelago Wolf population was by a USDA Forest Service-sponsored interagency committee. This concern came about because of the extensive logging being conducted in the region's forest, under the Tongass Land Management Plan.[7][12]
A petition was presented to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in December 1993 by the Biodiversity Legal Foundation and an independent biologist, requesting that the Alexander Archipelago Wolf to be listed as a threatened species under the Endangered_Species_Act (ESA). The agency published a positive 90-day finding in the Federal Register on May 20, 1994, but near the of the year issued another finding that a "listing is not warranted at this time", but that if the logging was not reduced or reservation areas created, the "long-term viability of the Alexander Archipelago wolf is seriously imperiled." [13] To better assess the status of the species, the FWS ordered a conservation assessment to be made in terms of specific data of the species and its viability for the future.[7]
After the assessment was completed, more studies were undertaken to understand exactly how the Alexander Archipelago Wolf fits into the food chain and what effect extensive logging would cause. It was surmised after study that, between 1995 and 2045, the population of the Alexander Archipelago Wolf would "decline as much as 25%", along with Sitka deer population declining by 28% within the same time period.[14]
In 1994 the FWS issued a memo stating that "not protecting the wolf would be the 'least controversial option'". This was in regards to the logging companies and lobbyists that opposed restrictions on logging in the area, which protecting the Alexander Archipelago Wolf would create.[15]
Jack Ward Thomas wrote in his book, Jack Ward Thomas: the journals of a Forest Service chief, about a meeting that was held in 1995 in regards to a consideration by the Forest Service to list the Alexander Archipelago Wolf and the Queen Charlotte goshawk as threatened. The meeting was between Jack Thomas, Undersecretary James Lyons, Deputy Undersecretary Adela Backiel, and Alaska Regional Forester Phil Janik, all on behalf of the Forest service, and Ted Stevens, Frank Murkowski, and Don Young. The main argument was from Stevens, Murkowski, and Young, who believed that the Forest Service was trying to purposefully limit the lumber market in Alaska. They demanded that the two species not be listed or that negative legislation would follow, likely resulting in budget and personnel cuts for the Forest Service.[16]
The Tongass Land Management Plan (forest plan) was revised in 1997 after immense pressure from environmental groups to list the Alexander Archipelago wolf as threatened. The plan included a standard and guideline to sustain a habitat carrying capacity of least 18 Sitka deer per square mile to provide adequate prey and to limit the density of roads (i.e. miles of road per square mile). The forest plan also established a system of habitat reserves. [17] On the basis of the new plan, shortly afterward FWS made a final determination that listing the wolf as threatened was unwarranted.[18] [19]
A new, 103-page petition to list the Alexander Archipelago wolf as a threatened or endangered species under the Edangered Species Act was filed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Center for Biological Diversity and Greenpeace on August 10, 2011.[20][21] The petition requests consideration for a separate listing of the Prince of Wales Island population because it is believed to be a distinct population segment, as well as a listing for the subspecies as a whole.[22]
However, Greenpeace and the Cascadia Wildlands Project later pointed out[5] that the data set the Forest Service was using was known to be prone to overestimation of the carrying capacity for deer,[23], the wolfs' primary prey. Furthermore, a conversion factor, known as the "deer multiplier", that was used in the calculations was incorrectly applied, causing a 30% overestimation of carrying capacity and corresponding underestimation of impacts.[5] The two organizations determined that, in total, the carrying capacity for the Sitka deer in places throughout the Tongass had been generally been overestimated by the Forest Service in its timber planning, by as much as 120% (varying geographically due to the faulty data set).[5]
In 2008, Greenpeace and the Cascadia Wildlands Project sued in order to stop the Forest Service from proceeding with four timber sales on the Tongass NF slated to extract around "30 million board-feet of Tongass timber", an amount close to the annual volume then being logged.[24] The sales are on Prince of Wales, Kupreanof, Mitkof and Revillagigedo Islands. The suit challenged the agency's method of calcualting the impact of logging on habitat carrying capacity for deer. In a radio story the plaintiff's spokesman explained that the dataset being used to represent habitat quality is actually uncorrelated to habitat quality, and that the deer multiplier mentioned above was misused according to the science under which it was derived.[25] The story points to the Forest Service's underestimation of impacts not only to wolvles but to subsistence deer hunters.
In May 2010 US District Judge Ralph Beistline denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, saying he "found no wrongdoing on the part of the Forest Service" and that it was a "scientific disagreement". The plaintiffs have appealed the decision to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals (case 10-35567). A three judge panel (Arthur Alarcon, Susan Graber and Jay Bybee) heard oral arguments in the appeal on May 3, 2011[26] The panel ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on August 2, 2011, reversing in part, vacating in part and remanding the district court's decision.[27] The ruling says in part:
In a statement to the press, a spokesman for the plaintiffs said that principles in this lawsuit apply to every significant timber sale between 1996 and 2008 before the Forest Service corrected errors in the deer model when the agency issued its revised Tongass Forest Plan. But, he said, the agency still fails to address cumulative impacts to deer, especially on Prince of Wales Island, as challenged in the Logjam timber sale lawsuit.[28] He also said, "The purpose of the lawsuit is to make the Forest Service go back and do its analysis right on these timber sales. And we believe that when the Forest Service does that, that it can’t justify the volume of the timber that it decided to log in these projects."[29].
In January 2010 the Forest Service was sued over its 73 million board foot Logjam Timber Sale on Prince of Wales Island, by Tongass Conservation Society, Cascadia Wildlands, and Greenpeace.[30] At issue is the impact of excessive road density on wolf mortality and further loss of habitat for the primary prey (deer), among other issues.[31] The plaintiff's motion for summary judgement was denied by the U.S. District Court, Alaska in September, and the case has been appealled to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals.[32] The court scheduled oral arguments before Judges Betty Fletcher, Andrew Kleinfeld and Consuelo Callahan for July 29, 2011, sitting in Anchorage.[33]