Cited by 51Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife EducationEnvironmental law and policyWildlife Ecology and Conservation

Removing Protections for Wolves and the Future of the U.S. Endangered Species Act (1973)

Open access
Bruskotter, Jeremy T., Vucetich, John A., Enzler, Sherry, Treves, Adrian, Nelson, Michael P.·2014·Conservation Letters

Abstract

In June of 2013, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed removing gray wolves ( Canis lupus, Linnaeus ) from Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections throughout the conterminous United States. The proposed rule depends on a definition of endangerment that is inconsistent with the legislative history and historical implementation of the ESA, as well as numerous court rulings. The proposed rule also asserts that areas where wolves once existed but no longer exist are “unsuitable habitat” because people in these areas lack tolerance for wolves. That claim entirely ignores a significant body of scientific knowledge that suggests otherwise. By effectively narrowing the definition of endangered species and ignoring the best available science on tolerance for wolves, the proposed rule would set an unfortunate precedent with far‐reaching consequences, including dramatically limiting recovery efforts for other species protected by the ESA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/conl.12081

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bruskotter, J. T., Vucetich, J. A., Enzler, S., Treves, A., & Nelson, M. P.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Michigan Technological University (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Oregon State University (US)
Corresponding author
Bruskotter, Jeremy T.
Venue
Conservation Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-12-26
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
401-407
ISSN
1755-263X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1574009426
Cited by
51
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5
FWCI
18.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Conservation Letters (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - Michigan Tech (Michigan Technological University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
  • Social Sciences › Law › Environmental law and policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
gray wolf, wolf, Endangered Species Act, delisting, species recovery, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, legislative history, best available science

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review