The year 2025 has unfolded as a pivotal period for the Mexican wolf, a subspecies of gray wolf that has been slowly reclaiming its ancestral lands in the American Southwest since its reintroduction in 1998. With the latest census revealing approximately 286 wolves roaming across Arizona and New Mexico, the species has marked an encouraging nine-year streak of population growth, leading many to believe a genuine wildlife success story is within reach. This perceived progress, however, has ignited a contentious legislative battle, as Representative Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) introduced a bill in July aimed at removing the imperiled predators from the list of federally endangered species.

During a subcommittee hearing this fall, Congressman Gosar articulated his position that federal protections for the Mexican wolf are no longer necessary, citing concerns over livestock and, in rare instances, even domestic pets lost to wolf predation. While federal recovery program records indicate that Mexican wolf attacks on pets are indeed uncommon, with one dog killed in 2023 and another injured in 2024, the broader economic impact on ranchers remains a focal point of his argument. Proponents of delisting argue that a robust population size, combined with the costs associated with wolf management and depredation, warrants a shift in oversight from federal to state authorities.

However, a chorus of wolf advocates, conservation organizations, and tribal representatives vehemently opposes such a move, cautioning that delisting would be dangerously premature and could reverse decades of painstaking progress. They point to the stringent criteria established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for delisting, which mandates a wild population threshold of 320 wolves averaged over an eight-year period, alongside other ecological and genetic benchmarks that have yet to be consistently met. Bryan Bird, Southwest director for Defenders of Wildlife, emphasized the precarious nature of the current situation, stating, "I think we’re on the cusp of a really American wildlife success story, like the bald eagle or the American alligator. It would be extraordinarily unfortunate if the legislative branch was to step in now, when we really are making progress." Bird further noted that while New Mexico provides state-level endangered species protection for wolves, Arizona currently lacks such safeguards, leaving the species vulnerable to hunting and other threats if federal oversight is withdrawn. Should delisting proceed, he suggested that states would likely need to collaborate with federal wildlife managers to maintain a viable wolf population, preventing the need for relisting in the future.

The cultural significance of the Mexican wolf adds another layer of complexity to the debate. Clark Tenakhongva, a Hopi rancher and artist, articulated the profound cultural and ecological implications of delisting for the Hopi people. "They were here before humans, so we’re encroaching on their territory and their ancestral rights to roam the land," he stated, highlighting the deep-rooted spiritual connection. Wolves have historically been integral to the tribe’s kachina ceremonies, signifying their inherent belonging alongside humans and livestock within the landscape. This perspective underscores the importance of considering not just scientific metrics but also the intrinsic value and traditional ecological knowledge held by Indigenous communities in conservation decisions.

Historically, successful legislative attempts to bypass the FWS’s administrative process for removing federal protections have been rare. Congressman Gosar’s previous endeavor to pass a similar bill in 2015 failed, suggesting the current bill faces an uphill battle. Yet, the unprecedented high numbers of Mexican wolves since reintroduction, coupled with a Republican-controlled Congress and a political climate described by some as willing to challenge established norms, has created what proponents of delisting see as an unusual window of opportunity to dismantle the subspecies’ federal safety net. The Endangered Species Act (ESA), a landmark environmental law passed in 1973, provides a robust framework for protecting and recovering imperiled species, relying on scientific assessments to guide listing and delisting decisions. Legislative interference, while not unheard of, typically bypasses this scientific review process, raising concerns among conservationists about political expediency overriding biological imperatives.

The initial reintroduction of Mexican wolves into the ponderosa pine forests of southeastern Arizona in the 1990s was fraught with uncertainty, even among federal wildlife managers. A primary concern from the outset was the extremely limited genetic diversity of the founding population. All reintroduced animals traced their lineage back to just seven "founders" from three distinct genetic lines, leading to a population where, as Philip Hedrick, an emeritus professor at Arizona State University specializing in wildlife genetics, noted, "Every individual is as closely related as a sibling." This severe bottleneck has resulted in high levels of inbreeding, which can significantly impair reproduction, reduce disease resistance, and hinder the wolves’ ability to adapt to environmental pressures such as climate change, shifting prey availability, and habitat fragmentation.

To counter these genetic vulnerabilities, a critical management goal has been to maximize the survival and reproductive success of as many wolves as possible. However, this objective often conflicts with the need to address livestock depredation. Wolves that develop a habit of preying on cattle or sheep are frequently removed from the wild or lethally dispatched to mitigate economic losses and appease livestock producers, further complicating efforts to expand genetic diversity. Despite these formidable constraints, federal managers, tribal leaders, and dedicated conservationists have achieved remarkable progress in growing the population over the past three decades. Innovative strategies have included the Department of Agriculture’s compensation program for ranchers experiencing livestock losses, as well as the FWS’s provision of funding to states and tribes for non-lethal deterrence methods designed to keep wolves away from rangelands. Biologists have also orchestrated a sophisticated "matchmaking" program for Mexican wolves housed in approximately 60 zoos and captive breeding facilities across the country, aiming to infuse genetic diversity into the wild population. Adult captive-bred wolves have been released, and since 2016, managers have successfully employed "cross-fostering," placing captive-born pups into wild dens to be raised by adoptive families, though only about a quarter of the 99 pups released through 2023 survived their critical first year.

Should Gosar’s bill succeed in delisting the Mexican wolf, these vital federal programs, including compensation and deterrence funding, would likely cease or fall entirely to the states, potentially straining already limited budgets. Moreover, promising new initiatives, such as allowing the expanding Mexican wolf population to intermingle with the genetically distinct and far larger northern gray wolf population further north, would face even steeper obstacles. Currently, Mexican wolves that wander north of Interstate 40, which delineates the northern boundary of the official reintroduction area, are captured and relocated back south, preventing a natural genetic exchange that could significantly bolster the subspecies’ long-term viability. The historical range of gray wolves across North America suggests that such intermingling would have occurred naturally before human intervention fragmented populations.

The FWS recovery plan also encompasses the Mexican wolf population south of the border, requiring consistent growth and a benchmark of 200 wolves in Mexico before the subspecies as a whole can be considered for delisting. However, with only an estimated 35 to 40 Canis lupus baileyi currently living in Mexico, achieving this goal appears unlikely before 2043. Congressman Gosar’s bill explicitly seeks to "decouple" the U.S. population from the Mexican population, thereby allowing for delisting in Arizona and New Mexico irrespective of the recovery status in Mexico. This approach raises significant concerns for international conservation efforts and the overall genetic health of the species, which is inherently a transboundary population. While the FWS, the Arizona Game and Fish Department, and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish have refrained from commenting directly on Gosar’s proposal, recent public statements from all three agencies reflect a newfound optimism regarding the animal’s future. As Stewart Liley, wildlife chief for the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, remarked in a March press release, after nine consecutive years of growth, "we are knocking on the door of recovery."

Paradoxically, even as wolf numbers have steadily climbed, confirmed livestock depredations have shown a decline, with wolf kills falling in four out of the past six years. Nevertheless, some ranchers remain deeply concerned that as the U.S. wolf population expands into new territories, livestock losses could escalate, particularly exacerbated by the region’s prolonged drought conditions, which can make natural prey scarcer for wolves. Tom Paterson, president of the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association, recently experienced the loss of a yearling steer to a wolf. He voiced his support for Gosar’s delisting bill but also advocated for the federal compensation program, authorized by Congress in the annual Farm Bill, to not only continue but to be substantially expanded. Paterson estimated that approximately $1.5 million annually would be required to adequately compensate ranchers for anticipated losses, a significant increase from the current allocation of around $190,000. Despite these challenges, Paterson expressed a belief in coexistence, stating, "With the right management… I can do my business, and we can have wolves out on the landscape."

Effective coexistence on lands where wolves and livestock share territory requires proactive planning and foresight, according to Sisto Hernandez, a former range management specialist for the White Mountain Apache Tribe and currently the Southwest resources coordinator for the Western Landowners Alliance. Over the years, wolf managers have developed and refined a suite of non-lethal deterrence methods, including visual deterrents like fladry (strands of flagging tape), electric fencing, and noise-emitting boxes. In the expansive, arid landscapes of the Southwest, Hernandez emphasized the particular efficacy of range riders, or "conflict resolution specialists," as he prefers to call them, to avoid the cultural connotations of "cowboy." He explained that the vastness of the rangelands in the arid Southwest, necessary to support cattle, renders some methods effective in other regions like Montana less practical. Range riders can actively monitor livestock across extensive areas, acting as a preventative measure against wolf encounters.

Hernandez underscored that safeguarding both livestock and wolves demands a blend of unwavering vigilance and operational flexibility. "You have to be adaptable," he noted, explaining that "the same pack may behave differently from one ranch to the next," necessitating tailored management approaches. For Hernandez and the ranchers he collaborates with, the question of delisting is secondary to more immediate and tangible needs. What ranchers truly require, he articulated, "is to have the resources and technical assistance necessary to help us continue to steward the land we operate on. Because we’re not just taking care of livestock, we’re also stewarding the land for all of the wildlife species that we share the land with." This holistic perspective highlights a broader understanding of land management that integrates conservation with agricultural practices, fostering a more sustainable future for both people and wildlife in the American Southwest. The ultimate fate of the Mexican wolf hinges on navigating this complex interplay of science, policy, economics, and cultural values, striving to achieve a true, lasting recovery for this iconic predator.