Wildlife and People

RM Grey Wolves Genetically Connected

In July, 2008, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy enjoined the delisting of grey wolves in the Northern Rockies (thus placing them back on the Endangered Species list) [here, more].

Molloy based his ruling on a faulty understanding of genetics in wolf populations. A quote (with emphasis added):

Plaintiffs argue (1) even though the environmental impact statement on wolf reintroduction specifically conditions the delisting decision on a Finding of Subpopulation Genetic Exchange, the Fish & Wildlife Service delisted the wolf when there is no plausible showing of that genetic exchange between the Greater Yellowstone core recovery area and the northwestern Montana and central Idaho core recovery areas. …

As recently as 2002, the Service determined genetic exchange between wolves in the Greater Yellowstone, northwestern Montana, and central Idaho core recovery areas was necessary to maintain a viable northern Rocky Mountain wolf population in the face of environmental variability and stochastic events. The Fish & Wildlife Service nevertheless delisted the wolf without any evidence of genetic exchange between wolves in the Greater Yellowstone core recovery area and the other two core recovery areas.

Now wolf experts from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Yellowstone National Park, the Nez Perce Tribe, and UCLA have published a study showing that Rocky Mountain wolves are fully genetically connected — due to their (the wolves) propensity, as members of the Dog Family, for having multiple relations with whatever all the time (or words to that effect). The study is behind a pay wall [here]:

VONHOLDT, B. M., STAHLER, D. R., BANGS, E. E., SMITH, D. W., JIMENEZ, M. D., MACK, C. M., NIEMEYER, C. C., POLLINGER, J. P. and WAYNE, R. K. (2010), A novel assessment of population structure and gene flow in grey wolf populations of the Northern Rocky Mountains of the United States. Molecular Ecology, 19: 4412–4427. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04769.x

Abstract The successful re-introduction of grey wolves to the western United States is an impressive accomplishment for conservation science. However, the degree to which subpopulations are genetically structured and connected, along with the preservation of genetic variation, is an important concern for the continued viability of the metapopulation. We analysed DNA samples from 555 Northern Rocky Mountain wolves from the three recovery areas (Greater Yellowstone Area, Montana, and Idaho), including all 66 re-introduced founders, for variation in 26 microsatellite loci over the initial 10-year recovery period (1995–2004). The population maintained high levels of variation (HO = 0.64–0.72; allelic diversity k = 7.0–10.3) with low levels of inbreeding (FIS < 0.03) and throughout this period, the population expanded rapidly (n1995 = 101; n2004 = 846). Individual-based Bayesian analyses revealed significant population genetic structure and identified three subpopulations coinciding with designated recovery areas. Population assignment and migrant detection were difficult because of the presence of related founders among different recovery areas and required a novel approach to determine genetically effective migration and admixture. However, by combining assignment tests, private alleles, sibship reconstruction, and field observations, we detected genetically effective dispersal among the three recovery areas. Successful conservation of Northern Rocky Mountain wolves will rely on management decisions that promote natural dispersal dynamics and minimize anthropogenic factors that reduce genetic connectivity.

That’s a little bit dry. Journalist Cory Hatch does a better job of interpretation:

Study finds wolves genetically diverse, dispersing

‘Pivotal’ research could change the wolf debate in the northern Rockies.

By Cory Hatch, Jackson Hole News and Guide, October 13, 2010 [here]

Wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains are genetically healthy and have migrated and bred successfully among subpopulations in central Idaho, greater Yellowstone and northern Montana, according to a new study.

Authors of the study analyzed DNA samples from 555 wolves, beginning with the reintroduction of a few dozen wolves in 1995 and running through 2004, when the population had grown to about 850 animals. The study was published in the October issue of Molecular Ecology.

“We found that genetic diversity was high and maintained throughout the study period for the three recovery areas,” the authors said. “Overall, genetic diversity throughout the [northern Rockies] was comparable or greater than estimates for other gray wolf populations.”

In addition to high levels of genetic diversity, data show “a lack of significant inbreeding in each population,” researchers said. “In addition to a rapid population expansion and a genetically diverse founding population, low inbreeding estimates were probably driven and maintained through behaviorally mediated inbreeding avoidance.”

The study also seems to allay concerns that breeding wolves haven’t been able to migrate among the central Idaho, northern Montana and greater Yellowstone populations.

“The presence of reproductively successful migrants between recovery areas may have influenced genetic diversity,” researchers said. “Idaho and Montana have greater connectivity than either of these areas has to the [greater Yellowstone area].” …

The paper expands on a previous study by some of the same researchers that showed Yellowstone National Park wolves were genetically isolated.

Conservation groups subsequently cited that study as one reason wolves should remain under Endangered Species Act protection, and U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy cited genetics in a decision to grant an injunction against wolf hunts after the federal government’s first delisting attempt in 2008.

But the study authors say the 2008 Yellowstone study gave a limited picture of the total population, particularly because most of the park already had established wolf packs.

“High wolf densities and territory saturation in Yellowstone during the height of this study probably limited the ability of individuals to effectively disperse into this core area,” researchers said.

The newer study shows “effective dispersal was most successful outside of Yellowstone during our study, presumably owing to greater opportunities to establish territories and breed.”

The new research is “pivotal,” said study coauthor Mike Jimenez, Wyoming wolf recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

“This is a far more in-depth study,” he said, reinforcing the idea that some of early conclusions were a “huge underestimation.” The northern Rocky Mountain wolf population is “very diverse,” he said.

Since the study’s conclusion, the population has doubled to more than 1,700 wolves, which likely increases the level of genetic interchange, Jimenez said.

This genetic diversity shows the 1995 reintroduction was a success biologically. … [more]

The upshot is that everybody knew this all the time, but one, obscure, dated, defective study was all it took for the Judge to relist wolves. Molloy was not thinking rationally but with excessive political bias. He did, however, make genetic connectivity the keystone of his ruling, and reiterated his concern in his subsequent re-relisting ruling last July [here].

Now Molloy’s argument has been wadded up and thrown in the dumpster. Legally that may mean exactly nothing, however, because everybody including the Judge knew he was making it up as he went along. Federal Judges are judges for life, and they can act as crazy as loons and still keep their jobs.

The point is moot in any case now, as Molloy has found another reason for relisting: the ESA is poorly written… which you might think would negate the law altogether but instead the ESA now means whatever the Judge wants it to.