Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
Bob Kelleher
St. Paul, Minn.

Lawsuit seeks delay in wolves removal from protection

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Log inCreate a free Account

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Show me!

A lawsuit seeking to force upper Great Lakes wolves from federal protected status to a state management program is on hold until June.

The suit, filed by Minnesotans Gerald Tyler of Ely and Dale Lueck of Aitkin, is stayed until June 10.

The Minnesota DNR joined the suit as a friend of the court. The DNR's Ed Boggess said the delay gives the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service time to complete a new delisting proposal, due this spring.

"The reason it's being stayed is to give the Fish and Wildlife Service time to do what they've indicated they intend to do, which is also consistent with what the current lawsuit has asked them to do," he said.

Wolves in Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin have twice been removed from the federal list of endangered and threatened species, but environmental groups convinced the courts to reverse those decision.