The plan would keep endangered status for the Mexican gray wolf, although no protected habitat was delineated for this fragile population. Sixteen scientists whose research is referenced in the draft rule have stated in a letter to Interior Secretary Jewell that science does not support delisting. 

• Interior Secretary Sally Jewell
• Your representatives in the House of Representatives and Senate.   

Talking points may include the following.  

Please feel free to personalize these points with your own concerns, as well.

1. Sixteen scientists expressed "serious concerns" with a recent draft rule to remove Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves across the Lower 48 States. They do not believe that the rule reflects the conclusions of their work or the best available science concerning the recovery of wolves. They also do not believe the rule reflects the fundamental purpose of the Endangered Species Act to conserve endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. By law, Endangered Species Act decisions are supposed to be governed by the best available science.

2. There is a growing body of scientific literature demonstrating that top predators play critical roles in maintaining a diversity of other wildlife species and healthy, balanced ecosystems.

3. The gray wolf has barely begun to recover or is absent from significant portions of its former range where substantial suitable habitat remains. The Service's draft rule fails to consider extensive suitable habitat in the Pacific Northwest, California, the southern Rocky Mountains and the Northeast. It also fails to consider the importance of these areas to the long-term survival and recovery of wolves, or the importance of wolves to the ecosystems of these regions.