Canis lupus x familiaris arctos

Normally called arctic wolves or polar wolves, these creatures regularly hybridized with huskies in the 1930s. They have morphological and behavioral traits that indicate a dog ancestry: changes in skull shape, reduction in teeth size, lack of fear towards and able to be called by humans, digging in the trash, and adjustability to a diverse range of prey changeshttps://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1994.tb05259.x. Recently some individuals have had slight differences than the regular population, expressing more wolf-like skulls. This would indicate that they're no longer breeding with huskies or other dogs, and that evolutionary regression may be taking place (or perhaps breeding with other nearby wolf subspecies). While they are part wolf and are established in their wolf ancestor's location, they are still somewhat hybrid. While many wolf subspecies contain some hybridization with dogs, the amount of hybridization apparent in most arctic wolfdogs is apparent enough that it would proper to fix their names to be wolfdogs until the regression is more pronounced in the population. Therefore while most scientists would refer to them as Canis lupus arctos, it's clear that they have evolved through breeding and achieved a consistency different then that of their former ancestor. Perhaps a new name is in order. 
Despite most people believing that arctic wolfdogs thrive in the whole of the arctic, this is in fact false. Canis lupus arctos (x famliaris), as genetically, physiologically, and behaviorally described, fits the wolves on Queen Elizabeth and Melville Islands.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_wolf What many people designate as arctic wolves are a variety of wolf subspecies. Including, but not limited to: C.l occidentalis, C.l pambasileus, Canis lupus ligoni, Canis lupus tundrarum, Canis lupus manningi, Canis lupus Canis lupus orion, Canis lupus hudsonicus and Canis lupus albus. Any northern species of wolf may be called "Canis lupus arctos". Additionally, any white wolf may be seen to be an arctic wolf. The true understanding of subspecies goes beyond range and color and extends into deeper anatomy differences that may be invisible to the untrained eye. The cause of believing that many northern wolves are arctic wolves is likely due to the romanticism of the arctic and white wolves. A misunderstanding of geography may also be at play, especially for Americans. The arctic itself is an ice-field that may or may not melt in spring and summer. It is a circle at the top of the earth that extends into the topmost part of North America, Eurasia, and many islands. Attributing facts about other animals may also help. Arctic foxes may change their phases in winter, but C.l. arctos does not, despite the sources that claim it does. Another issue is that the public can be uninformed on the history of subspecies and how they could be identified by physiological and behavioral observation. If C.l arctos has a thin, small head, your average observer doesn't know to look for this trait, instead preferring to look at their white coat and snow beneath their feet. If C.l arctos is more likely to go to settlements to look for trash to eat, the public doesn't necessarily know that another wolf subspecies wouldn't, rather focusing on an animal's geography or species habits as a whole. Therefore, all wolves may look for trash, rather than a wolfdog such as C.l arctos or wolves in arctic settlements, where food is hard to comeby and even polar bears and arctic foxes do the same.
It should be noted that scientists too have debates and disagreements, and it's possible that some zoologists deliberately misinformed the public. When scientists have disagreements, they may not always announce the other's conflicting view point in speeches and articles to the public. If some scientists disagreed with Pocock's designation of arctos and orion being different subspecies on the basis of skull shape and body size, they might just merge one with the other. Hence why, despite the recent genetic evidence suggesting otherwise, arctic wolfdogs are still listed as living on Ellesmere island, and even Greenland. Whether scientist or layperson, the bias towards naming various subspecies as arctic wolves seems to be summarized as "the wolves are white and they live where it's extremely cold, and therefore they should be arctic wolves!" 
Scientific names are intended to be extraordinarily helpful for understanding different populations of animals. However, some scientists feel that the difference between species and subspecies is too imbalanced, and it's common for scientists to argue over whether an animal is or isn't a subspecies. For example, scientists are still arguing over what to classify the Red Wolf. Is it a separate species? Is it a subspecies? If so, is it a subspecies of coyotes or wolves? If not, is it just a coywolf hybrid? If it is a hybrid, does that nullify it's part in the swamp ecosystem? The moment scientists recognize the wolfdogs of Queen Elizabeth and Melville Island as wolfdogs, they will have this same problem. Is it "valid"? Should the dog parts of it be bred out with outside wolf subspecies, or will that ruin its unique arctic genes permanently? Does it count as a wolf or is it a dirty hybrid? Does it have a place in the ecosystem if their hunting strategies and choices seem to differ radically by season and year? Perhaps its best if they have more subclassifications in place.
==References==