Ithaca 37
New member
Poor Kevin doesn't really seem to understand the issue well, but he's trying. Idiots in the Idaho Legislature advised by the Cattleman's Association thought they could prevent wolf re-introduction in Idaho by refusing to let our F&G Dept. get involved in the management. All that happened was that we got left out of any decision making process, had no input and had to sit on the sidelines and watch! Now they've smartened up and decided it's better to be involved!
Kevin Richert: Idaho first hates, now wants to manage, state’s wolf packs
• Read past columns by Kevin Richert
Two winters ago, the state of Idaho went on record saying it wanted wolves removed from the state “by whatever means necessary.”
Now, it wants more of a hand in managing its wolf population — even though the animals are still under the federal government´s jurisdiction.
What in the name of Little Red Riding Hood is going on?
Given the state´s ugly record on wolf reintroduction, I´m skeptical.
I´m also fascinated by the politics of it. Trust me: This isn´t some dry debate over governmental turf. Would the Bush administration turn over wolf management to a wolf-unfriendly state, buying itself heat on an environmental issue with national profile? Would the state use this opportunity to get some much-needed science into the rancorous wolf issue?
It´ll sure be interesting.
State officials briefed the Legislature´s resource committees Wednesday about their negotiations with the feds over management of Idaho´s wolves, at least 285 in number, and growing.
Let´s walk through the turf issue, which is dry but important to understand.
The federal government — which released more wolves in Idaho in 1995, over the objections of state officials — is now managing the 19 or so packs that roam the state. As long as the animals are on the endangered species list, they are the feds´ responsibility.
But with wolves recovering nicely in the Northern Rockies, the federal government wants the states to come up with plans to manage the animals when they are removed from federal protection. Idaho wants the management job before the wolves are taken off the federal endangered species list.
“Our plan is done,” said Greg Schildwachter, policy adviser for Gov. Dirk Kempthorne´s Office of Species Conservation. “We´re ready to put it into use.”
And, evidently, the Bush administration is ready to defer. “Idaho´s voices are being heard loud and clear in the halls of the Department of the Interior,” Kempthorne attorney Michael Bogert said.
Still, if the administration hands off Idaho wolf management, you can expect environmental groups to have a field day with it.
They can cite the language of the state´s 2001 anti-wolf resolution — a silly, non-binding letter to the federal government. They also can point out that Idaho was so piqued over wolf reintroduction that it basically told its Department of Fish and Game to stay away from the process.
This tantrum has made Fish and Game a non-player in the reintroduction, and an outsider as real biological questions have come along.
“There´s no question in our mind that wolves are having an effect on elk populations,” Fish and Game Director Steve Huffaker told legislators Wednesday. Measuring the effect, though, is a “tough order.”
Of course, this might be the most pointed question of all about wolves. Where elk numbers are down, blame seems to go to the wolves first. It´s what Boise State University political science professor John Freemuth calls a “rural myth” that doesn´t allow for the effects of habitat and other predators.
Meanwhile, as the Kempthorne administration tries to hammer out a deal with the feds, it will ask state legislators to take the muzzle off F&G. Schildwachter hopes this will allow Fish and Game to bring its expertise to tracking wolves and their effects on big game.
I´m not sure what to make of this.
On the one hand, Senate Resources and Environment Committee Chairman Laird Noh, R-Kimberly, sees promise in the state´s idea. And Noh has been one of the Legislature´s more reasonable thinkers on resource issues for years.
On the other hand, steadfast conservative Rep. Lenore Hardy Barrett, R-Challis, surprised even Schildwachter by taking a measured position on the plan. Which is odd, considering her contempt for wolves: “It´s common knowledge in Custer County that the wolves are eating better than the folks who live there,” she said Wednesday.
For years, Idaho politicians have treated the wolf as an adversary. Now they seem eager to manage the species. I´m not sure this isn´t a bureaucratic wolf in sheep´s garb.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/Opinion/story.asp?ID=32522
Kevin Richert: Idaho first hates, now wants to manage, state’s wolf packs
• Read past columns by Kevin Richert
Two winters ago, the state of Idaho went on record saying it wanted wolves removed from the state “by whatever means necessary.”
Now, it wants more of a hand in managing its wolf population — even though the animals are still under the federal government´s jurisdiction.
What in the name of Little Red Riding Hood is going on?
Given the state´s ugly record on wolf reintroduction, I´m skeptical.
I´m also fascinated by the politics of it. Trust me: This isn´t some dry debate over governmental turf. Would the Bush administration turn over wolf management to a wolf-unfriendly state, buying itself heat on an environmental issue with national profile? Would the state use this opportunity to get some much-needed science into the rancorous wolf issue?
It´ll sure be interesting.
State officials briefed the Legislature´s resource committees Wednesday about their negotiations with the feds over management of Idaho´s wolves, at least 285 in number, and growing.
Let´s walk through the turf issue, which is dry but important to understand.
The federal government — which released more wolves in Idaho in 1995, over the objections of state officials — is now managing the 19 or so packs that roam the state. As long as the animals are on the endangered species list, they are the feds´ responsibility.
But with wolves recovering nicely in the Northern Rockies, the federal government wants the states to come up with plans to manage the animals when they are removed from federal protection. Idaho wants the management job before the wolves are taken off the federal endangered species list.
“Our plan is done,” said Greg Schildwachter, policy adviser for Gov. Dirk Kempthorne´s Office of Species Conservation. “We´re ready to put it into use.”
And, evidently, the Bush administration is ready to defer. “Idaho´s voices are being heard loud and clear in the halls of the Department of the Interior,” Kempthorne attorney Michael Bogert said.
Still, if the administration hands off Idaho wolf management, you can expect environmental groups to have a field day with it.
They can cite the language of the state´s 2001 anti-wolf resolution — a silly, non-binding letter to the federal government. They also can point out that Idaho was so piqued over wolf reintroduction that it basically told its Department of Fish and Game to stay away from the process.
This tantrum has made Fish and Game a non-player in the reintroduction, and an outsider as real biological questions have come along.
“There´s no question in our mind that wolves are having an effect on elk populations,” Fish and Game Director Steve Huffaker told legislators Wednesday. Measuring the effect, though, is a “tough order.”
Of course, this might be the most pointed question of all about wolves. Where elk numbers are down, blame seems to go to the wolves first. It´s what Boise State University political science professor John Freemuth calls a “rural myth” that doesn´t allow for the effects of habitat and other predators.
Meanwhile, as the Kempthorne administration tries to hammer out a deal with the feds, it will ask state legislators to take the muzzle off F&G. Schildwachter hopes this will allow Fish and Game to bring its expertise to tracking wolves and their effects on big game.
I´m not sure what to make of this.
On the one hand, Senate Resources and Environment Committee Chairman Laird Noh, R-Kimberly, sees promise in the state´s idea. And Noh has been one of the Legislature´s more reasonable thinkers on resource issues for years.
On the other hand, steadfast conservative Rep. Lenore Hardy Barrett, R-Challis, surprised even Schildwachter by taking a measured position on the plan. Which is odd, considering her contempt for wolves: “It´s common knowledge in Custer County that the wolves are eating better than the folks who live there,” she said Wednesday.
For years, Idaho politicians have treated the wolf as an adversary. Now they seem eager to manage the species. I´m not sure this isn´t a bureaucratic wolf in sheep´s garb.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/Opinion/story.asp?ID=32522
